I see tons of articles from Bloomberg being posted on HN, where people care about that issue. Outside of this, no one cared and there are people on both camps as far as that story is concerned.
What matters is not people's opinions but evidence (or lack of it).
That particular story wasn't quite as fraudulent as Newsweek's exposé of a random retired Japanese-American guy as "Satoshi Nakamoto" a few years back, but it's close.
The overlap of the two businesses is likely counted in single digit percentages of revenue.
Sorry that I don't have numbers
They sell a software terminal at about $20k/yr subscription, and there are > 325,000 paying subscribers. It's nearly an essential tool in finance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomberg_Terminal.
It's pretty neat, there's some really interesting tech and history involved but it's all hidden away in a very insulated industry.
Although as qnt points out, this particular one sells terminal access. So I guess they can go ahead and throw the credibility thing overboard, and still do OK.
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/bloomberg-reporters-compensa...
(looks like it might be Bangladesh (see below for link))
They passed legislation that allows a RIVER to have rights and lawyers can sue on its behalf.
We need similar legislation for reality. We have about 50% of the country that literally doesn't give a shit about lying.
The truth should have rights to sue.
Now I KNOW there is a fuzzy ground but there are also things that are clearly, provably false.
If a politician says he was in the United States, yet there are records, showing he was in Germany, and you can prove damages, you should be able to sue.
We already have limits to the 1st amendment. You can't libel or slander someone for example. The truth needs to be protected. Otherwise we're doomed.
https://www.npr.org/2019/08/03/740604142/should-rivers-have-...
* Bloomberg, of course, is the publication that published “The Big Hack” in October 2018 — a sensational story alleging that data centers of Apple, Amazon, and dozens of other companies were compromised by China’s intelligence services. The story presented no confirmable evidence at all, was vehemently denied by all companies involved, has not been confirmed by a single other publication (despite much effort to do so), and has been largely discredited by one of Bloomberg’s own sources. By all appearances “The Big Hack” was complete bullshit. Yet Bloomberg has issued no correction or retraction, and seemingly hopes we’ll all just forget about it. I say we do not just forget about it. Bloomberg’s institutional credibility is severely damaged, and everything they publish should be treated with skepticism until they retract the story or provide evidence that it was true.