This settlement benefits meta immensely. Are the journalists reading the correct judgement?
The stock pretty much had a breakout when this news came out.
I'm ok with generic people struggling with that. But anybody covering tech or business should be able to work effectively with the numbers at hand. Anything less is journalistic malpractice.
There's arguably more journalistic malpractice going on than actual journalism.
Think back to anything you can speak to with some authority, personally or professionally. Think of the last time a reporter actually got it right. It does happen, and there are a few good journalists still out there who care about getting the facts and the issues right. But it's buried under a pile of ignorant rage-baiting slop.
Unfortunately, it really depends who you consider a journalist. With internet advertising destroying journalism as a revenue source, as anyone can really say anything about who they are
Meta stock is up $400 since 2016-2018, when "teen mental health" first became a concern. It's clear that META has boomed since then. Fines have amounted to little more than a cost of doing business. Stern words amount to no more than empty threats.
Comments
This settlement benefits meta immensely. Are the journalists reading the correct judgement? The stock pretty much had a breakout when this news came out.
It's another case of people struggling with huge numbers. We just aren't prepared to tackle millions/billions/trillions very well.
I'm ok with generic people struggling with that. But anybody covering tech or business should be able to work effectively with the numbers at hand. Anything less is journalistic malpractice.
There's arguably more journalistic malpractice going on than actual journalism.
Think back to anything you can speak to with some authority, personally or professionally. Think of the last time a reporter actually got it right. It does happen, and there are a few good journalists still out there who care about getting the facts and the issues right. But it's buried under a pile of ignorant rage-baiting slop.
Unfortunately, it really depends who you consider a journalist. With internet advertising destroying journalism as a revenue source, as anyone can really say anything about who they are
We should rephrase things in % terms. IE this payout is X% of their net profit from last year.
The journalists were most likely told to spin it this way so that meta can put on a sad face in public.
Everything is for sale and meta has the money.
Meta stock is up $400 since 2016-2018, when "teen mental health" first became a concern. It's clear that META has boomed since then. Fines have amounted to little more than a cost of doing business. Stern words amount to no more than empty threats.
Like in "Chicago" they should have prepared 2 versions of the article, yet i guess they had only one.