Comment by gopher2 | Hacker News Reader

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by gopher2 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

The NY Times published about 10 articles on Facebook between November 14-16th. It was a like a coordinated blitz recently.

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-data-...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/business/media/facebook-a...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/jobs-facebook-...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/14/technology/facebook-crisi...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/facebook-defin...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/zuckerberg-fac...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/opinion/facebook-data-con...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/opinion/letters/facebook-...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/opinion/facebook-zuckerbe...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/business/dealbook/faceboo...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/opinion/facebook-mark-zuc...

* https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/17/technology/facebook-democ...

> a coordinated

Being a single newspaper, it absolutely is coordinated. Ever newspaper is coordinated. It would be surprising if it wasn't. So this is largely irrelevant.

It would be relevant if there was coordination amongst multiple newspapers.

And even then, it might not matter: coordination doesn't imply the the news aren't true.

So, no. There isn't a coordinated media blitz, and even if there was, it wouldn't matter.

This looks to me like you got hung up on one specific word and ignored the substantive point being made.

Responsible newspapers don't coordinate news coverage with editorial pieces, as evidenced here.

That's true, it would be weird not to coordinate at some level for a single paper, and I could have said "Coordinated by the NYTimes" which is what I meant. I don't think it's irrelevant. The NYTimes is a competitor to Facebook for advertising dollars and eyeballs and influence.

It's true that coordination doesn't imply the news is false. But a lot of this Times coverage comes across as an attack.

For instance, they published an article "‘No Morals’: Advertisers React to Facebook Report", which is just a bunch of color commentary by some ad people they interviewed. It's pretty easy to see how you can go interview a bunch of advertisers and quote the ones who are most negative on Facebook to fit a narrative that you have planned to release together with other stories.

Which is obviously coordinated, because they released the same day.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/business/media/facebook-a...

They also published on how "New CompSci grads don't want to work at Facebook", for which it's similarly easy to find people with that opinion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/15/technology/jobs-facebook-...

If they wanted to end the articles with "Full Disclosure: Facebook is our competitor" then go for it haha. Maybe I'm being naive, but I think it's worth pointing out that just like there's a behind-the-scenes at Facebook, there's a behind-the-scenes at the NYTimes too.

That's called milking a story. Writing a single piece can't address all different aspects of a story, such as covering the impact, reactions, etc.

It is pretty much standard fare, and would be surprising if they didn't do it. You can also see the same in any big story the NYT or other papers publish, good or bad.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com