4 ms·

I am not interested in arguing about whether Zuckerberg, Parker etc. deserve their wealth or not. That was not my point here. I just wanted to point out what

by copx 13y ago

I am not interested in arguing about whether Zuckerberg, Parker etc. deserve their wealth or not. That was not my point here. I just wanted to point out what I think are the dynamics behind attack pieces like this. I dare to claim that if some popular rich people, say Hollywood stars, had done exactly the same thing there would be no coverage outside of the gossip section where the writers would only fawn over the romantic scenery. I think this is not about the actual event itself. It is about the things I mentioned earlier.

numbsafari 13y ago
Or, maybe, the 2.5 million in fines actually had something to do with the actual event itself, which is shameful and disgusting. Nobody is surprised when people from Hollywood do shameful and disgusting things, because they are openly and honestly shameful and disgusting. But Silicon Valley and the SF area like to paint and market themselves as somehow better than that. So it's a "surprise" when they go and do something shameful and disgusting. They've made so much money, couldn't they have found a better way to spend it? If you want to create a magical experience, why does it have to involve destroying the environment?
- copx 13y ago
  I did not mean that the mentioned resentment is the cause of the fines, but I think it is the cause of the coverage.
jaegerpicker 13y ago
I disagree, sure there was some bias in the article. The fact that Parker made his money in Silicon Valley is completely besides the point. My take away is that a rich asshole* thinks the rules and laws don't apply to him. He developed an sensitive ecological area without little to no regard as to it's effects. People should be called out for these type of things. I could have done without the bias also but this was and is something worth calling people out on. *I don't personally know Parker of course so asshole may be a bit of an unfair judgement but stories like this aren't likely to make me think favorably of him.

by copx 13y ago

numbsafari 13y ago

Or, maybe, the 2.5 million in fines actually had something to do with the actual event itself, which is shameful and disgusting. Nobody is surprised when people from Hollywood do shameful and disgusting things, because they are openly and honestly shameful and disgusting. But Silicon Valley and the SF area like to paint and market themselves as somehow better than that. So it's a "surprise" when they go and do something shameful and disgusting. They've made so much money, couldn't they have found a better way to spend it? If you want to create a magical experience, why does it have to involve destroying the environment?

copx 13y ago
I did not mean that the mentioned resentment is the cause of the fines, but I think it is the cause of the coverage.

jaegerpicker 13y ago

I disagree, sure there was some bias in the article. The fact that Parker made his money in Silicon Valley is completely besides the point. My take away is that a rich asshole* thinks the rules and laws don't apply to him. He developed an sensitive ecological area without little to no regard as to it's effects. People should be called out for these type of things. I could have done without the bias also but this was and is something worth calling people out on. *I don't personally know Parker of course so asshole may be a bit of an unfair judgement but stories like this aren't likely to make me think favorably of him.