
Quibi’s CEO Meg Whitman Compared Reporters to Sexual Predators - laurex
https://www.theinformation.com/articles/quibis-ceo-meg-whitman-compares-reporters-to-sexual-predators?pu=hackernews61grs6&utm_source=hackernews&utm_medium=unlock
======
vinaypai
What did she actually (allegedly) say? As far as I can tell from the article
she said reporters "groom" sources, and The Information then extrapolated that
to draw a comparison to sexual predators because "the term ‘grooming’ has been
used by child safety advocates to describe how predators gain trust with their
victims", which seems to be quite a stretch.

~~~
arkades
Not a single article covering this has the quote - they all refer back to the
The Information article.

I suspect if the quote was as damning as it is being made out to be, it would
be included.

~~~
whakim
They probably don't have the quote. It's not surprising that they don't,
because whoever heard it probably wasn't taking notes or something, they're
just recollecting what was said. I think it's still pretty clear from the
article that the term "grooming" was used as part of a larger analogy between
reporters and sexual predators though. Either way, and regardless of how
"damning" this actually is, Quibi's response isn't really denying that it
happened.

~~~
vinaypai
If they don't have the quote, a credible journalist wouldn't run the story.

~~~
whakim
I don't agree with that. Obviously it's better to have a quote, but in many
cases having an exact quote isn't possible. Most "credible journalists" write
stories detailing "what happened" all the time without exact quotes, because
if that was the standard required then we would never hear about anything that
wasn't public.

~~~
vinaypai
This is someone who was in a meeting and decided to go leak something they
heard to a journalist. Asking them to recall more than "she used the word
grooming" is not a high bar to clear. You can believe whatever you like but it
doesn't clear my threshold for credibility.

~~~
whakim
It wasn't just the word "grooming" \- the source(s) leaked that she compared
journalists to sexual predators _and_ used the word "grooming". How much more
detailed could a source be without a quote if the quote was something like
"journalists are like sexual predators - they groom their sources etc. etc."?

Totally fair not to believe the article. I do, because if it didn't happen
then Quibi would have said so in their response (they didn't - it's a classic
denial-non-denial). But even if you don't, credible journalism doesn't use
exact quotes all the time.

~~~
arkades
I don't see anything in the article to indicate it wasn't just the word
grooming. To quote the relevant part:

She compared how reporters develop a friendly rapport with sources to how
sexual predators “groom” children they’re targeting, the two people said. The
term ‘grooming’ has been used by child safety advocates to describe how
predators gain trust with their victims. Whitman’s comments upset some Quibi
employees who described them as strange and off-putting.

That's it. She used the word "grooming," and then some commentary from third-
parties about grooming being used to describe sexual predators. Except it's
also been used to describe, you know, cultivating a contact. It's an old
idiom. Additional context could further strengthen the assertion that this was
meant to be related to sexual predators, except "journalists are like sexual
predators" _isn 't_ being described as having been said.

As to a non-denial denial: "This reporting from The Information is materially
inaccurate" is a moderately strong denial from a PR hack.

You're free to extrapolate from that as much as you like, but it just isn't
there. There's no meaningful amount of information to conclude what she meant
in one direction or another. I think given the incentives of the media outlet
to generate controversy, it's safe to assume that if this is the most smoke
they could generate, there likely isn't any fire.

~~~
whakim
Worth noting that Whitman has acknowledged the reporting was accurate and
apologized.

~~~
vinaypai
Well, I stand corrected then.

------
mc32
I think she’s referring to the social engineering part of the activity of
getting people on the inside to open up and give up company information.

From a psychological perspective she’s probably right. The results sought are
obviously quite different.

~~~
HenryBemis
I know Meg, she wouldn't mean it in a way "journalists are rapists" but more
like "journalists/corporate espionage are relentless (with the same intensity)
as sexual predators" in the pursuit of company secrets".

I remember there was a couple of similar incidents issue while in HP, so she's
been burnt before.

Edit: added a couple of words for clarity

~~~
duxup
"similar incidents issue while in HP"

Considering the politics at HP and all the crazy things that happened, I'm not
sure journalists were were even required to get less than positive news out of
HP. Plenty of folks inside HP playing games there before and after she left.

~~~
HenryBemis
It wasn't "positive news", there were some things that we planned to be
announce at a certain date/time (e.g. Monday after NYSE trading closing) and
they would be leaked on Friday or during the weekend. And some sensitive news
(e.g. M&A's).

------
mirimir
Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren published the first notable article about
privacy in 1890, "The Right to Privacy".[0] It's often cited for the "the
right to be let alone".

What's not well known is that its focus was newspaper reporting, which it
basically characterized as "gossip".

0)
[https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/priv...](https://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/privacy/Privacy_brand_warr2.html)

------
dang
As with previous articles [1], The Information has unlocked this one for HN
readers. Thanks! We've changed the URL from
[https://www.theinformation.com/articles/quibis-ceo-meg-
whitm...](https://www.theinformation.com/articles/quibis-ceo-meg-whitman-
compares-reporters-to-sexual-predators).

