6 ms·

I just don't agree. It's not as though this isn't a solved problem. And this isn't just a stale read, it's a bait and switch.

brudgers 11y ago
It becomes bait and switch via a presumption that the editorial direction wrought by the changes is improper. It's not if one presumes that the additional context makes for better journalism: then the changes are improvement. This appears to be the belief The New York Times's editors.
- leereeves 11y ago
  Switching a neutral article for an opinion piece would bother me even if I agreed with the opinion.
  - tptacek 11y ago
    I read this comment and was moved to summarize every graf in the piece to check whether it was an opinion piece: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=9870891 https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=9870891 Spoiler: I don't think "it's an opinion piece" is a colorable argument.
    - leereeves 11y ago
      Consider the neutral statements that were deleted: “It became clear that the board and I had a different view on the ability of Reddit to grow this year,” Ms. Pao said in an interview. “Because of that, it made sense to bring someone in that shared the same view.” Sam Altman, a member of Reddit’s board, said he personally appreciated Ms. Pao’s efforts during her two years working at the start-up. “Ellen has done a phenomenal job, especially in the last few months,” he said. Also consider what the article left out, like the complaints of IAmA mods about the way Victoria was terminated; the requirement that all employees move to San Francisco; the ban on salary negotiations; the community manager who said he was fired for being too sick to work; the complaints from mods about poor support from the admins. Some opinion pieces explicitly state an opinion. This one conveys an opinion by cherry-picking facts and quotes.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        * Contra your argument, the piece retains Pao's claim that she left because of differences on the direction of the company. * The Altman quote that was removed favors Pao's supporters. Removing it makes her plight less sympathetic. * Contra your argument, the petition not only remains in the final story, but has its own graf. * Contra your argument, the piece retains the concern about Victoria's firing. * The relocation of Reddit's employees was a Yishan Wong initiative, as was the salary negotiation policy. There is virtually no news story that you can't attack for "leaving out facts". You might not like this reported news story, but it is not an opinion piece.
        leereeves 11y ago
        You're right about the petition. Mea culpa; it was just moved. What's your source re the salary negotiation policy? Numerous news stories said it was Pao's decision. The move to SF was often brought up again in discussions over the past couple weeks. Contra the misogyny argument, there's anger at reddit that pre-dates Pao. Regarding the Altman quote and Pao's statement that "it made sense to bring someone in that shared the same view", I can see your interpretation, though I disagree. Regarding Victoria's firing: yes, the NYT mentioned it, but without explaining why it angered the mods so much.
        tptacek 11y ago
        Here is the entire Victoria graf: Ms. Pao’s departure from Reddit was prompted after the online message board’s tight-knit community broke into upheaval when news broke that Victoria Taylor, a prominent and well-liked Reddit employee, had been suddenly dismissed from the company this month with no public explanation. In protest, Reddit users shut down hundreds of sections of the message board. This graf: * Establishes an objective cause of Pao's ouster --- the firing of Victoria Taylor --- that Pao's opponents widely agree is the reason she left. * Calls into question the reason for Taylor's firing. * Reports the subreddit strike, which was done precisely to get this sort of attention. At no point does the graf downplay the firing or somehow mitigate Pao's involvement in it. Which it easily could have, because Pao didn't fire Taylor, Ohanian did. I do not think you can win an argument that the Times tried to spin the Victoria Taylor issue out of the article.
