She wrote a whole book about it, and yes that’s more or less her claim. Her telling is that she tried to avoid touching China policy as long as possible until she was forced into it, largely as retaliation for reporting sexual harassment from Joel Kaplan. Kaplan and Zuckerberg were directing most of the China policy personally so she had little to no ability to overrule them.
The audiobook is free if you have Spotify premium.
Public schools are closing due to lack of enrollment. Transit agencies are cutting back from low ridership and lack of fare revenue. If housing costs were low enough for more people to move in affordably it could be a boon for the city.
Maybe a boon for the city, but is definitively a boon for the people? Or could they be better served by building up another nearby town and connecting it?
For anyone unfamiliar with Andy Ngo he has an extreme far right bias and associates with the proud boys. Worth taking anything he says we a heap of salt.
Idk about factually incorrect, but the piece repeatedly misgenders the cultists, puts their names in scare quotes and favors their old names (and calls those old names their “real names”) and leads with “trans terror” in the headline.
At every turn the purpose of the piece is demonize trans people, even if it got the facts right.
In my experience, biased authors are unintentionally reliable narrators. The reader can use that bias as an anchor for truth, to triangulate facts that might be less obvious in a neutral narrative. I would rather read two articles from biased opposing authors, than a single article from the middle. That’s why I read CNN and Fox instead of Reuters. And it’s the basis of sites like Ground News.
Of course, this only works as long as the reader is aware of the bias, so your comment is a valid warning in that respect.
>In my experience, biased authors are unintentionally reliable narrators. The reader can use that bias as an anchor for truth
This is absolutely nonsensical. No amount of watching InfoWars can help you understand global warming or the operations of FEMA.
Bad information isn't like the "picking stocks" problem where being reliably wrong can be mapped to being right. Enough bias just comprehensively ruins the data.
Reading InfoWars can give you information about upcoming narratives that will seep through the right-wing infosphere. If you see them talking about some mainstream story with a controversial angle not present in the other sources, then – despite being wildly exaggerated, cherry picked and out of context – there is probably some kernel of truth to it. And even if it’s a tiny kernel, it could be enough for a few influencers to latch onto it and promote the narrative.
For example, not every article about the Zizians mentions their gender identity. But the right wing articles do. If you only read some news sources, you would miss this bit of information. Is it relevant to the story? Maybe, maybe not – that’s up to the reader to decide. Is it relevant to the narrative that will take hold as it propagates throughout social media? Yes absolutely. And the fact that only one side mentions it means it’s even more likely to become a central point of contention, because each side will weaponize it against the other. The right will claim the left is hiding it and the left will claim the right is unnecessarily elevating it. In the end, it will become the most controversial (and therefore popular) part of the narrative, and the hook of engagement bait that keeps the story going.
You wouldn’t be able to anticipate this if you only read a few mainstream left-leaning articles about the story. And there is value to anticipating these narratives because if you catch them early, you know to ignore them as they expand into a larger waste of time.
For anyone who thinks the comparisons to monarchy are an overreaction look up favorite philosopher of Peter Thiel and JD Vance Curtis Yarvin. He quite explicitly calls for a “CEO king” to fire all federal employees and replace them with loyalists.
The deposition of his father clearly laid out that they saw spikes in sales when the sandy hook conspiracy was mentioned and actively sought to replicate it.
From Matt Levine on his everything is securities fraud theory
An odd fact of the U.S. legal system for public companies is that every crime is also securities fraud: If a company does a bad thing, and regulators find out about it, then the bad-thing regulators can punish it for doing the bad thing, but the securities regulators can also punish it for not disclosing the bad thing to shareholders. . . . It is a strange combination: Generally speaking the companies do the bad things on behalf of shareholders—to make more money for them—but then the securities regulators come in and fine them for defrauding shareholders.”
