Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I find it surreal that the article is written in a medium owned by Amazon.



> owned by Amazon

It's not owned by Amazon, it's owned by Bezos. Granted that's not much of a distinction but I think it's still important.


It's not surreal, it's a good sign. Would you rather live in a world in which the owner of a media company will never allow negative content to be published about their other properties?


Or they want to get ahead of the messaging...


Rather than surreal, it's more like a good chance to burnish their reputation for independence.


A bit like BBC News, who regularly report on scandals at the BBC (most recently, the pay gap between male and female presenters).


The BBC is ostensibly owned by the public, so they stand to lose politically if they buried scandals at the BBC.

(incidentally, the BBC was accused of doing exactly that when they spiked a Newsnight story that would have broken the Jimmy Savile scandal)


Why ?

Do you really think that Bezos doesn't know Betteridge's law of headlines ?


That law is only valid in the domain of slanderous, clickbaity or otherwise tabloid-style headlines.


No, you are wrong.

It refers to when a headline asks a question ... then the answer must be no.

Because if it was yes ... the newspaper wouldn't form it into a question the newspaper would state it as fact.

If the owner knows that ... he might be sharp enough to use it to his advantage.


Great, sounds applicable then.


Just because you dislike the premise of the question does not mean it's not a legitimate question that can be discussed and debated. The headline "Is [company/individual/country] getting to [rich/big/powerful/indebted]?" is a valid question, and very different from a headline like "Is [White House staffer] capable of [an incredible acrobatic feat]?"

Edit: OK, I think I get your point that the headline is a clickbait considering the article is supposedly lacking. But my point is that the question being posed is not a question that anyone would get into legal trouble for stating as a positive fact, so the "headline law" doesn't apply.


Except

"Is 'company/individual/country' getting to [sic] 'rich/big/powerful/indebted'?"

is a matter of opinion, and when it comes to legitimacy, the last place I would look for a legitimate discussion about Amazon would be in a publication that is personally owned by Jeff Bezos.


You make a very valid point. I'm only saying that just because it is a question in a headline, the answer is not automatically "no".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: