22 ms·

An upcoming story about Coinbase

171 points by atarian 6y ago

joemazerino 6y ago
Preemptive move.
underseacables 6y ago
Seems really Atypical to see such preemption by a tech company. Are there other examples?
whimsicalism 6y ago
Ass covering par examplar
Waterluvian 6y ago
> We are committed to maintaining an environment that is safe, supportive and welcoming to employees of all backgrounds. These are inexpensive words said by every company. I feel that most companies, after uttering them, don't actually do anything to follow through.
- nailer 6y ago
  The article explicitly mentions Coinbase has already followed through.
  - IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
    Yes... By asking people to quit or shut up about its racism, IIRC
    - nailer 6y ago
      No, you don't remember correctly. The article contains details of how the handled the investigations. You mention "Coinbase's racism" - do you have any additional info about the case providing the basis for this certainty?
      - IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
        Some of the complaints at issue here certainly predate that infamous "please leave your politics at home" post. So while my comment above was made somewhat flippantly, I'm pretty sure it isn't wrong. It's no surprise that Coinbase touts some other changes. But these are made under duress, facing the imminent PR crisis that being called out in the paper of record. As such, they tell you as much about their true convictions and future actions as a confession made under torture. As to additional info: I only have the knowledge that there is an article about to come out, and it will be weighty enough to invite an already incriminating attempt to preempt it.
        nailer 6y ago
        > that infamous "please leave your politics at home" post. Why is that 'infamous'? It's entirely reasonable to want to avoid political discussion at a workplace, in favour of work. Especially considering a particular political group (BLM) seems to have been the cause of issues at Coinbase. > an already incriminating attempt to preempt it Wanting to have your own say in advance of a newspaper that is objectively creeping towards the left (http://evoweb.net/blog2/20190630-islamophobia-nyt-timelines.htm http://evoweb.net/blog2/20190630-islamophobia-nyt-timelines.... as mentioned elsewhere) writing an article criticizing your company is not evidence of guilt.
        JacobSuperslav 6y ago
        the world is not standing still of course they are "creeping towards the left". how could it be otherwise? correlation that words like toxic masculinity are rising. well, they didn't exist before, did they? we had different problems then. we tackled them, now we're moving the the next ones.
        nailer 6y ago
        I'm not sure why you think there's no alternative to creep to the left. Ideas being new does not make them worthy of attention, especially when we definitely do have many more important issues.
- brighton36 6y ago
  It's cheap talk. It's not intended to be followed through. It intends to fool the neurotic, which, it usually succeeds in doing.
  - whimsicalism 6y ago
    > It intends to fool the neurotic, which, it usually succeeds in doing. Disagree - neurotic people who believe in equality are not so easily fooled. It's meant to sway MLKs "white moderate" before they read a mean article in the NYT.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ed25519FUUU 6y ago
Is this is what the CEO gets for rejecting corporate social activism?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- hnracer 6y ago
  Pretty much. They're going to pay the price for not being on-board with the woke agenda. We all knew this was coming. I do not expect any good faith coverage from the NYT (on any wokeness related topic they have no remaining journalistic integrity), although I hope to be pleasantly surprised.
lefrenchy 6y ago
Streisand effect. Now I want to read the article when it comes out.
- adtac 6y ago
  Not really. They're just trying to own the narrative with this post here. Streissand effect only applies when someone tries to cover up an already-published piece of fact.
  - drewbug01 6y ago
    That’s not how I’ve understood the Streisand effect - nor how Wikipedia does either: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect From the link: > The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet. It’s not so much about whether a piece of information has been “published” or “publicized,” (although obviously that is typically the situation!) - but rather the act of trying to control the narrative causes the narrative to spin further away from your control. Anyways, pedantry aside, to me this neatly fits the definition. There is information that Coinbase really doesn’t want out there: and their attempt at controlling the narrative has ensured I will be looking for this article and make time to read it as soon as it is published.
    - ajhurliman 6y ago
      The wikipedia link backs the parent's point more than it does yours
      - gamblor956 6y ago
        No, Coinbase's preemptive post has simply drawn more attention to the allegations of racism than the (as of yet unpublished) NYT article on its own would have, which is the very definition of the Streisand Effect. The fact is that they think the article is so damaging that they must do preemptive damage control speaks volumes.
ve55 6y ago
>Overall, we expect the story will paint an inaccurate picture that lacks complete information and context, despite our best efforts to fact-check details of the story with the reporter. Probably the most important line from this; those that have been through it before know it better than anyone. Likely best to apply healthy levels of skepticism to both parties.
- lrae 6y ago
  Only problem is that they don't offer that complete information or context either?
  - ve55 6y ago
    Sure, I cannot claim to defend Coinbase when I know nothing of the matter. But since news is inherently cherry-picked (after all, one cannot report on literally everything), there will generally be an inherent slant to the information provided, and such an inherent slant will likely tend more towards an optimization of metrics (clicks, engagement, ad revenue, subscriptions, etc) rather than perfect statistical representation of the baseline (which it turns out people are not excited to read about!).
    - jolux 6y ago
      This is enormously unfair to the journalistic profession. There are quite a lot of leaps from "it's not possible to report every fact" to "all journalism is slanted for metrics." Journalists like getting a big scoop but the good ones do their due diligence and go to great pains to report fairly and accurately.
      - ve55 6y ago
        I think there may be a mis-understanding; what I mean is that in the very essence of reporting a scoop, they have already chosen to report that event above other events. So the reporting about the given scoop may be 100% fair and honest, but there is still, in the bigger picture, a large statistical bias, since only some types of things qualify as 'worthy of reporting' and get converted to scoops to begin with. e.g. imagine one news outlet that only reports about homicides, another than only reports about theft, and another that only reports about covid deaths. All three can be perfectly factual, but they still present radically different views of what is wrong with the world to their readers.
ApolloFortyNine 6y ago
It's really really hard to prove your not racist. If anyone has any clue as how to do so, please share. They could have waited until the story was published I guess to share this statement, but publishing it preemptively makes sense too I believe (it's an always open entity that is incredibly easy to switch away from). But truly, when you get accused of racism, what can you even do?
- gpm 6y ago
  I wonder how the nyt feels about them posting it publicly? Is that something that's going to make them reconsider sharing details in future stories? (I think it was probably the right choice either way given how serious the allegations appear to be, so this is just idle curiosity on my part).
  - nlh 6y ago
