[lstroud]

Corrections don’t sell papers...err get clicks. They also don’t evolve the narrative.

Fedex isn’t just challenging the facts. They are challenging the underlying premise that corporations are a net negative on society.

I think it would be fascinating to see an actual debate by folks that aren’t politicians, but are willing to put their public reputation on the line.

[mthoms]

>Fedex isn’t just challenging the facts.

Actually, they didn't say anything that challenges a single specific fact from the article.

> They are challenging the underlying premise that corporations are a net negative on society.

The article never made that claim (nor even implied it).

What Fedex is doing is attempting to change the discussion from a very specific accusation to, well, anything other than what the specific accusation were. I can't believe otherwise intelligent people fall for this nonsense.

[learc83]

>Fedex isn’t just challenging the facts.

But they are also challenging the facts, and then refusing to state what facts are incorrect.

[lovehashbrowns]

NYT makes corrections. Your statement should actually read "people don't pay attention to corrections." It doesn't matter how many times a publication issues a correction because people will continue to spread the inaccurate information anyway.

For example, the Wakefield study that led to an entire anti-vaccination movement.

[gregwtmtno]

The Times newsroom doesn't posit premises (and certainly not the one you suggest) or debate tax policy, it reports facts. I find the ignorance on the basics of journalism and its role in American society on hacker news to be shocking and embarrassing.

[frockington1]

No person/group/company is ever perfect. Always be skeptical of everything. Here's a humorous mistake where the Times created inception-esque corrections: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/09/new-york-times-a...