3 ms·

Also true of non-tech-adjacent reporters! The impulse may be stronger in some and weaker in others, and the incentive structure at their outlet may be stronger

Also true of non-tech-adjacent reporters! The impulse may be stronger in some and weaker in others, and the incentive structure at their outlet may be stronger or weaker, but all of them know, even subconsciously, what type of stories are likelier to capture attention, make $ for the outlet and hopefully return a portion of that to them. Outrage is high the list of qualities that guarantee attention. Since learning about social media algorithms, I've come to think of all news media, even old timey newspapers, in the same light. IMO The only difference between TikTok's For You page and newspaper headlines from 200 years ago was the precision of the engagement feedback and the latency.

MountDoom 1y ago
> Also true of non-tech-adjacent reporters! It's true for everyone. Over the years, I've been on the business end of several "tech outrage" stories that made the headlines on HN, and over time, became a sort of IT canon: "company X did something really bad". And they all had the same origin: a party with an ax to grind latched onto a fairly boring story, distorted the facts to tell a narrative, and that narrative "clicked" with everyone else because it confirmed their preexisting biases. It doesn't mean that there are no companies that are truly evil or incompetent, but I'd wager is <50% of the ones that get raked over the coals here and elsewhere.
- reissbaker 1y ago
  Yep — sadly the most effective cure is being on the receiving end of one of the stories, and realizing how bad faith they are. I think the U.S. slander laws are probably too light. I'm generally supportive of the idea that "democracy dies in darkness," but I think we've gone further than that in allowing people to lie in public for money. I don't think that helps democracy, and in fact probably hurts it. I think anyone, anywhere on the political spectrum, can point to damning examples of the other side lying for their cause, and I think we'd all be better off if that stopped.
kingforaday 1y ago
Re: Benjamin Franklin and the Pamphlet Wars
- snerbles 1y ago
  Also the Yellow Press drumming up support for the Spanish-American War.

MountDoom 1y ago

> Also true of non-tech-adjacent reporters! It's true for everyone. Over the years, I've been on the business end of several "tech outrage" stories that made the headlines on HN, and over time, became a sort of IT canon: "company X did something really bad". And they all had the same origin: a party with an ax to grind latched onto a fairly boring story, distorted the facts to tell a narrative, and that narrative "clicked" with everyone else because it confirmed their preexisting biases. It doesn't mean that there are no companies that are truly evil or incompetent, but I'd wager is <50% of the ones that get raked over the coals here and elsewhere.

reissbaker 1y ago
Yep — sadly the most effective cure is being on the receiving end of one of the stories, and realizing how bad faith they are. I think the U.S. slander laws are probably too light. I'm generally supportive of the idea that "democracy dies in darkness," but I think we've gone further than that in allowing people to lie in public for money. I don't think that helps democracy, and in fact probably hurts it. I think anyone, anywhere on the political spectrum, can point to damning examples of the other side lying for their cause, and I think we'd all be better off if that stopped.

kingforaday 1y ago

Re: Benjamin Franklin and the Pamphlet Wars

snerbles 1y ago
Also the Yellow Press drumming up support for the Spanish-American War.