4 ms·
The irony of a hacker news post concerning a rolling stone writers concern with how one's actions can affect others. :) [HN is very interesting, but it's also
by nullc 7y ago
The irony of a hacker news post concerning a rolling stone writers concern with how one's actions can affect others.
:)
[HN is very interesting, but it's also a fairly reliable source of some extremely inhumane and self-centered comments.]
- dntbnmpls 7y agoIn HN's defense, a HN comment didn't make up a fake rape article to ruin the lives of many innocent young people to push a certain narrative like a rolling stone's writer did. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus
- Ensorceled 7y agoA six year old, retracted article written by somebody described as "a former journalist". What else ya got?
- dexterdog 7y agoAre all of the editors who approved the article listed as "former editors?" Answer: No. Sean Woods, who was the editor directly responsible for the articles, is still a writer for RS.
- Ensorceled 7y agoSeriously, are there other instances/events or just this one? All news sources have their failures, some are consistently bad, is Rolling Stone in the consistently bad category?
- dntbnmpls 7y ago> What else ya got? That's not enough? People like you are why we have a "news" industry.
- Ensorceled 7y agoIt was six years ago. It was retracted. The person responsible was fired and blacklisted from the industry. What did people like you want to happen? Because EVERY news source has at least one skeleton like this in their closet.
- dntbnmpls 7y ago> It was six years ago. It was retracted. The person responsible was fired and blacklisted from the industry. Shouldn't the company itself be "fired and blacklisted"? > What did people like you want to happen? See above. > Because EVERY news source has at least one skeleton like this in their closet. It's not their "closet". They did it INTENTIONALLY to push an agenda. Meaning it's a problem with the institution itself. They intentionally set out to create "news" where it didn't exist to further their agenda. They retracted once they got caught. I wonder if you would be so dismissive of the "sins" of other "news" institutions that don't align with your bias or agenda.
- dsfyu404ed 7y agoThe thing that really gets me about HN comments is the lack of plausible deniability for stupid comments. People say dumb stuff on 2^N-chan and you can just assume they're trolls trying to rile up the extremeists. People say dumb stuff on Reddit and you can chalk it up to them being teenagers without life experience to have a more reality based opinion. People say dumb stuff on HN and you can't really make up any excuse for them because they have "Senior Engineer at X" and a link to a personal website that shows they're not an idiot or a deadbeat and you're left wondering how people so smart can be so stupid. Of course it's well known that most people don't know much about things outside their area(s) of expertise but it's still frustrating nonetheless because you'd expect smart people to know this and either not run their mouth or qualify their statements.
- pjc50 7y agoHave you checked the Presidential twitter feed? Stupidity is fashionable. Stupidity is popular. Stupidity is loyalty. (Other factions are also perfectly capable of this, e.g. the leaked Labour internal documents, but the right are really making a performance out of it these days)
- op03 7y agoRationality is Bounded - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_rationality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_rationality The internet does a bad job of signalling that.
- paulcole 7y agoIf somebody says something that makes you think they’re an idiot or a deadbeat, believe them.