    > Is that something that's going to make them reconsider sharing details in future stories? It's a fair question, but I doubt it. While getting a hot scoop and dropping it with a bang is something that feels good (and sells papers, so to speak), it's not the driving force behind how a professional news org works. The NYT is a professional news org. One of the things a professional news orgs does is fact check, get statements, and give its sources a chance to respond.
    - travisoneill1 6y ago
      One of the other things a professional news org does is not fire its editorial page manager for printing an opposing viewpoint.
    - nullc 6y ago
      The New York times is not a professional news org. They do not, in fact, fact check, get statements, or give their subjects a chance to respond, at least not consistently. When Nathaniel Popper wrote a hit piece substantially targeting me personally he (and NYT's fact checkers-- if they exist/were-involved at all) diligently avoided having any communication with anyone who could possibly contradict his narrative, including, of course, those he targeted. Not even the classic "email to an unmonitored mailbox 20 minutes before going to print to accompany a 'could not be reached for comment'" so often used in the industry and it isn't like he didn't know how to reach me. The subsequent apology I got from a times board member was only a small consolation. My experiences are not dissimilar to others I've talked to that have been the targets of hit pieces in the NYT. In my view the NYT is a garbage venue that is callously indifferent to the truth at best. At least coinbase knew this was coming, often NYT targets don't enjoy even that small piece of human decency.
dmix 6y ago
In an HN thread the other day someone mentioned Coinbase as a positive example of a company that decided to separate employee political activism from the workplace (which IMO is the only rational option unless you like volunteering for lose-lose landmine situations). As soon as I saw NYT in the I assumed it would something along those lines. It’s not clear what the grievances were yet so I’ll hold back judgement for now. There are always consequences to trying to run an apolitical as. It’s always seems easier to just give in, especially on the surface layer, with the social media grievance machine, but upholding values through out your company is worth the effort. Not being racist should be common sense by now. Engaging in political campaigns is another matter.
lrae 6y ago
Wonder how they think / thought that this will play out? That internal email is nothing but "NYT bad" and what seems like pretty cheap promises... if you have to send those to your employees in the first place. Then I don't think it will help Coinbase itself much with the potential backlash of a NYT story with what seems like multiple employees coming out including receipts that will get published. And it doesn't seem really helpful for employees to defend themselves from some potential inquiries/harassment either? And then there is the Streisand effect...
- nailer 6y ago
  > if you have to send those to your employees in the first place. And if they didn't, they'd be criticised for not doing do. > Then I don't think it will help Coinbase itself much with the potential backlash of a NYT story It depends. Backlash should be against provable actions of discrimination. From the article, it sounds like the issue was someone disagreeing with BLM. Being called 'Black Lives Matter' doesn't make criticism of BLM racist any more than the DPRK being called the 'Democratic People's Republic of Korea' makes criticism of North Korea anti-democratic.
jumelles 6y ago
Not sure how wise it is to preemptively post a response like this. The technique may backfire.
- CyanLite4 6y ago
  It’s frowned upon in the public relations community because now the NYT can make changes to their story based on CB’s prebuttal. Which will be even more damaging.
avolcano 6y ago
This is an odd thing to see widely published. I'm at a company that had a rather detailed negative article written about us, and we were warned about it internally shortly before it was published, after the reporter had contacted us with details and questions. However, we didn't go public with a reaction until after it was out, since it seemed rather pointless to respond to something that hadn't been published yet, especially when we hadn't even seen it in full. It is odd to me that they would preemptively go loud on this, drawing attention to a story that might not even get that much traction. It seems like it would have been much easier to just let that story go out and respond with a simple "We've investigated this before and dispute the claims, except for these few unfortunate stories we can confirm happened, and here's how we will prevent them in the future." What on earth do they gain with a preemptive memo like this? Are they really scared of their employees leaking this? Would anyone even pick up a story of "someone's about to publish a bad article about Coinbase"?
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  > It is odd to me that they would preemptively go loud on this "This is gonna be really bad, so we need to get out in front of it." That's what it sounds like to me.
  - unityByFreedom 6y ago
    Since we're all hip to this strategy these days, I have the same feeling as GP.
  - 3327 6y ago
    Thats exactly what it is. Hey dad, the cops Are gonna knock on the door and arrest me so heads up.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - theanarcrist 6y ago
    I suspect part of the motivation is to scoop the reporter's own story as a passive aggressive reprisal. It also serves to reduce the chance of future reporters on negative topics to talk directly to Coinbase since they've already showed they're willing to break stories before they publish.
ntsplnkv2 6y ago
> Let’s keep focused on building an amazing company together; we are hitting amazing new records on users, volume and revenue, and we have so much great work to do together. Ignore any potential negativity, everything we do is great, all that matters is revenue, nothing bad ever happens hear, blah blah blah. Don't focus on the bad part, those are all lies! The NYTimes article isn't released so I can't comment on the substance there, but this quote struck out to me, and makes me less likely to believe Coinbase. EDIT: Adding this to clarify for later readers, apparently the above quote I took from the post has been removed from the main post.
- hnracer 6y ago
  Let's assume that CB is really the entirely innocent and maligned party here. In such a world, how would their response have differed?
  - beervirus 6y ago
    They probably wouldn’t have responded preemptively.
    - hnracer 6y ago
      Why not? They would've had intel from current employees who were interviewed about the likely contents, and they claim that a number of the allegations that are likely to be published are false. If I was either innocent or guilty of such allegations, I will want to try to control the narrative ahead of time. Doing so doesn't seem to update our prior beliefs about the probability of guilt, all it shows us is that the allegations are significant enough to warrant damage control
      - jolux 6y ago
        Because ideally your culture should be strong enough to weather things like these, and your damage control should read more as a statement of facts than "we did nothing wrong," especially when you issue it preemptively.
markdown 6y ago
I thought I was on Coinbase... and then I wondered why there were some completely ridiculous ads at the bottom of the page. Is this company so cheap they can't even build themselves a website?
- bmarquez 6y ago
  That's one of the downsides of using Medium to host a blog. Looking at the footer links: "9 Fantastic Signs That Your Partner Is Madly In Love With You" and "The Elites Are Preparing a New Currency to Replace the U.S. Dollar" ...really detracts from the message.
peteretep 6y ago
> We are committed to maintaining an environment that is safe, supportive and welcoming to employees of all backgrounds I don’t think this is compatible with dismissing the struggle for human dignity in America as “politics”
- oh_sigh 6y ago
  Of course, the only correct definition of human dignity is your definition.
  - sg47 6y ago
    A commonly accepted notion of dignity. If the majority didn't agree, we'd still have slavery.
  - ev1 6y ago
