Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by zdyn5 1217 days ago
>Proof by authority? Not sure how this “proof by authority” cynicism applies here. Those events are pretty well established by now and he won a Pulitzer for breaking the story in the face of coverup… isn’t that exactly what high-quality journalism should be? And be rewarded for? There might be an unseemly bragging tone but it doesn’t make it any less true. What’s next - Einstein’s Nobels are also proof by authority?

Relevant (accurate) past recognition should be taken into account as a prior when evaluating uncertain present claims. It doesn’t mean they’re automatically right, and evidence/arguments should be evaluated on their own merit as much as possible, but in the face of opaque fog of war, are you suggesting this journalist should be taken no more seriously than some rando off the street?
1 comments
bhaak 1217 days ago
The proof by authority criticism is for the implied "I've been right in the past (I even got awarded for that) therefore I must be right now as well".

> What’s next - Einstein’s Nobels are also proof by authority?

If you use them as an argument for Einstein's later work, then yes. Einstein's later work for example for black holes was completely wrong.

link
coldtea 1217 days ago
>The proof by authority criticism is for the implied "I've been right in the past (I even got awarded for that) therefore I must be right now as well".

Or, you know, rather merely the implied:

"I'm just some random conspiracy theorist, some fresh of the bus aspiring journalist, or some blogger that got in over their head, I've got a proven track record of working with diffucult and covered/denied stories, being proven right, doing succesful investigate journalism, and bringing up major stories. Pulitzer level track record."

link
zdyn5 1217 days ago
Good points and I mostly agree here… important to have healthy skepticism but I still don’t think previous well-deserved recognition should be deemed irrelevant in areas where trust plays a big factor (like where where anonymous sources can’t be verified).

If there are verifiable counter-claims/evidence then that’s where the action should be.

link