4 ms·

>c. 2017 4 years after the Bezos acquisition?

fluidcruft 9mo ago
It's just so odd that he chose to move back to DC some time after the Bezos acquisition! It's almost as if these are unrelated events...
- ribosometronome 9mo ago
  Bezos didn't buy DC, he bought a newspaper. The commenter was saying that the decline in quality was potentially unrelated to the acquisition and then immediately compared pre and post acquisition quality. That seems like a strange way to make that point and like it might suggest that the acquisition perhaps was related to its decline in quality.
  - fluidcruft 9mo ago
    The commenter said they moved back to DC in 2017 and noticed the change then. Elementary reading skills suggest this means they lived in DC for some significant period of time prior to 2017 as a WP reader, moved away from DC for some unknown period living elsewhere as a non-WP reader, moving back to DC in 2017 when they started reading WP again.
    - ribosometronome 9mo ago
      Elementary reading skills would also make it obvious that I'm not talking about their move from and back to DC. Them moving back and forth from DC is certainly irrelevant to WaPo's quality. They noticed a decline in quality from before and after the acquisition and are using that to conclude that the acquisition didn't impact the quality of the paper. Again, that certainly seems like a strange way to make the point that the purchase didn't impact its quality.
      - fluidcruft 9mo ago
        ... because they left DC before the acquisition ... and moved back to DC after the acquisition ...
        ribosometronome 9mo ago
        And? Why do you think that matters to what I'm commenting on? Them moving to and from DC is almost certainly completely unrelated to any changes in WaPo's quality. That there is a personal reason for why their two datapoints are before and after acquisition doesn't change that their two datapoints are before and after acquisition such that it's hard to use those two datapoints to exclude that the ownership had major effects on the quality of the paper's reporting, if anything, it seems extremely suggestive that it did.
        fluidcruft 9mo ago
        No I do not think anything matters to what you are commenting at.

It's just so odd that he chose to move back to DC some time after the Bezos acquisition! It's almost as if these are unrelated events...

ribosometronome 9mo ago
Bezos didn't buy DC, he bought a newspaper. The commenter was saying that the decline in quality was potentially unrelated to the acquisition and then immediately compared pre and post acquisition quality. That seems like a strange way to make that point and like it might suggest that the acquisition perhaps was related to its decline in quality.
- fluidcruft 9mo ago
  The commenter said they moved back to DC in 2017 and noticed the change then. Elementary reading skills suggest this means they lived in DC for some significant period of time prior to 2017 as a WP reader, moved away from DC for some unknown period living elsewhere as a non-WP reader, moving back to DC in 2017 when they started reading WP again.
  - ribosometronome 9mo ago
    Elementary reading skills would also make it obvious that I'm not talking about their move from and back to DC. Them moving back and forth from DC is certainly irrelevant to WaPo's quality. They noticed a decline in quality from before and after the acquisition and are using that to conclude that the acquisition didn't impact the quality of the paper. Again, that certainly seems like a strange way to make the point that the purchase didn't impact its quality.
    - fluidcruft 9mo ago
      ... because they left DC before the acquisition ... and moved back to DC after the acquisition ...
      - ribosometronome 9mo ago
        And? Why do you think that matters to what I'm commenting on? Them moving to and from DC is almost certainly completely unrelated to any changes in WaPo's quality. That there is a personal reason for why their two datapoints are before and after acquisition doesn't change that their two datapoints are before and after acquisition such that it's hard to use those two datapoints to exclude that the ownership had major effects on the quality of the paper's reporting, if anything, it seems extremely suggestive that it did.
        fluidcruft 9mo ago
        No I do not think anything matters to what you are commenting at.