4 ms·

Is it dishonorable if it helps Twitter more than it harms them? None of the stuff they've published is terribly damaging to Twitter, and the publicity helps th

by pg 17y ago

Is it dishonorable if it helps Twitter more than it harms them? None of the stuff they've published is terribly damaging to Twitter, and the publicity helps them. Remember, Twitter and TechCrunch are pretty friendly. Till now TechCrunch tended to be attacked for being too nice to Twitter, not too harsh. So while you boil with indignation, Evan and Michael are probably still on cordial terms.

dfranke 17y ago
> Is it dishonorable if it helps Twitter more than it harms them? Yes, it is. TC's breach of conduct consists of publishing stolen confidential information, and then, apparently (see above thread), lying about having permission to do so. Whether this will ultimately reflect well or badly on Twitter is a complete non-sequitir to the question of honor.
- SamAtt 17y ago
  Unrelated Life Lesson: Never say "above" or "below" on HN
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
jfornear 17y ago
I agree. Just take a look at every Twitter-related TC post up until this debacle. The first few commenters are always complaining about the excessive reporting on Twitter. Now randoms are coming out of the woodwork to thrash TC over this. Even HN seems to have a more positive outlook on Twitter now (namely because TC is the bad guy). Seems like a win for Twitter to me... Either way, I don't think these leaks can be considered trade secrets. What would a competitor really have to gain that would outweigh the massive amount of attention Twitter is getting right now? Notes from Twitter strategy meetings sound like they wouldn't be useful for much more than rough drafts of Gossip Girl scripts anyway. From everyone's reaction, you would think TC published the President's security detail's shift schedule and itinerary...
ubernostrum 17y ago
"Is it dishonorable if it helps Twitter more than it harms them?" Yes. Publishing leaked or stolen documents when they contain information relevant to vital public issues is widely considered to be ethically acceptable, and there are even some legal precedents. But publishing leaked or stolen documents absent compelling public interest is not. In this case, I don't see an argument for Twitter's internal memoranda and such being relevant to some compelling public interest. What I do see is an information theft being milked for every last pageview it can be made to generate. That's not just unethical journalism, it's sleazy exploitation of another's misfortune.

by pg 17y ago

dfranke 17y ago

> Is it dishonorable if it helps Twitter more than it harms them? Yes, it is. TC's breach of conduct consists of publishing stolen confidential information, and then, apparently (see above thread), lying about having permission to do so. Whether this will ultimately reflect well or badly on Twitter is a complete non-sequitir to the question of honor.

SamAtt 17y ago
Unrelated Life Lesson: Never say "above" or "below" on HN

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

jfornear 17y ago

I agree. Just take a look at every Twitter-related TC post up until this debacle. The first few commenters are always complaining about the excessive reporting on Twitter. Now randoms are coming out of the woodwork to thrash TC over this. Even HN seems to have a more positive outlook on Twitter now (namely because TC is the bad guy). Seems like a win for Twitter to me... Either way, I don't think these leaks can be considered trade secrets. What would a competitor really have to gain that would outweigh the massive amount of attention Twitter is getting right now? Notes from Twitter strategy meetings sound like they wouldn't be useful for much more than rough drafts of Gossip Girl scripts anyway. From everyone's reaction, you would think TC published the President's security detail's shift schedule and itinerary...

ubernostrum 17y ago

"Is it dishonorable if it helps Twitter more than it harms them?" Yes. Publishing leaked or stolen documents when they contain information relevant to vital public issues is widely considered to be ethically acceptable, and there are even some legal precedents. But publishing leaked or stolen documents absent compelling public interest is not. In this case, I don't see an argument for Twitter's internal memoranda and such being relevant to some compelling public interest. What I do see is an information theft being milked for every last pageview it can be made to generate. That's not just unethical journalism, it's sleazy exploitation of another's misfortune.