3 ms·
The article seemed very strange to me, so I'm not surprised it's been pulled. (my overriding thought as I read it being "I'm sure google does assorted morally
by mst 3y ago
The article seemed very strange to me, so I'm not surprised it's been pulled.
(my overriding thought as I read it being "I'm sure google does assorted morally dubious things in this area but this really doesn't seem like their style of evil, and I suspect the article is either a misrepresentation or mistaken")
- rockskon 3y agoMy point is that it's highly unusual for a news outlet to outright remove an article as opposed to editing it and giving a note explaining why. Or a note saying the article is not accurate but leaving it up for historical purposes.
- mst 3y agoMy point is that it isn't unheard of for something sufficiently badly wrong, and that article cleared the bar hard enough that I was honestly surprised that wired published it at all. I find it highly likely that Google -do- try to influence coverage, mind, but I don't think that was the primary factor in play here.