Do you have the same reaction whenever an organisation has a scandal and they ‘don’t want to comment on an ongoing investigation’?
> Do you have the same reaction whenever an organisation has a scandal and they ‘don’t want to comment on an ongoing investigation’?
Yeah, kinda
Likewise, when a tech C-suite exec makes vague references to macroeconomic conditions, a reputable journalist would include a sentence like "Although rising interest rates have dampened venture capitalist investment into new startups hurting the growth and creation of billion-dollar valuations, the Big Tech companies including Meta have demonstrated continued growth and record profits quarter after quarter, yet still chose to undertake a policy of layoffs self-referencing each other as justification."
There's more to making an convincing argument than putting two contrasting things side by side and letting the audience assume it proves something.