7 ms·

Yet I don't recall anyone questioning Buzzfeed News when they dropped their bombshell story years back. I remember the defenders saying something along the line

Yet I don't recall anyone questioning Buzzfeed News when they dropped their bombshell story years back. I remember the defenders saying something along the lines of "If the news is newsworthy and constitutes journalism, then the publication it was produced in shouldn't matter" As HN audience mostly claim to be full of "independent thinkers" we should have no problem with this being published by the Post if it indeed is legitimate, correct?

cofeecup 6y ago
Well in that case, let me just clear my schedule to spend all of tomorrow performing an exhaustive fact check of the credibility of this story. /s It turns out that journalism is hard to do correctly. As an "independent thinker" I'm going to independently decide to not trust a publication with the reputation of the NY Post until it's been corroborated.
- sj3k 6y ago
  So glad I see this sentiment on here. I am still blown away by HN readers inability to critically analyze news sources. If this was some research paper it would have been put under the microscope by HN readers.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
    It helps that research papers on scientific domains have relatively easily verifiable data. It is much harder to claim ( not impossible ) that 1 is actually 0 if looked at from the right distance. Once we get to news ( assuming we bypass the whole conversation over how what passes for news is often opinion, or clickbait these days... ) you find out that 1s could indeed become 0s, you might not know all the facts, writers have bias, editors have bias, culture won't allow certain things to be said, polite society won't have a given phrase used.. the list just goes on and on. It is not inability. It is just a ridiculous exercise in futility. Chomsky can barely do it. And he has way better memory, command of language and reasoning skills than I do.
sfkdjf9j3j 6y ago
Buzzfeed was previously famous for apolitical clickbait articles and quizzes, they practically invented the genre. New York Post, meanwhile, has been a tabloid-level spreader of pro-conservative and anti-progressive misinformation. It's smart to be skeptical of obviously politically motivated reporting from any outlet, but especially so when one has such a concerning track record.
- dimitrios1 6y ago
  It's hilarious to me that the Post is now viewed as pro conservative. Framing the Post as pro-conservative is like calling Joe Rogan alt right. Finding some of the progressivism that has performed a hostile takeover of the democratic party hilarious, contradictory, and satire-friendly automatically makes you pro-conservative.
  - rtlfe 6y ago
    How is that funny or surprising? Every source that mentions political leaning of news media says they're right wing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-post https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-post https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/
    - dimitrios1 6y ago
      Is all of the right wing conservative? Is all of the left progressive? (turns out human beings don't fit neatly into these nice little categories)
      - rtlfe 6y ago
        > Is all of the right wing conservative? Yes. That's literally the definition: "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system." https://www.google.com/search?q=define+right+wing https://www.google.com/search?q=define+right+wing
ehsankia 6y ago
I'm not sure what you're implying, Buzzfeed News is independent from Buzzfeed (the clickbait site) and they do real journalism.
- jdminhbg 6y ago
  So real they get themselves into obvious lying situations: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/business/media/buzzfeed-news-trump-michael-cohen-mueller.amp.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/business/media/buzzfeed-n... Buzzfeed News doesn’t have listicles, but it doesn’t have journalistic standards either.
  - ehsankia 6y ago
    How was that a lie? The statement from Mueller's team was vague and hardly a real rebuttal. It just says that it's not accurate and provides no clarification at all. They had two independent government sources, which doesn't even come close to comparing to this story where the entire source is a single repairman who can't even get their story straight. And there's a very big difference between being fed wrong information from two sources and not doing enough to verify it, in a time where said information could be crucial, vs "lying" as you imply, which is what NY Post is doing.
millstone 6y ago
Nobody questioned NYPost when they broke the Anthony Weiner sexting scandal either [1]. That's because the reporting was incredibly solid. But this story is incredibly flimsy. 1: https://nypost.com/2016/08/28/anthony-weiner-sexted-busty-brunette-while-his-son-was-in-bed-with-him/ https://nypost.com/2016/08/28/anthony-weiner-sexted-busty-br...
nobody9999 6y ago
>As HN audience mostly claim to be full of "independent thinkers" we should have no problem with this being published by the Post if it indeed is legitimate, correct? I've not read any comments on HN that claims that they have a problem with "this being published by the Post" whether it's legitimate or not. It's possible that I missed such comments, but I don't think so. I would be grateful if you could point me at a few of them.

