3 ms·
As I said before, the meeting is happening possibly to curry favor from people who matter: writers and artists. Right now, a lot of writers and artists are sidi
by selmnoo 12y ago
As I said before, the meeting is happening possibly to curry favor from people who matter: writers and artists. Right now, a lot of writers and artists are siding against Amazon and with publishers (Hachette in this case).
Since I've been working in the place I work at now, I've learned that these things... happen. They're not make-believe stories thought up by conspiratorial nuts, they actually happen. My boss got together with a higher-up from a different department... all to get her daughter a job (I found this out only accidentally). David Cameron used to have dinner outings with Coulson et al., Murdoch invites people like Brin, Page, Zuckerberg, etc. to play golf with him, now Bezos ostensibly spends millions on parties with people who make the products he sells. Are we really so naive to believe that the people hosting the parties have zero ulterior motive all the time? Murdoch just likes to play golf with Sergey Brin because he thinks Brin is a stand-up guy? Bezos has so much time on his hands that he loves nothing more than to spend it with writers whose books he sells? And give them gifts? And give them a ride on his private jet? He's got no family to tend to? No over-work? Come on. Join the real world. It's ugly a lot of times, unfortunately. Journal outlets keep it in check by publishing articles like this and asking questions.
I recommend doing a second-reading on lukifer's comment, I think it really gets it.
- Turing_Machine 12y ago"Right now, a lot of writers and artists are siding against Amazon and with publishers (Hachette in this case)." Not really. The petition in support of Amazon has about 4 or 5 times as many signatures as the pro-Hachette one. The extremely wealthy authors who owe their success to the old model of artificial scarcity don't like changes, true, and neither do old media outlets like the New York Times. In the old days, the major publishers had an iron lock on what got published, and the New York Times had a near-lock on what became a "bestseller". Now anyone can publish anything they want, and bestsellers are determined by what people actually buy, rather than some secret method known only to the New York Times. > Are we really so naive to believe that the people hosting the parties have zero ulterior motive all the time? Well, until you have some actual evidence, I'm just going to operate under the assumption that Bezos likes parties.
- selmnoo 12y ago> Well, until you have some actual evidence, I'm just going to operate under the assumption that Bezos likes parties. Oh, absolutely. I'm also entertaining that as a possibility myself. I'm just arguing that news journals should cover events like this anyway, because they almost always are noteworthy in one way or another. There is an unbelievable amount of corruption everywhere you look: politics, technology, the valley. We've almost become too fatigued, we almost don't care, it doesn't shock us anymore. That's upsetting to me. One way corruption can perhaps be cut short is if we keep a close eye on these things, check out what's suspicious (I'd say this Bezos-hosted party qualifies as being suspicious, even if there is absolutely zero de facto evidence of there being corruption), and jump on first sign of wrong-doing. If we'd done that earlier with News of The World, less messy shit would have taken place. If we'd been watching Steve Jobs closely in the beginning, maybe we could have caught him before he did that collusion shit with the other CEOs in the valley.
- jiggy2011 12y agoHow do you tell the difference between a few billionaires hanging out together and "backroom dealing"?. Once you reach certain levels of wealth it probably becomes awkward to hang out with regular people.
- WalterBright 12y agoAnd if he does have an "ulterior motive" to throwing a lavish party, what's wrong with that? My only complaint is I wasn't invited :-)