Comment by roenxi | Hacker News Reader

Comment by roenxi | Hacker News Reader

This article could do with an serious edit; it seems to be an odd mix of actual information, imagined colour and emotion to the point where it is a little difficult to follow and hard to work out the credibility of any individual assertion. I get the strong impression here that Williams is a bit paranoid and spent a lot of time fearing for his skin in the company of people who thought we was a good mate and would probably just kick him out of the club if they figured out he was conspiring against them. I thought this passage summed the vibe up best:

> They spotted the dog at the same time. The bug was attached to a charging device. The animal was running around with it like it was a tennis ball. As Kinch went to retrieve it, Williams felt panic grip his chest. Could anyone talk their way out of this? He’d learned enough about Kinch to be terrified of his rage. Looking around, Williams eyed his host’s handgun on the kitchen counter.

> If he even starts to examine it, I’ll grab the gun, [Williams] thought. Then I’ll shoot him and flee into the woods.

> Kinch took the bug from the dog’s mouth. Then he handed it right to Williams and started to apologize.

This is a style of reporting called "narrative journalism": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative_journalism

It's not to everyone's taste (I often find it frustrating, like how confident is the reporter that the characters felt the way they are describing at various points in the story), but it has a long history, especially in US media.

I have a suspicion that it's less common in the UK and Europe.

I’ve learned to skip several paragraphs of writing once I recognize the pattern. These types of articles turn into long essays where the writer is trying to create a work of art more so than convey important information.

It’s called telling a story. That’s one of the most important part of investigative journalism

It’s also the important warning illustrated by the Gell-Mann amnesia effect: journalists are not experts in the fields they report on so the stories they tell about them are often grossly incorrect and misconstrued but you need some expertise or experience in the field to sort the bullshit from the facts.

Crafting a narrative out of a handful of facts about a domain you don’t fully understand is a perfect recipe for bullshit.

The lede isn’t just buried, it is submerged in a swamp under a pile of human interest rocks.

The article mentions several relatively minor/local public figures, including a prosecutor, apparently caught on mic saying they’ve influenced policy in favour of the group. Political lobbying is one thing, but an undeclared interest, another entirely.

As best I can tell this was published, talked about for a few days, and sank under its own mass. Their most read piece of 25, apparently, and it went precisely nowhere.

The only people who can do anything about this are either actively involved or allied with these groups, so no real surprise it sank.

Good lesson: carry your weapon on your person.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com