    strictly a thought exercise: is it possible to have reasonable discussion when one side considers not having an opinion on a subject or not wanting to discuss a subject with coworkers to immediately be equivalent to "you're equivalent to a white supremacist"? Note that this is not my own thoughts on the subject, but I'm legitimately curious how you can have discourse in a situation similar to this: https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-fires-employee-who-protested-its-inaction-on-trump-tweets-2020-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-fires-employee-who-... - what would you do when someone asks? What would the expected result be?
- shadowprofile77 6y ago
  And exactly what made said struggle so overpoweringly morally correct in every possible way that you can qualify it as a pure struggle for human dignity that can't be subjected to any valid criticism? Or claim that nobody has a morally sound right to stay out of it or claim it's too tinged with politics? Pray tell.
drewbug01 6y ago
Well, the whole press release / internal email smells of a company desperately trying to spin what they expect to be a very, very bad article. But this line jumped out at me twice: > To be specific: Although the story will likely allege that a number of Black employees and contractors referenced in the story filed complaints with the company, only three of these people filed complaints during their time at Coinbase. This is the kind of thing that really leads me to distrust everything Coinbase is saying. Reading between the lines, I imagine that the complaints workers claim to have filed were ignored by management at some level of the process, or not filed on the right paperwork or something. And so Coinbase can probably claim on a technicality “they didn’t file a complaint.” But being “technically correct” is only what you reach for when you don’t have any other leg to stand on. It’s a really telling move that they repeated this line multiple times. I’m speculating, obviously. The article isn’t out. But this isn’t my first rodeo, and this kind of corporate speak isn’t new. This kind of desperate spin only serves to underscore the fundamental truths of whatever the NYT is going to publish. Otherwise... why bother dignifying it with such a response?
- jimmygrapes 6y ago
  It seems to me that Coinbase is well aware of NYT's recent decline from paper of record to race-baiting propaganda, and knows that instead of being factual about numbers NYT will use weasel words to make it seem like Coinbase's entire company is run by "far right extremist racists" or whatever similar language. Of course, only time and the publication of the NYT article will tell, but given their recent track record I would absolutely not be surprised if it's written as an exaggerated hit piece full of emotional appeal rather than, well, news.
  - drewbug01 6y ago
    > race-baiting propaganda I think it’s reasonable to debate the quality of the NYT (and I have serious issues with a lot of what they publish - and dear lord, don’t get me started on how I feel about their opinion columnists). But I do think that calling the NYT “race-baiting propaganda” is a gross mischaracterization of what they do.
rlt 6y ago
Seems like someone at NYT wasn’t happy with Coinbase’s recent rejection of the politicization of the workplace (https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-is-a-mission-focused-company-af882df8804 https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-is-a-mission-focused-comp...)
- wilg 6y ago
  I would argue that your framing of that situation is itself politicized!
  - wonderwonder 6y ago
    He is probably correct though. Often times a company or person will do something that catches attention, this then provides an opportunity for a story on a subject that people are already aware of and drives interest. If Coinbase had not published the prior memo, this article would likely have not been written. Was it written by someone with an axe to grind, I don't know (maybe) but the odds of the article being greenlit were definitely juiced due to coinbase garnering attention and most critically, divided attention via their publication.
    - Barrin92 6y ago
      is that an actual problem though? Controversial actions drawing attention to other issues isn't exactly new in journalism, what matters is if the allegations in the piece are going to be substantiated, and this preemptive post makes me think that will be the case. When I read that previous coinbase statement I actually wondered immediately if they have internal issues like this, and their policy was just an attempt to shut it down, I guess that's what a journalist might think as well. It's of course also hilarious that Coinbases attempt at shutting political discourse at the company down now has put them into the crosshairs if that's actually the case.
      - wonderwonder 6y ago
        Not a problem, just a result of their actions. Oftentimes leaders of these high profile, unicorn style companies have a self focused, semi - narcissitic view of the world and have a hard time understanding the consequences of their decisions. Now a personality like this may at times be helpful in driving success (see Elon) but it also blinds them (see Elon's 420 tweet). Coinbase's ceo may have had a pro Trumpian view of the world or he may have just thought cutting off political / cultural conversations at work was the best thing to do, odds are either way he probably did not understand the type of focus this would bring in a hyper partisan media. Culture wars sell clicks and papers. All things being equal, the Coinbase office is probably going to be a pretty awkward place to be the next couple of months.
throwlastone 6y ago
Lies are countered with facts, not generic dismissals. The post is textbook PR pointing to some unspecified inaccuracy which is supposed to cast doubt on the substance of the story. Then self-investigation and self-exoneration. Every company trying to cover up wrong doing writes the same thing.
- nullc 6y ago
  Their response contains specific facts, such as information on the number of and their handling of reported complaints. That isn't much-- I agree-- but I doubt that they know enough about the time's intended allegations to respond more specifically. And if they did respond too specifically presumably the times would shift their allegations to different specifics in any case, making a general response the only durable one. Interestingly, other commenters here characterized Coinbases' message with language such as "incredibly thorough prebuttal" and suggested that this indicated that the story was devastating. You seem to be arguing the opposite, that it is perfectly generic and is thus indicative of a traditional cover-up approach. From this it seems to me that regardless of what approach they took it would be characterized as evidence against them.
  - throwlastone 6y ago
    Those "facts" are about as relevant to dispelling the allegations as is the "fact" that a table has four legs. The facts are there to support an argument. The fact that only 3 people filed a formal complain isn't strong support of the argument that there wasn't more widespread discrimination, particularly when set against the specific statements of multiple alleged victims that will be published in the story.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
kingnight 6y ago
Disappointed as a customer to see this nyt-is-bad preemptive pr defense and no substance action, as I guess as fits their mission statement, than a critical assessment of flaws etc. and description of improvements they’ll make going forward.
- nullc 6y ago
  Do you think sending a pre-emptive heads up to their staff interally was unusual or unwarranted? Coinbase has been subject to a number of prior leaks where internally communication was shared partially and without context. My assumption on seeing this was that they didn't necessarily want to make it public but, instead, had a reasonable apprehension that if they didn't make it public themselves someone else would excerpt from it and use the fact that they didn't make it public to suggest there was something shameful about their response.
QuinnyPig 6y ago
I’m skeptical. I’ve worked with the NYT on a few stories; they’re incredibly thorough, and don’t publish unsubstantiated trash.
- barry-cotter 6y ago