    - shawn-butler 11y ago
      It's called parajournalism. "Opinion piece" has a clearly defined meaning in journalism and is an entirely different genre. Parajournalism seems to be journalism — “the collection and dissemination of current news” — but the appearance is deceptive. It is a bastard form, having it both ways, exploiting the factual authority of journalism and the atmospheric license of fiction. Entertainment rather than information is the aim of its producers, and the hope of its consumers.[0] Your bullet list summary reveals little but your own bias/agenda and adds little to the conversation. We have the actual diff and can read for ourselves which is sort of the point. The diff link was provided in the source article: http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/technology/ellen-pao-reddit-chief-executive-resignation.html http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015... I hope Margaret Sullivan looks into this. Seems appropriate. 0: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1965/aug/26/parajournalism-or-tom-wolfe-his-magic-writing-mach/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1965/aug/26/parajou...
      - tptacek 11y ago
        People level this charge, or charges just like it, at every news story they don't like. Nerds are going to get a rude awakening if they think they're going to cow the Times (or the WSJ editorial board, for that matter) over "bias" in their newsrooms; these publications have been at the center of the real-world culture war for decades.
  - brudgers 11y ago
    Deliberate omission of some set of facts is just as much an editorial decision as their inclusion. Ignoring the context of Pao's history in tech is as editorial as its inclusion. The BBC's "Omar Sharif: Lawrence of Arabia star dies aged 83" is appropriate for mentioning his role in a movie more than 50 years ago. Journalism is about exposing the relevant facts and erring on the side of too much rather than witholding is reasonable. History matters. The past is never dead. It's not even past. -- Faulkner
    - leereeves 11y ago
      Deliberate omission of facts that don't fit a particular opinion is a form of advocacy for that opinion. The NYT is entitled to their opinion, but I think it should be expressed in an editorial, not used to choose what facts to report.
      - tptacek 11y ago
        You cannot call a reported news story an 'editorial' because the facts it chooses to present are somehow inconvenient to your agenda. Contra repeated claims that this piece was transformed by addition of "opinions", it seems to be composed entirely of verifiable facts.
        leereeves 11y ago
        I hardly ever use reddit, and I'll certainly agree that reddit (especially the default subs) is dominated by young males and can be, at times, misogynistic. If I have an agenda here, it's to ask for better from professional journalists.
        FredoKing 11y ago
        Would you start a news about Hillary Clinton as, "Hillary Clinton, hero to many..." even though it might be technically true?
- Dylan16807 11y ago
  If you replace a good article on apples with a great article on bridges, it's still a bait and switch.
tptacek 11y ago
Increasing the article's emphasis on gender issues does not make the revision a "bait and switch". All the substantive material from the earlier revision remains. No facts reported in the original piece have changed.

