Comment by minorityreport | Hacker News Reader

Comment by minorityreport | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>> Sure and that happens. Journalists will cherry pick data to tell the story they want. But there is a difference. If the data is out there someone can dispute the journalists characterization.

Does it actually happen though? The media controls most of the narrative, including what goes into legislative discussions. The "paper of record" becomes history while everything else goes into a vast firehose of tweets which get washed away by the dominant narrative.

Real recent example. NYTimes June 21, 2021:

"How Big Tech Allows the Racial Wealth Gap to Persist"

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/21/us/politics/big-tech-raci...

So according to the NYTimes, "big tech" allows a racial wealth gap. Consider that this is the only industry where Asians, Indians, and others are actually allowed to consistently and widely climb ranks into senior management.

The ultimate irony is -- this is coming from the NYTimes -- a small group of mostly white, rich, people in Brooklyn and the Upper West Side of Manhattan -- with almost zero diversity at the executive ranks -- is saying this.

Further, there is no discussion about the FAANG exams, hiring committees, etc -- or the fact that the authors hire on no objective measures themselves -- they are mostly hired based on which elite private school they attended.

So what happens? We end up with congressional investigations on big tech monopolies (worth looking into) but ignore obvious monopolies like my mobile phone provider, my healthcare providers, etc -- places that charge a pound of flesh and have no competitors.

> Does it actually happen though? The media controls most of the narrative

You can't be serious.

I can list a litany of topics--the dangers of sugar, smoking, carbon emissions--where corporations, through their vast war chests, lobbying connections, and pliant journalists, have more than successfully controlled the narrative.

Facebook isn't the victim here. Not by a long shot.

The problem that Facebook has compared to those other industries is that journalists blame Facebook for the decline of journalism and view Facebook as a gatekeeper. Those other companies on the other hand are valuable advertisers.

>So according to the NYTimes

Here's the report that the NYTimes is reporting on.

https://www.conference-board.org/press/mind-the-gap-June2021

>The ultimate irony is -- this is coming from the NYTimes -

>with almost zero diversity at the executive ranks

>the authors hire on no objective measures themselve

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

It's not whataboutism because, from your link:

> attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument

but the parent has addressed the argument:

> Consider that this is the only industry where Asians, Indians, and others are actually allowed to consistently and widely climb ranks into senior management.

>How can the nyt report on a wage gap when they too have a wage gap?

>I didn't read what they were actually reporting on, but I assume that's checkmate.

No one considers NYT a "paper of record" anymore. That may have been the case 8 years ago, but they have gone totally off the rails since, and everyone knows it.

I find 'everyone' to be a pretty dubious source. But I am sincerely curious: is there a publication you consider to be a "paper of record"?

There isn't one anymore. It's one of the great tragedies of the last several years of hyper-polarization.

I'd argue that the NYT remains a paper of record, but there is no way to perceive it as such for all groups present in the US.

I emphasize the reduction in common ground, over any real change at the NYT.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com