  > If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. Cardinal Richelieu There’s no need to lie in a hit piece. You can select your material, shade the truth and quote people who hate your subject on their opinions. Lying leaves you open to libel and slander too.
  - chipotle_coyote 6y ago
    "Hit piece" is in and of itself a framing that clearly has a bias toward one side. Was the reporting from multiple outlets on Theranos a series of hit pieces? They were all negative, but that doesn't mean they were wrong. Coinbase has preemptively presented their side of the story in an effort to make us all say "oh, yeah, that's the hit piece we were warned about," but we haven't actually seen the other side of the story yet.
    - akhilcacharya 6y ago
      Tim Draper absolutely called the Carreyou articles hit pieces, and I'm fairly certain still believes that.
    - barry-cotter 6y ago
      All framing has bias. That’s standpoint theory in four words. It’s entirely possible the NYT reporter working on the piece about CoinBase feels they are being scrupulously honest and that anyone who reviewed their notes, interviews and background work would come to the same conclusions they do in the article. Not everyone would actually agree. People have divergent experiences and beliefs and will come to different conclusions based on exactly the same evidence because their prior beliefs are different.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
themark 6y ago
It almost seems like they have already read the article.
ffggvv 6y ago
fake news nyt trying to punish him for not wanting to be political and his previous statements
fblp 6y ago
I think the specific pre-emptive denial of claims by specific ex-employees reads as righteous and dismissive. Who knows what is going to be published in the final version? They later state that only 2 of the four claims were investigated by third parties. "likely quote three former Coinbase employees and a former contractor by name, and include photos of some of them....The story will likely imply that Black employees were discriminated against during this process; this is false."
predictmktegirl 6y ago
[edit: Not going to risk retaliation for my family, not sure why I bothered]
- ttesttom 6y ago
  Didn't he state support for BLM publicly on Twitter though? https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1268622377182621696 https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/12686223771826216...
  - predictmktegirl 6y ago
    Yes, after employees walked out.
    - ttesttom 6y ago
      Ah, good to know context, thanks!
- travisoneill1 6y ago
  > employees who walked out, "forcing" his hand > No one was asking for a political statement Pick one
  - predictmktegirl 6y ago
    They walked out because he wouldn't say, in private, that black people's lives mattered. It was simply outrageous to see that in this age. Do you really think it is political to say that a human's life is important, in private?
    - TerminalWarrior 6y ago
      Its non-sense to ask someone to say the lives of any race "matter". It might be a great catch phrase for a movement but what an absolutely stupid thing to demand a person state. Unless a person is actively KILLING people based on their race, to ask them to state that their lives matter is, again, just stupid. I want you to say the lives of Japanese people matter. Say it, why won't you say it? You must hate Japanese people apparently...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
- TerminalWarrior 6y ago
  There's that unfounded HN hatred for Bitcoin we've all come to know and love!
nilkn 6y ago
I have to wonder to what extent this is just punishment from the establishment for Coinbase’s recent rejection of political activism in the workplace. Of course we will need to see the article from the NYT first before drawing any conclusions, but the timing is pretty suspicious; this implies that the NYT more or less launched this project immediately after that announcement went out.
- wilg 6y ago
  Sounds like a good conspiracy theory to me!
- Barrin92 6y ago
  Probably because the announcement made people question if the change in policy was prompted by exactly something like this brewing internally. That's kind of how investigative journalism works. It's like Google changing their policy to never mention the words 'marketshare' in internal documentation and journalists going out and investigating Google's antitrust situtation and writing about it. That's not a bad thing, that's what generally prompts journalists taking a look at a company
  - nilkn 6y ago
    Completely fair point.
- gamblor956 6y ago
  Coinbase's political non-activism policy announcement at the end of September had no bearing on this article. Investigations into racial discrimination or sexual harassment complaints take months (see for example, at Riot Games, an internal investigation took almost 5 months even though most of the facts were already publicly known at the start of the investigation. https://www.espn.com/esports/story/_/id/26686134/how-got-here-line-riot-games-cultural-controversy https://www.espn.com/esports/story/_/id/26686134/how-got-her...). This means that the race complaints predated the September announcement. Additionally, given that investigative pieces generally involve months of investigation, fact-checking, re-writing, it's very likely that this article was already being researched or written at the time of Coinbase's original political non-activism announcement.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
someonehere 6y ago
As many of my HR friends have said (I’m sure most of you have heard this too, HR is in the business of protecting the company and not the employees. I’ve been at plenty of startups and have witnessed people doing the right thing or rocking the boat and being let go. I myself have been in that boat for reporting sexual harassment on behalf of a friend/peer at work who was too afraid to report the manager. I caught the heat from it and was let go over that. This is going to be an interesting who said what and what really happened in the next few days.
TigeriusKirk 6y ago
I don't think any response they could make would change anyone's mind about anything. They've taken a stance that has generated a polarized response, and people are going to respond to any and all problems that arise at the company based on their now-existing polarization. I don't exempt myself from that.
CyanLite4 6y ago
TLDR: We’re not racist, we’re just not anti-racist.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
throwaway-sf 6y ago
I'm fairly certain Coinbase is a leading target for Bill Ackman's SPAC ($PSTH), so this is interesting timing for all here. Coinbase is likely particularly sensitive to negative stories and possible regulatory action right now.
rdtwo 6y ago
Meh I guess I don’t care as long as it’s not related to fraud or skimming or improper accounting.
burnthrow 6y ago
Well now I'm definitely not going to miss this story.
oh_sigh 6y ago
I'd love to see what modifications will be made to the nyt story in response to this pre-response
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
A lot of people are talking about the PR considerations of this, but I think there's an important factor that should be noted. There's been a growing perspective in SV, particularly among executives and VCs, that traditional media outlets are competitors to the tech industry rather than neutral reporters on it. And lot of the puzzling aspects here make a lot of sense when seen in that context. This is exactly the kind of response you'd expect if, say, you discovered some famous short seller were going to release a report on you.
pcdoodle 6y ago
This attention seeking by both sides is not worth paying attention to.
chenpengcheng 6y ago
this smells like bullshit
nwsm 6y ago
This is pathetic. Honestly I’d be embarrassed if my company published this.
GoodJokes 6y ago
Hi, we are guilty but let us tell you we are not. We are borg.
RestlessMind 6y ago
"There is no such thing as bad publicity", eh? You can count on NYT to publish any story at the intersection of Silicon Valley and Racial Justice, so a story about Coinbase itself won't be a big deal since public will forget it in 5 minutes. But by proactively publishing this blog post, Coinbase seems to be extending the news cycle around this.
hardsoftnfloppy 6y ago
Knowing what I know about Coinbase... it's most likely all true.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

