Hacker News appears to reflect a predominantly Western-centric audience and moderation framework, which may influence content visibility. Consequently, stories that are critical of Western political actors or policies may face greater scrutiny or flagging. In contrast, content that aligns with prevailing Western geopolitical narratives, such as criticism of the Chinese government illustrated by the recent front-page coverage of Jimmy Lai, tends to receive broader acceptance and prominence.
Lots of people don't want politics on HN unless it's directly about technology regulation (and probably not even then). They will flag any political story that comes up.
Looks like they are still there, just flagged. Not sure if it's moderator decision or just more people are annoyed by political topics than by japanese culture
This is a pretty important story historically speaking. It's the most public incident of state censorship in America in generations. (All the other examples I can think of are from wartime.)
You might be interested in browsing the active page [0] of Hacker News every so often. It shows even flagged stories that have a lot of recent interaction.
well, I think its relevant to tech, vc, and startups.
An event like this exposes a chink in legacy media practices that could be distrupted by a new media player like youtube, or whatever.
If 60minutes had used a more modern distribution platform such as Apple TV or YouTube they could have programmatically squashed the distribution of the episode without the need to police their various global distribution partners. I mean frankly, global bespoke distribution deals are a terrible UX anyhow.
They failed to do that in this case and here is the fallout.
Half the articles about Japanese culture are "off topic" yet rocket to the front page without issue.
i.e, on or off topic hasn't been the deciding factor on that for some time now. Pretty sure the rules even state that it's about "what people find interesting".
There’s a small print to that and we know that “some” politics is off topic.
Or else I should not be seeing lots of criticism on the front page when the current US president does something that negatively affects the tech or AI industry.
I see a similar theme with most techbros or rich VC groups. They say they dont like politics but they move fast to influence policy by buying influence. See what's happening with Trump and the tech companies.
What tech connected leaders really hate is the plebs being informed and having an opinion on policy. I see the same thing with the All-In podcast. All round glee on that podcast with things that negatively impact the working classes.
Billionaires are for billionaires while controlling the media.
Its really interesting how this stories about "getting somehow richt with a startup" seems to be more portrayed on social media than on classic media?
I guess this is because on classic media, you have limited slots for sending - on social media, everybody can broadcast (youtubes slogan was "broadcast yourself", IIRC, for a long time?)
This allows those shows to be produced at nearly minimum costs - and since this is content is viewed by a lot of people, the creators see that "inviting the next rich guy" drives traffic & clicks, Id say?
engineerhead|2 months ago
AndrewDucker|2 months ago
oytis|2 months ago
josefritzishere|2 months ago
jmholla|2 months ago
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/active
daft_pink|2 months ago
It’s part of what makes HN great.
jonway|2 months ago
An event like this exposes a chink in legacy media practices that could be distrupted by a new media player like youtube, or whatever.
If 60minutes had used a more modern distribution platform such as Apple TV or YouTube they could have programmatically squashed the distribution of the episode without the need to police their various global distribution partners. I mean frankly, global bespoke distribution deals are a terrible UX anyhow.
They failed to do that in this case and here is the fallout.
windex|2 months ago
If tech is influencing politics and consequently, all of us, why should there be an asymmetry when the tech plebs want to talk politics?
ofalkaed|2 months ago
Klonoar|2 months ago
i.e, on or off topic hasn't been the deciding factor on that for some time now. Pretty sure the rules even state that it's about "what people find interesting".
DemocracyFTW2|2 months ago
rvz|2 months ago
There’s a small print to that and we know that “some” politics is off topic.
Or else I should not be seeing lots of criticism on the front page when the current US president does something that negatively affects the tech or AI industry.
unknown|2 months ago
[deleted]
opengrass|2 months ago
HardwareLust|2 months ago
steventruong|2 months ago
windex|2 months ago
What tech connected leaders really hate is the plebs being informed and having an opinion on policy. I see the same thing with the All-In podcast. All round glee on that podcast with things that negatively impact the working classes.
Billionaires are for billionaires while controlling the media.
KellyCriterion|2 months ago
I guess this is because on classic media, you have limited slots for sending - on social media, everybody can broadcast (youtubes slogan was "broadcast yourself", IIRC, for a long time?)
This allows those shows to be produced at nearly minimum costs - and since this is content is viewed by a lot of people, the creators see that "inviting the next rich guy" drives traffic & clicks, Id say?
bananapub|2 months ago
it's uh pretty confronting!
tim333|2 months ago
This probably is - 474 comments currently on this one https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46361024
There are presently eleven 60 minutes censored stories up on HN.
It's been a busy day for Trump related news what with that and some Epstein stuff.
BergAndCo|2 months ago
[deleted]