Hacker News Reader

Comment by teh_klev | Hacker News Reader

My own thoughts were along the the lines of "what a waste of talent on such a scumbag publication".

"Tables are co-located, meters away from the news desk ‘the customers’, meaning it only takes minutes if something breaks for the communication between the developer and the user."

Meh, can you imagine sitting across from journalistic horrors like Melanie Phillips or Peter Hitchens, and being torn between fixing your shit quickly or doing the nation a favour and delaying publication of their right wing tripe from poisoning the weak minded for just a few minutes/hours longer.

View on HN

Their journalists hold their opinions because they can earn a good living by doing so, not because they particularly believe them.

> The Mail attracts writers, who ought to oppose it, because it pays them top rates on one condition only: they say exactly what the editor wants them to say. You can get at least £1,000 for a morning’s work, and Dacre will fill your pockets even if he decides not to use your piece. Writers will bark like a performing seal for money as easy as that.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/nick-cohen/2013/10/who-is-the-g...

That sounds familiar. I know somebody who worked on our student paper that swallowed their beliefs to go and work for the Mail because it was the only paper still hiring. Not believing in it doesn't absolve you from being complicit in it, though.

I actually have more respect for someone who is a genuine right-wing nutjob and tells it like it is than someone who abandons their principles and sells out. As Marina (of 'and The Diamonds') so eloquently put it "better to be hated / than loved, loved, loved for what you're not".

The Daily Mail position was paying upto £100k for their permanent software engineers.

That + being able to offer people a greenfield project using Clojure and Node.JS probably attracted great engineers.

Still not worth it.

some western prostitutes make more in Saudi Arabia,what's your point ? The Daily Mail is evil period.

My point was that if you are making a decision explicitly on salary and interesting technology it was a good choice. I'm sorry if this was not clear.

Were you asking me to explain my point because you find the existence of a rational explanation for intelligent people working for the company extremely offensive?

It's a common fallacy to assume that political beliefs are connected to intelligence.

You should always consider the possibility that there are smart people who hold different political/ethical positions to you.

The engineers that joined might not consider the publication evil, and they might not like the grossly-offensive insinuation by you that they are like western prostitutes in Saudi Arabia (?!).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com