171 points by atarian 6y ago

joemazerino 6y ago

Preemptive move.

underseacables 6y ago

Seems really Atypical to see such preemption by a tech company. Are there other examples?

whimsicalism 6y ago

Ass covering par examplar

Waterluvian 6y ago

> We are committed to maintaining an environment that is safe, supportive and welcoming to employees of all backgrounds. These are inexpensive words said by every company. I feel that most companies, after uttering them, don't actually do anything to follow through.

nailer 6y ago
The article explicitly mentions Coinbase has already followed through.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
  Yes... By asking people to quit or shut up about its racism, IIRC
  - nailer 6y ago
    No, you don't remember correctly. The article contains details of how the handled the investigations. You mention "Coinbase's racism" - do you have any additional info about the case providing the basis for this certainty?
    - IfOnlyYouKnew 6y ago
      Some of the complaints at issue here certainly predate that infamous "please leave your politics at home" post. So while my comment above was made somewhat flippantly, I'm pretty sure it isn't wrong. It's no surprise that Coinbase touts some other changes. But these are made under duress, facing the imminent PR crisis that being called out in the paper of record. As such, they tell you as much about their true convictions and future actions as a confession made under torture. As to additional info: I only have the knowledge that there is an article about to come out, and it will be weighty enough to invite an already incriminating attempt to preempt it.
      - nailer 6y ago
        > that infamous "please leave your politics at home" post. Why is that 'infamous'? It's entirely reasonable to want to avoid political discussion at a workplace, in favour of work. Especially considering a particular political group (BLM) seems to have been the cause of issues at Coinbase. > an already incriminating attempt to preempt it Wanting to have your own say in advance of a newspaper that is objectively creeping towards the left (http://evoweb.net/blog2/20190630-islamophobia-nyt-timelines.htm http://evoweb.net/blog2/20190630-islamophobia-nyt-timelines.... as mentioned elsewhere) writing an article criticizing your company is not evidence of guilt.
        JacobSuperslav 6y ago
        the world is not standing still of course they are "creeping towards the left". how could it be otherwise? correlation that words like toxic masculinity are rising. well, they didn't exist before, did they? we had different problems then. we tackled them, now we're moving the the next ones.
        nailer 6y ago
        I'm not sure why you think there's no alternative to creep to the left. Ideas being new does not make them worthy of attention, especially when we definitely do have many more important issues.
brighton36 6y ago
It's cheap talk. It's not intended to be followed through. It intends to fool the neurotic, which, it usually succeeds in doing.
- whimsicalism 6y ago
  > It intends to fool the neurotic, which, it usually succeeds in doing. Disagree - neurotic people who believe in equality are not so easily fooled. It's meant to sway MLKs "white moderate" before they read a mean article in the NYT.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ed25519FUUU 6y ago

Is this is what the CEO gets for rejecting corporate social activism?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
hnracer 6y ago
Pretty much. They're going to pay the price for not being on-board with the woke agenda. We all knew this was coming. I do not expect any good faith coverage from the NYT (on any wokeness related topic they have no remaining journalistic integrity), although I hope to be pleasantly surprised.

lefrenchy 6y ago

Streisand effect. Now I want to read the article when it comes out.

adtac 6y ago
Not really. They're just trying to own the narrative with this post here. Streissand effect only applies when someone tries to cover up an already-published piece of fact.
- drewbug01 6y ago
  That’s not how I’ve understood the Streisand effect - nor how Wikipedia does either: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect From the link: > The Streisand effect is a social phenomenon that occurs when an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of further publicizing that information, often via the Internet. It’s not so much about whether a piece of information has been “published” or “publicized,” (although obviously that is typically the situation!) - but rather the act of trying to control the narrative causes the narrative to spin further away from your control. Anyways, pedantry aside, to me this neatly fits the definition. There is information that Coinbase really doesn’t want out there: and their attempt at controlling the narrative has ensured I will be looking for this article and make time to read it as soon as it is published.
  - ajhurliman 6y ago
    The wikipedia link backs the parent's point more than it does yours
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      No, Coinbase's preemptive post has simply drawn more attention to the allegations of racism than the (as of yet unpublished) NYT article on its own would have, which is the very definition of the Streisand Effect. The fact is that they think the article is so damaging that they must do preemptive damage control speaks volumes.

ve55 6y ago

>Overall, we expect the story will paint an inaccurate picture that lacks complete information and context, despite our best efforts to fact-check details of the story with the reporter. Probably the most important line from this; those that have been through it before know it better than anyone. Likely best to apply healthy levels of skepticism to both parties.

lrae 6y ago
Only problem is that they don't offer that complete information or context either?
- ve55 6y ago
  Sure, I cannot claim to defend Coinbase when I know nothing of the matter. But since news is inherently cherry-picked (after all, one cannot report on literally everything), there will generally be an inherent slant to the information provided, and such an inherent slant will likely tend more towards an optimization of metrics (clicks, engagement, ad revenue, subscriptions, etc) rather than perfect statistical representation of the baseline (which it turns out people are not excited to read about!).
  - jolux 6y ago
    This is enormously unfair to the journalistic profession. There are quite a lot of leaps from "it's not possible to report every fact" to "all journalism is slanted for metrics." Journalists like getting a big scoop but the good ones do their due diligence and go to great pains to report fairly and accurately.
    - ve55 6y ago
      I think there may be a mis-understanding; what I mean is that in the very essence of reporting a scoop, they have already chosen to report that event above other events. So the reporting about the given scoop may be 100% fair and honest, but there is still, in the bigger picture, a large statistical bias, since only some types of things qualify as 'worthy of reporting' and get converted to scoops to begin with. e.g. imagine one news outlet that only reports about homicides, another than only reports about theft, and another that only reports about covid deaths. All three can be perfectly factual, but they still present radically different views of what is wrong with the world to their readers.

