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

> Your statement stems from an attack by Musk.

No, my statement stems from reading his account, then comparing it to Musk's data.

> What makes you think that a journalist would be more biased than the CEO of a car companies with billions of dollars at stake?

Again, this sort of sleight of hand. I'm not defending Musk's bias here, Musk's bias doesn't in any way exonerate the other's, and nice try, if that was intentional. I'm purely attacking Broder's incompetence.

> Your stalwart defense of Musk belies your inability to think objectively.

So it's "objective" to not recognize Broder's bias in his inaccuracies, or at least to excuse it because, hey Musk was probably biased too!

...Okay! You're entitled to your position, man!

> It's a he-said-she-said

Yes, the rest of us are just avoiding the "he-said-she-said" quagmire. It is a quagmire, and the likely ROI is low. Really, the outcome of one car review isn't so important, but the issue brings up plenty of stuff which is. I'll tell you what: When Musk is the head of a national media outlet "of record," and he publishes the same sort of stuff, I'll hold his feet to the fire for shoddy journalism for his hasty comments and interpretation of data -- which he is guilty of. It's not a par-performance, objectively a bit of a PR cock-up, but still understandable from a CEO. Of course he's biased in favor of his product. The journalist is only human, but he's not only supposed to try to be objective as a part of his job, he's supposed to show some competence at it.

The disturbing part of this whole issue for me is the degree to which carelessness about empirical fact is seen as "okay." Elon Musk has a substantial public record which shows a notable degree of diligence towards getting facts right. Broder's article -- best I could say about it is: enh.

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