top | item 33426006

(no title)

Grim-444 | 3 years ago

"I work at Google and they've told me to work 125 hours weeks". In that statement I provided just as much evidence for my claim as the article does their claim. In fact, there's more proof for my claim since it has a username tied to it, whereas the article just cites anonymous "according to internal sources".

And yet, this is an article that how many thousands of people will read, and internalize into their model of reality? How much more hate will such an article foster?

Shouldn't we at least require some SHRED of proof for articles such as these?

discuss

order

memish|3 years ago

Especially when you look at how much journalists have gotten wrong the past few days.

Ligma and Johnson ("They are visibly shaken"), mass layoffs before Nov 1st (nope), unbanned accounts would be back on by Monday (nope), Elon restored Ye's account (it was restored before the acquisition), Saudi Arabia bought into Twitter (they already were shareholders), etc...

systemvoltage|3 years ago

NYT said they’ll have mass layoffs by Nov 1 because of stock compensation expiration. It didn’t happen and Musk refuted it outright.

https://twitter.com/austen/status/1587458237414068224

My generous take on this: Media is incompetent and they need to do more due diligence.

My cynical take on this: Media is losing its power and influence, this is the last ditch effort to smear opponents.

lemmsjid|3 years ago

This is how reporting works. I know Business Insider and believe it is pretty above board. Business Insider is basically citing CNBC, which is pretty above board. These are two of the shrinking list of organizations that actually practice journalism. CNBC, meanwhile, is citing multiple employees who feared to put their names on record for fear of retaliation. CNBC, on top of that, says in the article that they were able to review internal communications.

If that kind of reporting is below the bar for evidence, then a lot of abuses will never see the light of day.

johnchristopher|3 years ago

If only that article came with a blue check mark :/

/s