4 ms·

At least they had the decency to retract. I get the sense that other news sites these days would leave it up with its "alternative facts".

dwighttk 6y ago
E.g. Bloomberg’s The Big Hack https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-h...
- chance_state 6y ago
  Here's another classic: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-held-secret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-hel...
- weakfish 6y ago
  Could you elaborate on the problems with this article? I couldn't find any info online.
  - dwighttk 6y ago
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/17/bloomberg-reporter-challenged-big-hack-story-gets-promoted/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/17/bloomberg...
CharlesW 6y ago
Yeah, I don't get the hate here. You don't complain about companies doing the right thing if you want them to do it more and better. Also, every day Facebook does 10,000 times the damage that this has done. Perspective, people.
- SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
  If they were ever doing their jobs this never would have seen the light of day. Even the most basic amount of research showed it was unsubstantiated. Same with 1619 which is “problematic”. Their desire to push a narrative outweighed their desire to be factually correct. The scandal here isn’t they removed something quietly. It’s that if they failed their jobs here, where else are they failing and just haven’t been exposed yet? This isn’t the first time they lied to you, it’s just a time they were caught.
  - CharlesW 6y ago
    > If they were ever doing their jobs this never would have seen the light of day. Yes, it could not be more obvious that people fucked up. Now you have an opportunity to decide whether you're more interested in nurturing your retroactive rage and inciting it in others, or if it might make more sense to reinforce the responsible media behavior that you say you want. In my experience, the latter is more effective and better for mental health.
- hitekker 6y ago
  > This fall, as Canadian authorities were wrapping up an investigation on Chaudhry, Callimachi similarly championed her series. On Twitter, she raised questions about the competence of Canadian intelligence officials in the Chaudhry case. The Times defended her piece to The Washington Post and others, saying the reporting proved to be true and that doubts about Chaudhry's account were central to the podcast's narrative. This isn't "coming clean", it's getting busted. They had a chance at the former several months ago, and they forwent it.
  - ehsankia 6y ago
    Just curious, my understanding is that Canada's case is only getting started. Yes, they charged him for "hoax", but it could very well be a trap: Chaudhry has to either provide proof that he is an ISIS fighter, or admit it was all a hoax. Either way, we won't know for sure until the case is over. So far it's just alleged.
ohhhhhh 6y ago
this is some abusive relationship type of mentality

dwighttk 6y ago

E.g. Bloomberg’s The Big Hack https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-h...

chance_state 6y ago
Here's another classic: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-held-secret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/27/manafort-hel...
weakfish 6y ago
Could you elaborate on the problems with this article? I couldn't find any info online.
- dwighttk 6y ago
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/17/bloomberg-reporter-challenged-big-hack-story-gets-promoted/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/17/bloomberg...

CharlesW 6y ago

Yeah, I don't get the hate here. You don't complain about companies doing the right thing if you want them to do it more and better. Also, every day Facebook does 10,000 times the damage that this has done. Perspective, people.

SV_BubbleTime 6y ago
If they were ever doing their jobs this never would have seen the light of day. Even the most basic amount of research showed it was unsubstantiated. Same with 1619 which is “problematic”. Their desire to push a narrative outweighed their desire to be factually correct. The scandal here isn’t they removed something quietly. It’s that if they failed their jobs here, where else are they failing and just haven’t been exposed yet? This isn’t the first time they lied to you, it’s just a time they were caught.
- CharlesW 6y ago
  > If they were ever doing their jobs this never would have seen the light of day. Yes, it could not be more obvious that people fucked up. Now you have an opportunity to decide whether you're more interested in nurturing your retroactive rage and inciting it in others, or if it might make more sense to reinforce the responsible media behavior that you say you want. In my experience, the latter is more effective and better for mental health.
hitekker 6y ago
> This fall, as Canadian authorities were wrapping up an investigation on Chaudhry, Callimachi similarly championed her series. On Twitter, she raised questions about the competence of Canadian intelligence officials in the Chaudhry case. The Times defended her piece to The Washington Post and others, saying the reporting proved to be true and that doubts about Chaudhry's account were central to the podcast's narrative. This isn't "coming clean", it's getting busted. They had a chance at the former several months ago, and they forwent it.
- ehsankia 6y ago
  Just curious, my understanding is that Canada's case is only getting started. Yes, they charged him for "hoax", but it could very well be a trap: Chaudhry has to either provide proof that he is an ISIS fighter, or admit it was all a hoax. Either way, we won't know for sure until the case is over. So far it's just alleged.

ohhhhhh 6y ago

this is some abusive relationship type of mentality