Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by rich_sasha on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:21AM
(#33752844)
It's typical now, for better or worse. They have a story and want to publish, now. But have to ask for comment. So they ask for comment, count to 5 and publish with that disclaimer.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by madeofpalk on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:31AM
(#33752931)
And i mean, they are transparent about it.
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by michaericalribo on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:35AM
(#33752963)
And almost always update the story when they do receive a comment
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by chiefalchemist on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:43AM
(#33753025)
That's too late. First impressions matter. Once a narrative is set and biases established, even facts after the fact don't do well to alter what's already in place.
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by duxup on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:56AM
(#33753131)
What is the first impression you are thinking of here?
I don’t think there is much of any to worry about.
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by capableweb on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:43AM
(#33753031)
Transparent about being shit, but what's the value in that?
Like if they would write:
> The above source was never verified, but we swear we talked with a real person
And then call it a day. What kind of journalism is that?
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by duxup on Saturday November 26, 2022 @09:54AM
(#33753122)
We all know when the story was published and the timing.
Re:FTX owned an $11.5M stake in a tiny rural bank in Washing...
by aegis4244 on Saturday November 26, 2022 @10:50AM
(#33753587)
It's the regular kind, Seth would say.