[zxt_tzx]

Mildly interesting that the author runs a media relations company in SF.

On the one hand, I am sympathetic to the general perspective of the original article.

On the other hand, that the same person is writing “hit pieces” and running a media relations company bears a certain resemblance to protection rackets of yore

[yareal]

Can you say what you are saying? You are alluding to something, but it's not clear what. Are you saying this author is extorting tech executives?

[Eisenstein]

The implication is that the writer is using their bona fides as a corporate media relations expert to craft a compelling narrative targeting a person with a lucrative corporate position. It just so happens that this position is reliant on their political skills rather than their technical qualifications because by all metrics they are terrible at doing what it is they position requires, so instead of watching their reputation blow up and their ability to keep pretending their skillset isn't limited to 'talk about the good old days at the management consulting firm we at together sucking blood from the productive parts of society' with the CEO, that person will pay some kind of protection fee or do whatever dance the writer wants them to do to get them to stop.

As fun as it is to outline such a scheme, it seems incredibly implausible, since a person who's entire income is reliant on corporate media relations wouldn't bite the hand that feeds them to make a few dollars from a corporate enshittifier. Also, the path from 'hit piece' to 'rolling in the dough' seems kind of long and windy, and there are a few steps in there that I don't really get how they would work.

This is why the OP just insinuated the whole thing instead of saying it -- because when you write it down fully it sounds ridiculous.

[kevingadd]

classic protection racket: a guy with a blog rolling up to a millionaire and breaking his kneecaps. You'll never work in this town again, buddy! I've got a blog! The millionaire calls the cops but they won't help because they're too busy chasing dogs with their cars, so he calls his other millionaire friends but they're too busy teaching LLMs how to sell banner ads or teaching self-driving cars how to hit dogs. The millionaire gnashes his teeth and rends his garments. But then he remembers! The law! He calls up a lawyer and says, "this guy with a blog is slandering me, and he broke my kneecaps! I've tried everything and nothing works!" The lawyer thinks for a moment and responds, "that sounds like libel to me, not slander." Crestfallen at the news that he mixed up two very similar concepts, the millionaire settles for having a highly-paid job ruining one of the world's foremost search engines, and accepts the reality that no one in San Francisco has more power than a guy with a blog.

[pclmulqdq]

In all seriousness, written defamation is a tort if you can prove that the allegations about you are both factually false (not just "opinions I don't like" or "not the full story" - even the statement "X is a Nazi" might not be defamatory) and materially damaging. It doesn't sound like either of those is the case.

If this guy loses a $10M/year job over these posts, his lawyer may well go through them to see if they are defamatory.

[skulk]

Is a SVP of a trillion-dollar publicly traded company legally considered a public figure? If so, the bar for defamation is a lot higher because they need to show malice. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/public-figures-and-o...