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

Interesting view - other than the issues the community had around that server hacking piece, what article has been outright wrong vs just having a heavy editorial slant (as most publications now do)?

This is just more anecdata, but I notice a small minority of Bloomberg articles, including the server hacking piece, where it seems that some competent journalists tried pretty hard to break a real story.

(edit for clarity- Clearly they got a lot in the server hacking piece wrong, but in the situation it seems like they were intentionally misled, and were really not expecting so many of their "sources" to be basically repeaters of the same falsehoods)

BUT, most of their articles seem like extremely low quality drivel. They fail to get basic facts or ideas about the situation correct, and/or they sound like someone shit out a 1-sentence long opinion and then expanded it into a page or 2. I haven't been flagging these and don't think most do, but maybe we should start.

They’ve always been low quality. I remember when they said something weird about the Indian Railway budget and I looked it up and they’d completely misinterpreted the stats (which were well apparent to a thinly sliced goat leg, let alone a trained journalist).

I can’t say about all articles—only the ones posted on HackerNews. The server hacking piece and the fallout was what prompted me to look with a slightly more discerning eye. Compared to much of the content that hits the front page, Bloomberg is generally low quality.

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