5 ms·

I agree that this behavior is deplorable, its not unique to Providence or McKinsey - https://www.propublica.org/series/st-judes-unspent-billions https://www.pro

by Aloha 4y ago

I agree that this behavior is deplorable, its not unique to Providence or McKinsey - https://www.propublica.org/series/st-judes-unspent-billions https://www.propublica.org/series/st-judes-unspent-billions As much as I might agree with the thrust of the article, I strongly dislike the leading purple prose. It's bad writing, and doesn't make the case - its just moralizing - the fact that I agree with this particular moralizing doesn't make it any good. Moralizing generally just feeds the boiler of the outrage machine - it makes the reader feel good for agreeing - and gives the general impression that just talking about the issues are enough to have contributed, but does little to solve the underlying issues that plague our societies. If you're curious what I mean - the language gins up outrage, but it's wantonly short on conclusions or suggestions to repair the problem, the reader is left to figure that out on their own.

bigcat12345678 4y ago
> I strongly dislike the leading purple prose. It's bad writing, and doesn't make the case > Providence is a health giant whose anchor is a network of Catholic hospitals. They colluded with McKinsey to steal from their poorest patients, by deceiving them about their eligibility for free care, saddling poor, sick people with crushing debts: This part? Does not seem matches your "equally moralizing" writing.
eyelidlessness 4y ago
You’re engaging in exactly the thing you’re complaining about, but you’re doing it while undermining interest in addressing the problem you say you find deplorable, and moralizing about raising concerns about actual problems. If you find the practices deplorable, maybe you’d find it more valuable to offer some suggestions of your own instead of attacking people bringing it to your attention.
- Aloha 4y ago
  I did - the bulk of my commentary was on the writing of the article itself. Not the topic of said article. Also I linked to a wonderful series that goes into great depth of what should be done. One which I've read, it even covers the state level investigations into such practices. Largely I think it needs someone watching these organizations, and probably a minimum number spent on delivering services based on endowment size to retain non-profit status.

by Aloha 4y ago

bigcat12345678 4y ago

> I strongly dislike the leading purple prose. It's bad writing, and doesn't make the case > Providence is a health giant whose anchor is a network of Catholic hospitals. They colluded with McKinsey to steal from their poorest patients, by deceiving them about their eligibility for free care, saddling poor, sick people with crushing debts: This part? Does not seem matches your "equally moralizing" writing.

eyelidlessness 4y ago

You’re engaging in exactly the thing you’re complaining about, but you’re doing it while undermining interest in addressing the problem you say you find deplorable, and moralizing about raising concerns about actual problems. If you find the practices deplorable, maybe you’d find it more valuable to offer some suggestions of your own instead of attacking people bringing it to your attention.

Aloha 4y ago
I did - the bulk of my commentary was on the writing of the article itself. Not the topic of said article. Also I linked to a wonderful series that goes into great depth of what should be done. One which I've read, it even covers the state level investigations into such practices. Largely I think it needs someone watching these organizations, and probably a minimum number spent on delivering services based on endowment size to retain non-profit status.