5 ms·
Did this person clearly state this when it happened in 2014? If not, they failed as a journalist, and then to try to bring this up after the fraud was known to
by anm89 4y ago
Did this person clearly state this when it happened in 2014?
If not, they failed as a journalist, and then to try to bring this up after the fraud was known to get credit is even worse.
- mgraczyk 4y agoThat's basically what this article is about. > “John Carreyrou did a brilliant job of exposing Elizabeth Holmes — I did not.” Auletta reflected. “So, when I look back on that, yeah, I did a profile of her, but I did not produce the goods that he did.”
- pxmpxm 4y agoI mean it's the New York Times, a story about female STEM start up founder is essentially an identity politics version of crack to them.
- zone411 4y agoThe New Yorker, not the New York Times.
- pxmpxm 4y agoAh definitely misread it, thought I vaguely remember Forbes and/or NYT being the cheerleaders at the time.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- advisedwang 4y agoIt was not really a flattering profile. Give it a read before you assume: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler
- advisedwang 4y agoTheir piece [1] is pretty skeptical of Theranos. All of Theranos claims are quoted as claims, not fact. The article explicitly says Theranos doesn't say how they are achieving what they want, details a lack of independent evidence in support of their claims and quotes competitors explaining problems in Theranos' claims. He makes it clear that Holmes was a charismatic "big claims" type person. He didn't blow the case open, but reported on it as well as he could have, given libel laws. [1] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler