Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Unfortunately being doxxed by Reddit (funny how Reddit is known for that these days) isn't a requirement for having some nutcases go off on you:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/bronx/bx_idiots_beat_up_a...

Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources driving up the hysteria and publishing these photos.



Not ironically, the NY Post is just as bad as the Daily Mail.

On the day of the bombing, they were reporting that the bomber had already been arrested. The day after the bombing, they had a picture on their cover of a backpack that was supposedly the bomb... except it wasn't. Today, they had a picture of two middle eastern looking people, who had nothing to do with the bombing. This is par the course for the NY Post.

My favorite though, is when I used to do political work, the NY Post would show up to large events, set up a quick photoshoot with paid actors, then leave, and whatever they staged a picture of would be the next day's front page.

Fuck the post.


Is there no penalty available for flagrantly inaccurate and damaging reporting?


Well, in the UK you can complain to the Press Complaints Commission. Headed by the editor of the Daily Mail


Steep profits which encourage further moral decline?


I honestly think all of Rupert Murdoch's newspapers and TV outlets should be taken away from him and destroyed.


> Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources

Just as the WSJ published about people in custody, the lesson is clear: Do not bother listening to any Rupert Murdock publication for news.

The WSJ should just stick to finance, and the NYP should stick to whatever it is that it does well. (Remind me: What was it that the NYP does well?)


the lesson is clear: Do not bother listening to any Rupert Murdock publication for news.

Amen. Everyone, just refuse to follow a link to a Murdock website. Daily Mail. NY Post. WSJ. Are there others?


Murdoch Block extension for Chrome works well.

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/murdoch-block/moep...



The daily mail is worth ignoring, it is nothing to do with Rupert Murdoch though - it is mainly owned by Viscount Rothermere


I'd argue being doxxed means some nutcases already did go off on you.


In cases such as this, I can't help but wonder if the person in the picture has a strong legal case of libel and defamation against the publisher. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, and maybe it's just my personality but if a newspaper tried to ruin my life just to sell newspapers, I'd 'lawyer up' with the intent of owning that newspaper when it was all said and done.


> Ironically NY Post was one of the "news" sources driving up the hysteria

They optimize for units sold, not precise reporting.


Where are you getting irony out of the Post's editorial policy?




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

Search: