Hacker News Reader

Comment by hn_throwaway_99 | Hacker News Reader

Also, perhaps this is stating the obvious, but this article is posted on npr.org itself, and it is quite an in-depth treatment and analysis of the situation. While other news orgs my have a short blurb (often buried somewhere on their website), I rarely see them airing their own dirty laundry with such gusto.

View on HN

This isn't laudable, it's defensive. The snafu has been covered in the NYT so there's no burying it. They are making sure their side is told by covering it themselves.

... and if they hadn't covered it, would you criticize them for burying the story?

No. They can't bury a story after it's been in the NYT.

You have an idiosyncratic definition for what the phrase means. Or maybe I do.

When the source about the Biden's bribes in Ukraine turned out to be a Russian asset, it was widely reported, including the NYT. Fox and other right news sources glossed past it. To me, that is burying the story, even though it was widely reported in other outlets.

I mean, I'd love to see, as an example, as in-depth of a report from Fox News detailing the sexual harassment allegations against Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly, but I had no luck searching.

I also don't think NPR would be successful in "burying" it, but they could easily just choose to not report on it.

You should scroll through more articles by the author of the linked post. His focus is on the media and ethics. He very regularly goes after NPR and member stations and airs dirty laundry. It isn't a reflexive thing. It's central to their culture and something they actively protect and fund.

That's because he forced the issue by going to every outlet he could, mostly liberal ones, and he was right too.

He'd be buried if he didn't and wasn't.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com