Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by hammock 3835 days ago
Title was edited from the original to censor the mention of Airbnb (a YC company)? Really, Dang?
5 comments

That's against Hacker News policy to only use the actual title of the article (even if it's a worse one.)

I wonder if integrity will win out.

Yep there have been many submissions critical of AirBnb that were silently removed from the front page in the past.

I am surprised this is still holding up.

One could make a plausible case there's a bit of click bait in the original title because there is nothing specific to AirBnB in the script; the use of hidden cameras is not part of their business; nor are AirBnB rentals a unique market for hidden cameras.

Anyone who clicks on the link can read the title and decide its relevance to the hack. The primary people whose needs aren't accommodated by the change are those whose interest is triggered by "AirBnB."

The "in that AirBnB you’re staying in" is totally superfluous and is mere outrage fodder.
Not really. The script was written as a result of the recent AirBnB stories about hosts spying on and recording their guests. The relevance is direct and immediate, and taking it out of the title is shameless editorializing.
The very first vignette in the very first link (http://fusion.net/story/49806/beware-houseguests-cheap-home-...) is about someone who was spied on when staying for free at some person's apartment. Not AirBnB.

Journalists often concoct an "ongoing" narrative to make it sound like there is a big trend when there are only one or two anecdotes. Write a weak article with one example, follow it up with a second article with a second example, then write a third article proclaiming that something is "sweeping the nation," linking to what "we previously reported."

The linked title could just as well have said "when you're staying in a stranger's home," but that doesn't carry as much currency as "AirBnB." I think that's clickbait, albeit subtle.

I doubt it's explitly up to Dang, I remember seeing this same sort of thing back when PG was running the show too. And even if it is up to Dang's discretion..

Why would YC want to propagate negative content corresponding to their ventures?

As far as I'm aware, HN never promised to let us (the users) rule the roost this way. And they've never promised freedom from censorship.

To be clear, I don't mean any of this in a critical way. It simply is what it is.

I thought there was an announcement a few months back explicitly talking about editorial independence at HN.
That's a good point! I also recall the announcement [0] and related HN discourse [1].

Reviewing it now, it looks to me like they declared editorial independence without going into much detail. I especially don't see anything about guaranteeing the preservation of things that may harm the YC or affiliated brands.

[0] http://blog.ycombinator.com/two-hn-announcements

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10298512