cofeecup 6y ago

Well in that case, let me just clear my schedule to spend all of tomorrow performing an exhaustive fact check of the credibility of this story. /s It turns out that journalism is hard to do correctly. As an "independent thinker" I'm going to independently decide to not trust a publication with the reputation of the NY Post until it's been corroborated.

sj3k 6y ago
So glad I see this sentiment on here. I am still blown away by HN readers inability to critically analyze news sources. If this was some research paper it would have been put under the microscope by HN readers.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  It helps that research papers on scientific domains have relatively easily verifiable data. It is much harder to claim ( not impossible ) that 1 is actually 0 if looked at from the right distance. Once we get to news ( assuming we bypass the whole conversation over how what passes for news is often opinion, or clickbait these days... ) you find out that 1s could indeed become 0s, you might not know all the facts, writers have bias, editors have bias, culture won't allow certain things to be said, polite society won't have a given phrase used.. the list just goes on and on. It is not inability. It is just a ridiculous exercise in futility. Chomsky can barely do it. And he has way better memory, command of language and reasoning skills than I do.

sfkdjf9j3j 6y ago

Buzzfeed was previously famous for apolitical clickbait articles and quizzes, they practically invented the genre. New York Post, meanwhile, has been a tabloid-level spreader of pro-conservative and anti-progressive misinformation. It's smart to be skeptical of obviously politically motivated reporting from any outlet, but especially so when one has such a concerning track record.

dimitrios1 6y ago
It's hilarious to me that the Post is now viewed as pro conservative. Framing the Post as pro-conservative is like calling Joe Rogan alt right. Finding some of the progressivism that has performed a hostile takeover of the democratic party hilarious, contradictory, and satire-friendly automatically makes you pro-conservative.
- rtlfe 6y ago
  How is that funny or surprising? Every source that mentions political leaning of news media says they're right wing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-post https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-post https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-post/
  - dimitrios1 6y ago
    Is all of the right wing conservative? Is all of the left progressive? (turns out human beings don't fit neatly into these nice little categories)
    - rtlfe 6y ago
      > Is all of the right wing conservative? Yes. That's literally the definition: "the conservative or reactionary section of a political party or system." https://www.google.com/search?q=define+right+wing https://www.google.com/search?q=define+right+wing

ehsankia 6y ago

I'm not sure what you're implying, Buzzfeed News is independent from Buzzfeed (the clickbait site) and they do real journalism.

jdminhbg 6y ago
So real they get themselves into obvious lying situations: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/business/media/buzzfeed-news-trump-michael-cohen-mueller.amp.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/business/media/buzzfeed-n... Buzzfeed News doesn’t have listicles, but it doesn’t have journalistic standards either.
- ehsankia 6y ago
  How was that a lie? The statement from Mueller's team was vague and hardly a real rebuttal. It just says that it's not accurate and provides no clarification at all. They had two independent government sources, which doesn't even come close to comparing to this story where the entire source is a single repairman who can't even get their story straight. And there's a very big difference between being fed wrong information from two sources and not doing enough to verify it, in a time where said information could be crucial, vs "lying" as you imply, which is what NY Post is doing.

millstone 6y ago

Nobody questioned NYPost when they broke the Anthony Weiner sexting scandal either [1]. That's because the reporting was incredibly solid. But this story is incredibly flimsy. 1: https://nypost.com/2016/08/28/anthony-weiner-sexted-busty-brunette-while-his-son-was-in-bed-with-him/ https://nypost.com/2016/08/28/anthony-weiner-sexted-busty-br...

nobody9999 6y ago

>As HN audience mostly claim to be full of "independent thinkers" we should have no problem with this being published by the Post if it indeed is legitimate, correct? I've not read any comments on HN that claims that they have a problem with "this being published by the Post" whether it's legitimate or not. It's possible that I missed such comments, but I don't think so. I would be grateful if you could point me at a few of them.