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

Asking for curiosity: Given the tenured faculty comparison, should we blame tenured faculty who criticize predatory lending when their university accepts students with the same predatory loans?

Or perhaps a more direct comparison: Are tenured faculty at D1 sports universities hypocritical for researching the benefits of more funding going towards education and less towards massive stadiums?

There are two different cases for this:

1) The faculty member from University A writes an article criticizing University B, without mentioning that University A also has the same problems.

2) The faculty member from University A writes an article criticizing a set of problems, including examples from both University A and B.

The subtle distinction between both #1 and #2 is why people have different opinions on this. Many people consider #1 to be hypocritical and #2 to be fair.

It would never be pointed out at all if you're following case #2 though if you're in a position of the OP though. The university wouldn't allow the article. The net result is a loss.

If people can't criticise at all due to some level of hypocrisy (which is separated from the author in this case!) then we all end up in a worse spot.

I don't think there is a universal criteria for what constitutes whether an action is criticizable or not. I think more importantly is that the standards, whatever they may be, are applied uniformly, despite the circumstance and scenario. It isn't hard to imagine other scenarios which are seen as "lesser" where this wouldn't even be a question: of course you do, but for some reason we think that as an increase of import or salary, or whatever metric you may have in mind, all of a sudden some gray area is introduced. Stay true to your standards, and let it guide you.

I wouldn't put up with this type of hypocrisy from my frozen yogurt shop, my clothing store, or coffee shop, so I shouldn't put up with it with my news organizations, schools and universities and politicians. The inputs to the situation might be different, but the output should be the same. Otherwise, we are being the hypocrite as well.

If the lecturer gave a lecture and handed out fliers for the thing they were criticising without explaining that this was an example of the same problem the yes 100%.

The only way the article, its writer, the editor and the organisation should not be ridiculed is if they explicitly reference their own t's and c's in the article. Or if we all agree this is not news but entertainment and should not be takrn seriously (or shared on hacker news)

> Or if we all agree this is not news but entertainment and should not be takrn seriously (or shared on hacker news)

I've hardly seen news in my life that wasnt actually just profit seeking entertainment.

I have never understood why society praises these huge corporations. They do not have your best interest at heart. They are not doing a public service. They are a private entity seeking money and power just like every other private company.

Blame is the wrong word, but YES we should expect that they would hold their own employer accountable too.


"Welcome to PHY 4509, Classical Electromagnetism. You should not be here, this school is too expensive. If you would like to discuss transferring, you can find me in my office Tuesday and Thursday from 9 to 11AM. This message will repeat in thirty seconds."

How are they even able to teach students who can't afford the class? And if they managed to (distance learning?), how is that hypocritical?

I think the OP might be talking about student debts.

How it can be a professor's responsibility to give such advice? They are not there to offer life coaching.

That's academic advisors, not professors.

Is this a joke?

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