brudgers 11y ago

It becomes bait and switch via a presumption that the editorial direction wrought by the changes is improper. It's not if one presumes that the additional context makes for better journalism: then the changes are improvement. This appears to be the belief The New York Times's editors.

leereeves 11y ago
Switching a neutral article for an opinion piece would bother me even if I agreed with the opinion.
- tptacek 11y ago
  I read this comment and was moved to summarize every graf in the piece to check whether it was an opinion piece: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=9870891 https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=9870891 Spoiler: I don't think "it's an opinion piece" is a colorable argument.
  - leereeves 11y ago
    Consider the neutral statements that were deleted: “It became clear that the board and I had a different view on the ability of Reddit to grow this year,” Ms. Pao said in an interview. “Because of that, it made sense to bring someone in that shared the same view.” Sam Altman, a member of Reddit’s board, said he personally appreciated Ms. Pao’s efforts during her two years working at the start-up. “Ellen has done a phenomenal job, especially in the last few months,” he said. Also consider what the article left out, like the complaints of IAmA mods about the way Victoria was terminated; the requirement that all employees move to San Francisco; the ban on salary negotiations; the community manager who said he was fired for being too sick to work; the complaints from mods about poor support from the admins. Some opinion pieces explicitly state an opinion. This one conveys an opinion by cherry-picking facts and quotes.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      * Contra your argument, the piece retains Pao's claim that she left because of differences on the direction of the company. * The Altman quote that was removed favors Pao's supporters. Removing it makes her plight less sympathetic. * Contra your argument, the petition not only remains in the final story, but has its own graf. * Contra your argument, the piece retains the concern about Victoria's firing. * The relocation of Reddit's employees was a Yishan Wong initiative, as was the salary negotiation policy. There is virtually no news story that you can't attack for "leaving out facts". You might not like this reported news story, but it is not an opinion piece.
      - leereeves 11y ago
        You're right about the petition. Mea culpa; it was just moved. What's your source re the salary negotiation policy? Numerous news stories said it was Pao's decision. The move to SF was often brought up again in discussions over the past couple weeks. Contra the misogyny argument, there's anger at reddit that pre-dates Pao. Regarding the Altman quote and Pao's statement that "it made sense to bring someone in that shared the same view", I can see your interpretation, though I disagree. Regarding Victoria's firing: yes, the NYT mentioned it, but without explaining why it angered the mods so much.
        tptacek 11y ago
        Here is the entire Victoria graf: Ms. Pao’s departure from Reddit was prompted after the online message board’s tight-knit community broke into upheaval when news broke that Victoria Taylor, a prominent and well-liked Reddit employee, had been suddenly dismissed from the company this month with no public explanation. In protest, Reddit users shut down hundreds of sections of the message board. This graf: * Establishes an objective cause of Pao's ouster --- the firing of Victoria Taylor --- that Pao's opponents widely agree is the reason she left. * Calls into question the reason for Taylor's firing. * Reports the subreddit strike, which was done precisely to get this sort of attention. At no point does the graf downplay the firing or somehow mitigate Pao's involvement in it. Which it easily could have, because Pao didn't fire Taylor, Ohanian did. I do not think you can win an argument that the Times tried to spin the Victoria Taylor issue out of the article.
  - shawn-butler 11y ago
    It's called parajournalism. "Opinion piece" has a clearly defined meaning in journalism and is an entirely different genre. Parajournalism seems to be journalism — “the collection and dissemination of current news” — but the appearance is deceptive. It is a bastard form, having it both ways, exploiting the factual authority of journalism and the atmospheric license of fiction. Entertainment rather than information is the aim of its producers, and the hope of its consumers.[0] Your bullet list summary reveals little but your own bias/agenda and adds little to the conversation. We have the actual diff and can read for ourselves which is sort of the point. The diff link was provided in the source article: http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/technology/ellen-pao-reddit-chief-executive-resignation.html http://newsdiffs.org/diff/934341/934454/www.nytimes.com/2015... I hope Margaret Sullivan looks into this. Seems appropriate. 0: http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1965/aug/26/parajournalism-or-tom-wolfe-his-magic-writing-mach/ http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1965/aug/26/parajou...
    - tptacek 11y ago
      People level this charge, or charges just like it, at every news story they don't like. Nerds are going to get a rude awakening if they think they're going to cow the Times (or the WSJ editorial board, for that matter) over "bias" in their newsrooms; these publications have been at the center of the real-world culture war for decades.
- brudgers 11y ago
  Deliberate omission of some set of facts is just as much an editorial decision as their inclusion. Ignoring the context of Pao's history in tech is as editorial as its inclusion. The BBC's "Omar Sharif: Lawrence of Arabia star dies aged 83" is appropriate for mentioning his role in a movie more than 50 years ago. Journalism is about exposing the relevant facts and erring on the side of too much rather than witholding is reasonable. History matters. The past is never dead. It's not even past. -- Faulkner
  - leereeves 11y ago
    Deliberate omission of facts that don't fit a particular opinion is a form of advocacy for that opinion. The NYT is entitled to their opinion, but I think it should be expressed in an editorial, not used to choose what facts to report.
    - tptacek 11y ago
      You cannot call a reported news story an 'editorial' because the facts it chooses to present are somehow inconvenient to your agenda. Contra repeated claims that this piece was transformed by addition of "opinions", it seems to be composed entirely of verifiable facts.
      - leereeves 11y ago
        I hardly ever use reddit, and I'll certainly agree that reddit (especially the default subs) is dominated by young males and can be, at times, misogynistic. If I have an agenda here, it's to ask for better from professional journalists.
      - FredoKing 11y ago
        Would you start a news about Hillary Clinton as, "Hillary Clinton, hero to many..." even though it might be technically true?
Dylan16807 11y ago
If you replace a good article on apples with a great article on bridges, it's still a bait and switch.

tptacek 11y ago

Increasing the article's emphasis on gender issues does not make the revision a "bait and switch". All the substantive material from the earlier revision remains. No facts reported in the original piece have changed.