I am of the opposite opinion. From seeing how the internet evolved from dial up days to what it is now, my initial reaction to any article written in a story-e

I am of the opposite opinion. From seeing how the internet evolved from dial up days to what it is now, my initial reaction to any article written in a story-esque manner where the author tries to paint a certain bias with words like "unlighted, windowless room, draped in plastic, smelling of paint" is that its mostly just a very one sided account of things. Its very popular to hate on rich moguls and big companies these days with the rise of online leftism rhetoric, and considering that most non subscription online media publication literally live or die by clicks, you should be suspect of them as much as you are of Tesla. Real factual stories with links are often very milquetoast and boring to read. Id imagine in this case it be something along the lines of "Tesla said this, Employee said this, we don't have proof of any of this stuff other than statements, so we don't know what really happened and likely never will" For reference linked article here: http://deleter.net/index.php/news/5541/Business/September-11-2017/Reporter-Writes-Glowing-Article-About-Elon-Musk-But-Leaves-Out-Key-Details http://deleter.net/index.php/news/5541/Business/September-11... paints a different picture of how the said employee acted. It generally seems that the truth is most likely somewhere in between two extremes. Tesla is of course going to be corporate minded and not particularly care too much about employees, and its likely that the client in question is not fully guilt free either.