3 ms·

Sure, if there's evidence that the author is not really who they say they are, by all means go ahead and point it out. However, you just seem to be making vagu

frompdx 6y ago
Sure, if there's evidence that the author is not really who they say they are, by all means go ahead and point it out. However, you just seem to be making vague accusations about some grand conspiracy by corporate real estate developers, rather than addressing the article's very legitimate points. I think all of your points are completely fair so I don't want you to feel that I am being obtuse or overly pedantic. You're correct that I have not provided any evidence to indicate the author is not authentic. However, you made me curious so I decided to open the article in a private browsing session with no ad blocker enabled. Maybe everyone sees a different advertisement, but what I saw struck me. The article is peppered by advertisements from facebook. "Support Small Business Together." Is the tag line of the facebook advertisement. What I say next is facetious of course. This article isn't part of a grand conspiracy by corporate real estate developers, it is a grand conspiracy by one of the largest advertising platforms in the world, facebook. Remote work is hurting facebook's advertising revenue because small business are dying off. Again, entirely facetious. Still, The Atlantic is partially supported by advertising and I found this particular advertisement to be interesting given the content of the article and the discussion on HN. Draper's eyes gleamed as he delivered the line that would seal the deal. "We'll make them nostalgic for their offices and that is how you will sell more advertisements to small businesses mister Zuckerberg."
- kelnos 6y ago
  > Remote work is hurting facebook's advertising revenue because small business are dying off. Do you actually know the breakdown of Facebook's advertising revenue by company type? I would expect that small business is not their bread and butter, and with the current status of everything in the world, other businesses would pick up the slack. And FB's usage stats are probably through the roof with people unable to socialize in person. I think it's a bit weird to assume that FB would be attempting to promote "hit pieces" on remote work. In fact, I bet FB itself stands to save a lot of money by closing down or reducing in size many of its offices and transitioning a lot of its employees to permanent or semi-permanent remote work even after the pandemic has passed. I feel like you've let your imagination get away from you here.
AdrianB1 6y ago
The author may be authentic, it does not prevent her to have an agenda. The article has some points, quite weak, unstructured and unsupported with evidence (like "it's bad for women"), there is nothing that guarantees it's not paid for by someone with an agenda. There is no proof in the opposite direction either, so we should read it open-minded and without expectations.

frompdx 6y ago

Sure, if there's evidence that the author is not really who they say they are, by all means go ahead and point it out. However, you just seem to be making vague accusations about some grand conspiracy by corporate real estate developers, rather than addressing the article's very legitimate points. I think all of your points are completely fair so I don't want you to feel that I am being obtuse or overly pedantic. You're correct that I have not provided any evidence to indicate the author is not authentic. However, you made me curious so I decided to open the article in a private browsing session with no ad blocker enabled. Maybe everyone sees a different advertisement, but what I saw struck me. The article is peppered by advertisements from facebook. "Support Small Business Together." Is the tag line of the facebook advertisement. What I say next is facetious of course. This article isn't part of a grand conspiracy by corporate real estate developers, it is a grand conspiracy by one of the largest advertising platforms in the world, facebook. Remote work is hurting facebook's advertising revenue because small business are dying off. Again, entirely facetious. Still, The Atlantic is partially supported by advertising and I found this particular advertisement to be interesting given the content of the article and the discussion on HN. Draper's eyes gleamed as he delivered the line that would seal the deal. "We'll make them nostalgic for their offices and that is how you will sell more advertisements to small businesses mister Zuckerberg."

kelnos 6y ago
> Remote work is hurting facebook's advertising revenue because small business are dying off. Do you actually know the breakdown of Facebook's advertising revenue by company type? I would expect that small business is not their bread and butter, and with the current status of everything in the world, other businesses would pick up the slack. And FB's usage stats are probably through the roof with people unable to socialize in person. I think it's a bit weird to assume that FB would be attempting to promote "hit pieces" on remote work. In fact, I bet FB itself stands to save a lot of money by closing down or reducing in size many of its offices and transitioning a lot of its employees to permanent or semi-permanent remote work even after the pandemic has passed. I feel like you've let your imagination get away from you here.

AdrianB1 6y ago

The author may be authentic, it does not prevent her to have an agenda. The article has some points, quite weak, unstructured and unsupported with evidence (like "it's bad for women"), there is nothing that guarantees it's not paid for by someone with an agenda. There is no proof in the opposite direction either, so we should read it open-minded and without expectations.