ApolloFortyNine 6y ago

It's really really hard to prove your not racist. If anyone has any clue as how to do so, please share. They could have waited until the story was published I guess to share this statement, but publishing it preemptively makes sense too I believe (it's an always open entity that is incredibly easy to switch away from). But truly, when you get accused of racism, what can you even do?

gpm 6y ago
I wonder how the nyt feels about them posting it publicly? Is that something that's going to make them reconsider sharing details in future stories? (I think it was probably the right choice either way given how serious the allegations appear to be, so this is just idle curiosity on my part).
- nlh 6y ago
  > Is that something that's going to make them reconsider sharing details in future stories? It's a fair question, but I doubt it. While getting a hot scoop and dropping it with a bang is something that feels good (and sells papers, so to speak), it's not the driving force behind how a professional news org works. The NYT is a professional news org. One of the things a professional news orgs does is fact check, get statements, and give its sources a chance to respond.
  - travisoneill1 6y ago
    One of the other things a professional news org does is not fire its editorial page manager for printing an opposing viewpoint.
  - nullc 6y ago
    The New York times is not a professional news org. They do not, in fact, fact check, get statements, or give their subjects a chance to respond, at least not consistently. When Nathaniel Popper wrote a hit piece substantially targeting me personally he (and NYT's fact checkers-- if they exist/were-involved at all) diligently avoided having any communication with anyone who could possibly contradict his narrative, including, of course, those he targeted. Not even the classic "email to an unmonitored mailbox 20 minutes before going to print to accompany a 'could not be reached for comment'" so often used in the industry and it isn't like he didn't know how to reach me. The subsequent apology I got from a times board member was only a small consolation. My experiences are not dissimilar to others I've talked to that have been the targets of hit pieces in the NYT. In my view the NYT is a garbage venue that is callously indifferent to the truth at best. At least coinbase knew this was coming, often NYT targets don't enjoy even that small piece of human decency.

dmix 6y ago

In an HN thread the other day someone mentioned Coinbase as a positive example of a company that decided to separate employee political activism from the workplace (which IMO is the only rational option unless you like volunteering for lose-lose landmine situations). As soon as I saw NYT in the I assumed it would something along those lines. It’s not clear what the grievances were yet so I’ll hold back judgement for now. There are always consequences to trying to run an apolitical as. It’s always seems easier to just give in, especially on the surface layer, with the social media grievance machine, but upholding values through out your company is worth the effort. Not being racist should be common sense by now. Engaging in political campaigns is another matter.

lrae 6y ago

Wonder how they think / thought that this will play out? That internal email is nothing but "NYT bad" and what seems like pretty cheap promises... if you have to send those to your employees in the first place. Then I don't think it will help Coinbase itself much with the potential backlash of a NYT story with what seems like multiple employees coming out including receipts that will get published. And it doesn't seem really helpful for employees to defend themselves from some potential inquiries/harassment either? And then there is the Streisand effect...

nailer 6y ago
> if you have to send those to your employees in the first place. And if they didn't, they'd be criticised for not doing do. > Then I don't think it will help Coinbase itself much with the potential backlash of a NYT story It depends. Backlash should be against provable actions of discrimination. From the article, it sounds like the issue was someone disagreeing with BLM. Being called 'Black Lives Matter' doesn't make criticism of BLM racist any more than the DPRK being called the 'Democratic People's Republic of Korea' makes criticism of North Korea anti-democratic.

jumelles 6y ago

Not sure how wise it is to preemptively post a response like this. The technique may backfire.

CyanLite4 6y ago
It’s frowned upon in the public relations community because now the NYT can make changes to their story based on CB’s prebuttal. Which will be even more damaging.

avolcano 6y ago

This is an odd thing to see widely published. I'm at a company that had a rather detailed negative article written about us, and we were warned about it internally shortly before it was published, after the reporter had contacted us with details and questions. However, we didn't go public with a reaction until after it was out, since it seemed rather pointless to respond to something that hadn't been published yet, especially when we hadn't even seen it in full. It is odd to me that they would preemptively go loud on this, drawing attention to a story that might not even get that much traction. It seems like it would have been much easier to just let that story go out and respond with a simple "We've investigated this before and dispute the claims, except for these few unfortunate stories we can confirm happened, and here's how we will prevent them in the future." What on earth do they gain with a preemptive memo like this? Are they really scared of their employees leaking this? Would anyone even pick up a story of "someone's about to publish a bad article about Coinbase"?

ntsplnkv2 6y ago
> It is odd to me that they would preemptively go loud on this "This is gonna be really bad, so we need to get out in front of it." That's what it sounds like to me.
- unityByFreedom 6y ago
  Since we're all hip to this strategy these days, I have the same feeling as GP.
- 3327 6y ago
  Thats exactly what it is. Hey dad, the cops Are gonna knock on the door and arrest me so heads up.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- theanarcrist 6y ago
  I suspect part of the motivation is to scoop the reporter's own story as a passive aggressive reprisal. It also serves to reduce the chance of future reporters on negative topics to talk directly to Coinbase since they've already showed they're willing to break stories before they publish.

ntsplnkv2 6y ago

> Let’s keep focused on building an amazing company together; we are hitting amazing new records on users, volume and revenue, and we have so much great work to do together. Ignore any potential negativity, everything we do is great, all that matters is revenue, nothing bad ever happens hear, blah blah blah. Don't focus on the bad part, those are all lies! The NYTimes article isn't released so I can't comment on the substance there, but this quote struck out to me, and makes me less likely to believe Coinbase. EDIT: Adding this to clarify for later readers, apparently the above quote I took from the post has been removed from the main post.

hnracer 6y ago
Let's assume that CB is really the entirely innocent and maligned party here. In such a world, how would their response have differed?
- beervirus 6y ago
  They probably wouldn’t have responded preemptively.
  - hnracer 6y ago
    Why not? They would've had intel from current employees who were interviewed about the likely contents, and they claim that a number of the allegations that are likely to be published are false. If I was either innocent or guilty of such allegations, I will want to try to control the narrative ahead of time. Doing so doesn't seem to update our prior beliefs about the probability of guilt, all it shows us is that the allegations are significant enough to warrant damage control
    - jolux 6y ago
      Because ideally your culture should be strong enough to weather things like these, and your damage control should read more as a statement of facts than "we did nothing wrong," especially when you issue it preemptively.

markdown 6y ago

I thought I was on Coinbase... and then I wondered why there were some completely ridiculous ads at the bottom of the page. Is this company so cheap they can't even build themselves a website?

bmarquez 6y ago
That's one of the downsides of using Medium to host a blog. Looking at the footer links: "9 Fantastic Signs That Your Partner Is Madly In Love With You" and "The Elites Are Preparing a New Currency to Replace the U.S. Dollar" ...really detracts from the message.

peteretep 6y ago

> We are committed to maintaining an environment that is safe, supportive and welcoming to employees of all backgrounds I don’t think this is compatible with dismissing the struggle for human dignity in America as “politics”

oh_sigh 6y ago
Of course, the only correct definition of human dignity is your definition.
- sg47 6y ago
  A commonly accepted notion of dignity. If the majority didn't agree, we'd still have slavery.
- ev1 6y ago
  strictly a thought exercise: is it possible to have reasonable discussion when one side considers not having an opinion on a subject or not wanting to discuss a subject with coworkers to immediately be equivalent to "you're equivalent to a white supremacist"? Note that this is not my own thoughts on the subject, but I'm legitimately curious how you can have discourse in a situation similar to this: https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-fires-employee-who-protested-its-inaction-on-trump-tweets-2020-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/facebook-fires-employee-who-... - what would you do when someone asks? What would the expected result be?
shadowprofile77 6y ago
And exactly what made said struggle so overpoweringly morally correct in every possible way that you can qualify it as a pure struggle for human dignity that can't be subjected to any valid criticism? Or claim that nobody has a morally sound right to stay out of it or claim it's too tinged with politics? Pray tell.

drewbug01 6y ago

Well, the whole press release / internal email smells of a company desperately trying to spin what they expect to be a very, very bad article. But this line jumped out at me twice: > To be specific: Although the story will likely allege that a number of Black employees and contractors referenced in the story filed complaints with the company, only three of these people filed complaints during their time at Coinbase. This is the kind of thing that really leads me to distrust everything Coinbase is saying. Reading between the lines, I imagine that the complaints workers claim to have filed were ignored by management at some level of the process, or not filed on the right paperwork or something. And so Coinbase can probably claim on a technicality “they didn’t file a complaint.” But being “technically correct” is only what you reach for when you don’t have any other leg to stand on. It’s a really telling move that they repeated this line multiple times. I’m speculating, obviously. The article isn’t out. But this isn’t my first rodeo, and this kind of corporate speak isn’t new. This kind of desperate spin only serves to underscore the fundamental truths of whatever the NYT is going to publish. Otherwise... why bother dignifying it with such a response?

jimmygrapes 6y ago
It seems to me that Coinbase is well aware of NYT's recent decline from paper of record to race-baiting propaganda, and knows that instead of being factual about numbers NYT will use weasel words to make it seem like Coinbase's entire company is run by "far right extremist racists" or whatever similar language. Of course, only time and the publication of the NYT article will tell, but given their recent track record I would absolutely not be surprised if it's written as an exaggerated hit piece full of emotional appeal rather than, well, news.
- drewbug01 6y ago
  > race-baiting propaganda I think it’s reasonable to debate the quality of the NYT (and I have serious issues with a lot of what they publish - and dear lord, don’t get me started on how I feel about their opinion columnists). But I do think that calling the NYT “race-baiting propaganda” is a gross mischaracterization of what they do.

rlt 6y ago

Seems like someone at NYT wasn’t happy with Coinbase’s recent rejection of the politicization of the workplace (https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-is-a-mission-focused-company-af882df8804 https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-is-a-mission-focused-comp...)

wilg 6y ago
I would argue that your framing of that situation is itself politicized!
- wonderwonder 6y ago
  He is probably correct though. Often times a company or person will do something that catches attention, this then provides an opportunity for a story on a subject that people are already aware of and drives interest. If Coinbase had not published the prior memo, this article would likely have not been written. Was it written by someone with an axe to grind, I don't know (maybe) but the odds of the article being greenlit were definitely juiced due to coinbase garnering attention and most critically, divided attention via their publication.
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    is that an actual problem though? Controversial actions drawing attention to other issues isn't exactly new in journalism, what matters is if the allegations in the piece are going to be substantiated, and this preemptive post makes me think that will be the case. When I read that previous coinbase statement I actually wondered immediately if they have internal issues like this, and their policy was just an attempt to shut it down, I guess that's what a journalist might think as well. It's of course also hilarious that Coinbases attempt at shutting political discourse at the company down now has put them into the crosshairs if that's actually the case.
    - wonderwonder 6y ago
      Not a problem, just a result of their actions. Oftentimes leaders of these high profile, unicorn style companies have a self focused, semi - narcissitic view of the world and have a hard time understanding the consequences of their decisions. Now a personality like this may at times be helpful in driving success (see Elon) but it also blinds them (see Elon's 420 tweet). Coinbase's ceo may have had a pro Trumpian view of the world or he may have just thought cutting off political / cultural conversations at work was the best thing to do, odds are either way he probably did not understand the type of focus this would bring in a hyper partisan media. Culture wars sell clicks and papers. All things being equal, the Coinbase office is probably going to be a pretty awkward place to be the next couple of months.

throwlastone 6y ago

Lies are countered with facts, not generic dismissals. The post is textbook PR pointing to some unspecified inaccuracy which is supposed to cast doubt on the substance of the story. Then self-investigation and self-exoneration. Every company trying to cover up wrong doing writes the same thing.

nullc 6y ago
Their response contains specific facts, such as information on the number of and their handling of reported complaints. That isn't much-- I agree-- but I doubt that they know enough about the time's intended allegations to respond more specifically. And if they did respond too specifically presumably the times would shift their allegations to different specifics in any case, making a general response the only durable one. Interestingly, other commenters here characterized Coinbases' message with language such as "incredibly thorough prebuttal" and suggested that this indicated that the story was devastating. You seem to be arguing the opposite, that it is perfectly generic and is thus indicative of a traditional cover-up approach. From this it seems to me that regardless of what approach they took it would be characterized as evidence against them.
- throwlastone 6y ago
  Those "facts" are about as relevant to dispelling the allegations as is the "fact" that a table has four legs. The facts are there to support an argument. The fact that only 3 people filed a formal complain isn't strong support of the argument that there wasn't more widespread discrimination, particularly when set against the specific statements of multiple alleged victims that will be published in the story.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

kingnight 6y ago

Disappointed as a customer to see this nyt-is-bad preemptive pr defense and no substance action, as I guess as fits their mission statement, than a critical assessment of flaws etc. and description of improvements they’ll make going forward.

nullc 6y ago
Do you think sending a pre-emptive heads up to their staff interally was unusual or unwarranted? Coinbase has been subject to a number of prior leaks where internally communication was shared partially and without context. My assumption on seeing this was that they didn't necessarily want to make it public but, instead, had a reasonable apprehension that if they didn't make it public themselves someone else would excerpt from it and use the fact that they didn't make it public to suggest there was something shameful about their response.

