My Previous Post (Read it first, as this post might not make sense to you, without reading the previous post first)

I saw a lot of people defending Ars Technica in my previous post. Here is a simple proof that they are an evil company:

ProPublica Posts:

Ars Technica post:

As it can be seen here, the original source of the info/Investigation was Propublica and even in terms of the story cover photo, Propublica used a custom cover.

Yet, despite all of that, as expected Reddit manipulated upvotes to boost the Ars Technica story and even deleted the second ProPublica story from Reddit.

Journalism will be fucked up, because of Condé Nast and their parent company manipulation.

  • huppakee@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    But this isn’t really evidence that they are.

    So what you meant was: this isn’t enough evidence to change my mind. That is a very different statement. I think this doesn’t prove anything but it does support op’s previous claims Reddit boosts Ars Technica content.

    This isn’t showing Reddit is shitty, it is showing it is used by it’s parent company to influence the media landscape. That is not just shitty, it is amoral and can be very dangerous when it comes to political pieces.

    Tech companies are using media companies to shape the world to their liking, just like robber barrons and aristocrats used to.

    • azdle@news.idlestate.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      So what you meant was: this isn’t enough evidence to change my mind.

      No.

      One thing getting more upvotes than another isn’t somehow evidence that reddit is manipulating anything. There’s no immutible law that the original source of something should naturally get more upvotes than anything else. I find that the opposite is most often the case, even when the re-blogged story is crap.