Hah. It would be a hit piece if it were untrue and simply attempting to sway opinion against.
Facebook applying for patents on distinctly creepy inferences from photos is hardly a hit piece. It puts it squarely in the category of Facebook bringing it on itself.
> Facebook applying for patents on distinctly creepy inferences from photos is hardly a hit piece.
That one is by buzzfeednews, not the nytimes. I know it's hard to tell the difference between news companies today. There are 3 hitpieces on facebook on the frontpage. 2 of those are by the nytimes.
There is a 4th by the businessinsider trying to make it's way to the frontpage.
I still don't see them as hit pieces though, and I've seen only two NYT pieces about FB hit HN today. This one is talking of a specific company they hired. The piece about students not wanting to work there is a bit more woolly, granted.
It doesn't seem like they're being singled out unfairly to me.
This is an interesting comment. My guess is that fb is directly or indirectly paying these shills here and in other tech forums to defend fb and/or smear Google.
(Of course, Mark wouldn't know anything about it.)
BTW, does HN make their content available in programming friendly way (like Reddit)? It would be interesting to do some analysis on age of account vs their comments.
I've been noticing a lot of anti-Facebook stuff popping up in HN recently. I think this is the 5th anti-Facebook post to make the frontpage in the last 2 days. I don't care about Facebook one way or the other, but I wonder how organic this really is...
Swisher holding some of the richest people in the world to account for their impact on billions of people isn't anti-tech. But it is telling that "pro-tech" is being conflated here with "pro-Silicon Valley capitalism."