[1]
[https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...](https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22the%20information%22%20unlock&sort=byDate&type=comment)

~~~
gowld
The article is an unsubstantiated lie though.

~~~
dang
If you can demonstrate that it's a lie, we'd certainly moderate it
differently.

------
prawn
HN's comment policy on arguing in good faith seems to apply to this story.
Surely we can read her comment and understand her intent rather than find a
way to be upset? The media is served by manufacturing and fanning outrage. The
HN community shouldn't be part of that, IMO.

~~~
majormajor
> Surely we can read her comment and understand her intent rather than find a
> way to be upset?

It would be helpful if the article _actually included the comment_. Instead,
it's hard to discuss at all, since it's a very hollow story.

------
pattisapu
"But children, I submit, cannot be fooled. They can only be betrayed by
adults, not fooled—for adults, unlike children, are fooled very easily, and
only because they wish to be. Children—innocence being both real and
monstrous— intimidate, harass, blackmail, terrify, and sometimes even kill one
another. But no child can fool another child the way one adult can fool
another. It would be impossible, for example, for children to bring off the
spectacle—the scandal—of the Republican or Democratic conventions. They do not
have enough to hide—or, if you like, to flaunt."

—James Baldwin, "Dark Days" [1]

[1] [https://classic.esquire.com/article/1980/10/1/dark-
days](https://classic.esquire.com/article/1980/10/1/dark-days)

------
ArtWomb
I can't speak to the article in question. But the Quibi CES 2020 keynote is
worth a watch

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOG9yNRjxk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXOG9yNRjxk)

The idea of using a camera's extended sensory capabilities to create new video
viewing experiences is quite exciting.

But Quibi feels high risk. Even with old masters such as Spielberg at the
helm, asking consumers in the age of TikTok to pay for a four minute film
seems worthy of scrutiny ;)

~~~
1123581321
I hope the different edits for portrait and landscape eventually become
standard.

I also think the short, serial stories by prolific and talented people is a
good idea, assuming there are a lot of episodes and they release frequently.
I’d hoped for more of that on YouTube.

I don’t think Quibi will be the service providing these feature in five years
though.

------
duxup
I suppose there has always been tension between executives and reporters or
more generally what folks call "the media" these days.

But I find the rhetoric and severity of the language used extremely
disheartening. So many folks willing to throw such vitriol towards people and
things it feels like folks want to race towards the only valid information is
that are those echoing in our heads...

~~~
afandian
This came up earlier in the week. An excellent, if depressing, summary of lot
of new behavioural norms on the net and beyond.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22101244](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22101244)

~~~
duxup
Thank you for that link.

I think I saw that link and honestly misread the title and figured it was a
story about fake beef and moved on... maybe that says something too.

------
lawnchair_larry
I have trouble understanding why anyone would possibly care about this story.

~~~
neonate
It's a new twist in the war between tech and media companies for a prominent
CEO to speak this strongly, even if her current company isn't so prominent and
even if what she said wasn't intended to be public.

------
pmarreck
So basically whenever there's ulterior motive (profit, sex, whatever... but
mostly profit or sex), the relationship's tainted? Not very shocking. Ever
befriend a real estate agent who then finds out you're selling a house? Ever
spend a year as a friend with someone before realizing that person won't rest
until they can bang you? Ever befriend ANYONE in an MLM scheme or end up with
one in your extended family (ugh)? Ever marry someone to become a citizen?
Ever wonder why your wife wants to keep hanging out with that one particular
couple only to find out she has a crush on the other dude? Etc.

With regards to reporting, it is probably worse lately than in past years what
with the rather severe need to twist things into clickbait to get ad dollars
instead of being boringly sincere.

------
motohagiography
She's not wrong.

Talking to journalists is vanity, and that's how many reporters justify
obtaining peoples trust and then betraying it. Personally, I thought quite a
few journalists I met were actuated by a kind of sadism, where to bait and
smite people they envied was something they really enjoyed. Comparing this
trap setting mentality to a perversion is not as far a leap as it might seem.
The lunatics who threaten and harass them are no better, but the whole thing
is a seedy enterprise. Whitman is right to caution staff about them.

Anyone who has had their reputation harmed by having a quote taken out of
context and used to drive a writers narrative can attest to this. Journalism
as a story form relies on conflict, and preying on vanity to draw people into
conflict is literally the game.

------
Animats
Huh? She's not complaining about something in her personal life. She's
complaining about press coverage of her startup having trouble getting another
funding round. That's ordinary business news. It's something VCs, suppliers,
customers, and competitors all want to know if they're in that sector. It's
probably known outside the company, since fund-raising will have been in
progress.

------
kaonashi
Just because attention is unwelcome does not necessarily mean it’s unwarranted

