Hacker News Reader

Comment by gooseus | Hacker News Reader

I used to think that Musk and Tesla would die a death by a thousand cuts to their brand, but it turns out that public perception is more of an anti-fragile system, so every scandal they survive only makes them more resilient to the next scandal.

View on HN

I've had the same thought about some US politicians recently. I think there's an element of feeling shame that connects public perception about a scandal. More and more we're seeing people who refuse to publicly express remorse, or even acknowledge that something they did was wrong or should be considered wrong.

And the way that public perception works, if you have enough "True believers" who shout loudly when someone tries to speak ill of you, it all seems to be just water off a duck's back.

I'm not fan of Musk, but stories like this where "X wanted to do Y but actually didn't" are not a "scandel" or even bad in my books. This stuff happens all the time behind closed doors and it seems like in this case the checks and balances in the company prevented it from happening, which is what I care about.

If they actually did this, then I'd think twice. But I think what you are seeing is more that the true haters who bring these "didn't actually happen" things up all the time don't have a huge affect on people buying the product.

The closest thing that actually worried me was the recording of the external cameras. Yes they can record stuff in your garage which isn't great. But I don't actually care at all about them recording stuff on the street around me and sharing that. I WANT them to do that to improve the system.

Yeah, like Musk, it is a cult of personality. Results don't matter, actions don't matter. All that matters is preening for a crowd who just wants to hear the hits.

It’s a cult of identity. If you say you are a Musk/Trump/Whoever fan and make that a core of who you are, and then they do something bad, that might transfer to your identity. Better to constantly refute than take damage to your own identity. Better to lash out than look inside.

You generally won't feel shame about something that you don't believe is wrong, so that gives people mountains of leeway to rationalize whatever they want if they are willing to lie to themselves to get their end goals.

Yes, but in the context of a politician (or another public figure) you have historically been obligated to accept the moral standard of the public at large (because you need their vote.) Even if you didn't believe something was wrong, you'd have to at least feign the appropriate remorse so that people would back you again.

So when a politician comes out against drag shows because she thinks they're too sexual for kids, and then gives out a handjob in a theater among a bunch of kids, or calls her political opponents groomers while staying silent about her own party's attempts to codify child marriage or block legislation that would make it harder, what does that say about her voters?

> More and more we're seeing people who refuse to publicly express remorse, or even acknowledge that something they did was wrong or should be considered wrong.

This is because US politicians are loath to take action against their colleagues in legislative chambers, fearing retaliation. So they depend on shame, or "the honor system", hoping that the bad apples will simply step down.

Because about 90% of these 'cuts' are things most people simple don't care about.

One comment of Musk doing something that online 'leftist' don't like will have far, far, far more reach then some technical point about the driver monitor system or privacy concern.

And at the same time all the other companies have just as many 'cuts'. VW is still popular and they don't have cuts but rather literally holes in their brand.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com