Hacker News Reader

The article isn't arguing for underreaction. It argues that overreaction is worse now than it was before because the new platforms for publishing have dispensed with a number of editorial checks that would have tempered the sensationalism. Its main aim is that overreaction is more expensive than many realize.

the issue of what one should report on, and what it might mean to be unbiased is broader than the one at hand. all discourse, whether well founded or not, is being shaped my a machine whose entire function is to optimize ad revenue.

which is kind of sad, but the part that seems to be really egregious is that by co-opting communication, its not just feeding on us, its shaping us.

The issue with the ebola articles is that they all omitted to say how all experts agreed that there was no risk of epidemic.