Hacker News Reader

I'm not saying this is anything new, just pointing out that this is called corruption.

If the party claimed that they are in-fact biased against Bernie, as the evidence mostly shows, then this would have been fine. However, if the party claimed it was neutral but yet secretly worked against Bernie then this seems to me like it is corruption.

Or do you disagree?

View on HN

You're playing Humpty Dumpty here: A word — here, "corruption" — supposedly means what you say it means. This reminds me of a libertarian colleague who shouts "bigotry!" whenever someone disagrees with his views.

I don't know what else to call having campaign insiders inside a media outlet feed debate questions to their affiliated campaign ahead of time so they can prepare.

A more apt term than corruption would be unethical.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com