Hacker News Reader

Comment by izacus | Hacker News Reader

> Sixteen marketing associations, some of which are backed by Facebook Inc (FB.O) and Alphabet Inc’s (GOOGL.O) Google, faulted Apple for not adhering to an ad-industry system for seeking user consent under European privacy rules.

How did this turn into "Google-backed groups"?! Where's Facebook in the title? Is there no attempt at unbiased reporting anymore?

View on HN

The reporting is just fine, since it discloses both groups. The title is click-bait, but that’s the reality of the news/youtube/etc. industry if you want views. It would have been equally click-baity if the title had said “Facebook-backed groups”, yet equally false (and true).

There’s also ad agencies not backed by Facebook or Google, but they’re not in the title either.

> There’s also ad agencies not backed by Facebook or Google, but they’re not in the title either.

Yes, and this is why the reporting is dishonest - it's feels like it's there to smear one company in the title instead of actually disclosing to us who the people are.

I don’t think it is dishonest - it is more interesting that Google is anti-privacy, everyone already knows this about facebook. Additionally Google is nearly 2x the size of facebook so it takes precedence. You can’t disclose everything in a headline so you lead with what you can.

Since when did the HN crowd start being apologists for clickbait and purposeful omission?

Clickbait is simply the new normal. I hate it, but it's simply the case. You see it on news articles, YouTube video titles, and everything else where money and views are intertwined.

And why is it done? Because it has been proven to work. They make more money with clickbait titles.

Personally, it's simply a windmill I'm no longer willing to tilt against.

And it appears that nothing was purposefully omitted from the article itself, so I'm definitely not willing to tilt against this.

It is very dishonest. Trying to make this into Apple vs Google creates this false reality that only movies get away with.

Nearly two times the size so we can make up a story of selected truths?

Should the headline have disclosed every single tie every person associated with each organization has? No that would be absurd - you can’t disclose the nuance of a story in a headline so you disclose the most interesting thing. Nothing in the headline was false or misleading - just because the groups have other ties too doesn’t mean the headline has to list every one of them.

I think what's more interesting about Google backing it over Facebook, is that it implies that Android will potentially not follow suit.

Moreover, there's no mention of the names of any organizations, nor could I find the press release that the quotes were taken from.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com