Comment by benten10
9 years ago
To reply with the response such posts usually get: You must be really fun at parties!
This post was entertaining to most of us because we are not in the industry, knew little about the presence of hydrogen sulfide, and did not realize that the industry was so reluctant to sell to random interested buyers. Yes they could have written "This reporter tried to buy a barrel of oil, but sellers were reluctant, and it was calculated that individuals buying crude oil is not a profitable venture. She was also cautioned that Hydrogen sulfide is toxic, and is released by crude oil". They chose not to do that because, well -- that's not fun to read.
You are being downvoted because you are essentially telling us: 'you idiots, this is not funny, this is not news, this is stupid, there are smarter people there doing serious work, why waste your time on this' in extended form.
One might be well suggested to, as they say, 'cheer up'.
I like that comment.
One of the thing I like of HN I that you can have a serious technical discussion about any subject. Some users know more about chemistry, some users know more about computers, some users know more about rockets, ... Many press articles have a lot of hype and exaggerations, and it's nice to have comments with more technical balance and details.
About the downvotes: It's common to get a few downvotes, even with very good comment. Just ignore them. (But if you get 10 downvotes, try to read your comment again.)
Bloomberg is a really targeted news institution on which people rely for not comedy but financial information. It's reflected in the fees you pay to get access to their terminals, it's reflected in their promos, and even the corporations who select to advertise with them know they're trying to hit a target reader. Usually, that reader is not someone looking for a comic laugh.
Imagine pulling up a Linux news site and seeing something that's funny to someone who is in marketing because of some wacky antics. You went there to see what sort of critical patches need to be administered, but instead you saw "What happened when I tried to install Linux on my leather shoes!".
I'm upset because context is important. Especially for news outlets which are called the fourth estate for a reason. When I turn on PBS Newshour I don't want 50 minutes of Paris Hilton. If they re-oriented an entire episode to cover Paris Hilton just to get more viewers (equivalent of click-bait), I'd be equally upset. I'm not calling anyone here stupid, but this clearly is not news.
"This post was entertaining" -- that's my whole problem. Bloomberg is a news outlet. Jon Stewart went on the O'Reilly factor and eloquently articulated the problem with select subsets of media (oversimplified to "to fill 24 hours of content, some outlets have resorted to silly antics to increase/retain viewership rather, rather than do what they're supposed to -- report the news). This article was under "News" not "Op/ed".
RE: parties, again, context. I don't engage in pedantry there, because one can generally categorize that form of interaction as "social" rather than "news/informative". At which point, I politely engage in small talk until I find something they like which I find interesting (whether its model aircrafts or modern farming, I can find something interesting to talk about with anyone generally).
Just a FYI but Bloomberg has significantly changed their editorial direction recently. Think some senior editor left or something. I really don't mind because it does not seem that their standard news coverage has suffered as a result and I can easily avoid things but yeah.
It's a fine line. Newspapers were always partly entertainment; their goal is to get read so they can sell advertisement. You wouldn't have crosswords and comics and the NYT style section otherwise. A bit of infotainment is okay, when done in an ethical manner, as I think is the case here; Voltaire and Karl Kraus were doing something similar.
Now, when it verges on disinformation, like Geraldo or the NYT style section and their silly trend articles...
Bloomberg was a really targeted news institution. It deliberately is not just that anymore.
> "What happened when I tried to install Linux on my leather shoes!"
I, for one, would definitely click through and read this.
What you're saying is true, but it could have been much better if they'd paid attention to the details.
One of the things I love about HN is that not only will interesting and funny articles like this come up, but also that I can hit the comment section afterward for the real story. Your parent's comment was more interesting than yours.
In a world where journalism ethics and standards take a back seat to laughs or more clicks, I keep coming back to hn because you can find knowledgeable comments to help you understand what's going on.
Sure, people could communicate more effectively. Would we be more forgiving of the comment were the article a (slightly) ignorant joke about a topic hackers are passionate about?