QuinnyPig 6y ago

I’m skeptical. I’ve worked with the NYT on a few stories; they’re incredibly thorough, and don’t publish unsubstantiated trash.

barry-cotter 6y ago
> If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him. Cardinal Richelieu There’s no need to lie in a hit piece. You can select your material, shade the truth and quote people who hate your subject on their opinions. Lying leaves you open to libel and slander too.
- chipotle_coyote 6y ago
  "Hit piece" is in and of itself a framing that clearly has a bias toward one side. Was the reporting from multiple outlets on Theranos a series of hit pieces? They were all negative, but that doesn't mean they were wrong. Coinbase has preemptively presented their side of the story in an effort to make us all say "oh, yeah, that's the hit piece we were warned about," but we haven't actually seen the other side of the story yet.
  - akhilcacharya 6y ago
    Tim Draper absolutely called the Carreyou articles hit pieces, and I'm fairly certain still believes that.
  - barry-cotter 6y ago
    All framing has bias. That’s standpoint theory in four words. It’s entirely possible the NYT reporter working on the piece about CoinBase feels they are being scrupulously honest and that anyone who reviewed their notes, interviews and background work would come to the same conclusions they do in the article. Not everyone would actually agree. People have divergent experiences and beliefs and will come to different conclusions based on exactly the same evidence because their prior beliefs are different.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

themark 6y ago

It almost seems like they have already read the article.

ffggvv 6y ago

fake news nyt trying to punish him for not wanting to be political and his previous statements

fblp 6y ago

I think the specific pre-emptive denial of claims by specific ex-employees reads as righteous and dismissive. Who knows what is going to be published in the final version? They later state that only 2 of the four claims were investigated by third parties. "likely quote three former Coinbase employees and a former contractor by name, and include photos of some of them....The story will likely imply that Black employees were discriminated against during this process; this is false."

predictmktegirl 6y ago

[edit: Not going to risk retaliation for my family, not sure why I bothered]

ttesttom 6y ago
Didn't he state support for BLM publicly on Twitter though? https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1268622377182621696 https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/12686223771826216...
- predictmktegirl 6y ago
  Yes, after employees walked out.
  - ttesttom 6y ago
    Ah, good to know context, thanks!
travisoneill1 6y ago
> employees who walked out, "forcing" his hand > No one was asking for a political statement Pick one
- predictmktegirl 6y ago
  They walked out because he wouldn't say, in private, that black people's lives mattered. It was simply outrageous to see that in this age. Do you really think it is political to say that a human's life is important, in private?
  - TerminalWarrior 6y ago
    Its non-sense to ask someone to say the lives of any race "matter". It might be a great catch phrase for a movement but what an absolutely stupid thing to demand a person state. Unless a person is actively KILLING people based on their race, to ask them to state that their lives matter is, again, just stupid. I want you to say the lives of Japanese people matter. Say it, why won't you say it? You must hate Japanese people apparently...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

TerminalWarrior 6y ago
There's that unfounded HN hatred for Bitcoin we've all come to know and love!

nilkn 6y ago

I have to wonder to what extent this is just punishment from the establishment for Coinbase’s recent rejection of political activism in the workplace. Of course we will need to see the article from the NYT first before drawing any conclusions, but the timing is pretty suspicious; this implies that the NYT more or less launched this project immediately after that announcement went out.

wilg 6y ago
Sounds like a good conspiracy theory to me!
Barrin92 6y ago
Probably because the announcement made people question if the change in policy was prompted by exactly something like this brewing internally. That's kind of how investigative journalism works. It's like Google changing their policy to never mention the words 'marketshare' in internal documentation and journalists going out and investigating Google's antitrust situtation and writing about it. That's not a bad thing, that's what generally prompts journalists taking a look at a company
- nilkn 6y ago
  Completely fair point.
gamblor956 6y ago
Coinbase's political non-activism policy announcement at the end of September had no bearing on this article. Investigations into racial discrimination or sexual harassment complaints take months (see for example, at Riot Games, an internal investigation took almost 5 months even though most of the facts were already publicly known at the start of the investigation. https://www.espn.com/esports/story/_/id/26686134/how-got-here-line-riot-games-cultural-controversy https://www.espn.com/esports/story/_/id/26686134/how-got-her...). This means that the race complaints predated the September announcement. Additionally, given that investigative pieces generally involve months of investigation, fact-checking, re-writing, it's very likely that this article was already being researched or written at the time of Coinbase's original political non-activism announcement.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

someonehere 6y ago

As many of my HR friends have said (I’m sure most of you have heard this too, HR is in the business of protecting the company and not the employees. I’ve been at plenty of startups and have witnessed people doing the right thing or rocking the boat and being let go. I myself have been in that boat for reporting sexual harassment on behalf of a friend/peer at work who was too afraid to report the manager. I caught the heat from it and was let go over that. This is going to be an interesting who said what and what really happened in the next few days.

TigeriusKirk 6y ago

I don't think any response they could make would change anyone's mind about anything. They've taken a stance that has generated a polarized response, and people are going to respond to any and all problems that arise at the company based on their now-existing polarization. I don't exempt myself from that.

CyanLite4 6y ago

TLDR: We’re not racist, we’re just not anti-racist.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

throwaway-sf 6y ago

I'm fairly certain Coinbase is a leading target for Bill Ackman's SPAC ($PSTH), so this is interesting timing for all here. Coinbase is likely particularly sensitive to negative stories and possible regulatory action right now.

rdtwo 6y ago

Meh I guess I don’t care as long as it’s not related to fraud or skimming or improper accounting.

burnthrow 6y ago

Well now I'm definitely not going to miss this story.

oh_sigh 6y ago

I'd love to see what modifications will be made to the nyt story in response to this pre-response

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

A lot of people are talking about the PR considerations of this, but I think there's an important factor that should be noted. There's been a growing perspective in SV, particularly among executives and VCs, that traditional media outlets are competitors to the tech industry rather than neutral reporters on it. And lot of the puzzling aspects here make a lot of sense when seen in that context. This is exactly the kind of response you'd expect if, say, you discovered some famous short seller were going to release a report on you.

pcdoodle 6y ago

This attention seeking by both sides is not worth paying attention to.

chenpengcheng 6y ago

this smells like bullshit

nwsm 6y ago

This is pathetic. Honestly I’d be embarrassed if my company published this.

GoodJokes 6y ago

Hi, we are guilty but let us tell you we are not. We are borg.

RestlessMind 6y ago

"There is no such thing as bad publicity", eh? You can count on NYT to publish any story at the intersection of Silicon Valley and Racial Justice, so a story about Coinbase itself won't be a big deal since public will forget it in 5 minutes. But by proactively publishing this blog post, Coinbase seems to be extending the news cycle around this.

hardsoftnfloppy 6y ago

Knowing what I know about Coinbase... it's most likely all true.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]