4 ms·

On the contrary, I read / listen to news constantly. The issue I take, is that there's actually very very little legitimate news being promoted. Blogs and deta

On the contrary, I read / listen to news constantly. The issue I take, is that there's actually very very little legitimate news being promoted. Blogs and detailed substack's have way WAY more interesting content than the New York Times on most topics. The problem is group think, their articles / investigations tend to be just an opinion piece masked in "research". That's not to say it's all that way, but it often is. Collaborations are occurring because they quite literally have to share the story to keep the narrative(s) the same. There's only so many stories there allowed to comment on and only so many views they can get for their content. Collaborations are necessary to ensure revenue sharing.

psychometry 5y ago
It's not the authors' fault you're too fucking dumb to understand basic facts about how journalism works. Go shill some more ivermectin, you nutter.
- dang 5y ago
  We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop. Seriously not cool. I hate to ban an account that has been this active and contributed quite a few good posts as well, but the damage outweighs the benefits when an account is this aggressive. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
rhizome 5y ago
>The issue I take, is that there's actually very very little legitimate news being promoted. Blogs and detailed substack's have way WAY more interesting content than the New York Times on most topics. So you criticize them based on the idea of "legitimate news," but the standard you use for yourself is "interesting content." These are not the same thing and don't even necessarily overlap. There is also interesting illegitimate news and boring legitmate news, but these related forms of content don't exist in your argument because you're comparing the apples of your insides to the oranges of journalism's outsides. >because they quite literally have to share the story to keep the narrative(s) the same This isn't very charitable. What do you think is driving them to "keep the narratives the same?" What is the value of it?

psychometry 5y ago

It's not the authors' fault you're too fucking dumb to understand basic facts about how journalism works. Go shill some more ivermectin, you nutter.

dang 5y ago
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop. Seriously not cool. I hate to ban an account that has been this active and contributed quite a few good posts as well, but the damage outweighs the benefits when an account is this aggressive. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

rhizome 5y ago

>The issue I take, is that there's actually very very little legitimate news being promoted. Blogs and detailed substack's have way WAY more interesting content than the New York Times on most topics. So you criticize them based on the idea of "legitimate news," but the standard you use for yourself is "interesting content." These are not the same thing and don't even necessarily overlap. There is also interesting illegitimate news and boring legitmate news, but these related forms of content don't exist in your argument because you're comparing the apples of your insides to the oranges of journalism's outsides. >because they quite literally have to share the story to keep the narrative(s) the same This isn't very charitable. What do you think is driving them to "keep the narratives the same?" What is the value of it?