A striking illustration of how insidious the NYT reporting is in this article is how, despite the fact that I was very much on guard when I read it and I paid scrupulous attention, they still managed to plant something in my mind that I registered as fact, but is not.
Twice already on this forum, I said or implied that the NYT's sources included members of the board. I thought I read that in the article. However, I now searched for every occurrence of 'board' in the article and lo and behold, they didn't actually had contact with anyone on the board! Please note how every single time they refer to board members, they craft the sentence such that the board reference comes first, and only at the very end they add '...according to people familiar with the matter' disclaimer. Because they always put that at the very end, and also because it's such a standard utterance, my brain simply skipped it. Even if I managed to catch it in some of those paragraphs I must have missed in others, because I was left with a clear impression that they actually talked to board members. Not just that, but I then went on and propagated that "fact" to others.
If you think these writers don't know what they're doing, think again. See for yourselves:
The events set in motion by Mr. Musk’s tweet have ignited a federal investigation and have angered some board members, according to people familiar with the matter.Contrast this with the final manipulation that comes at the end, when the actual board statement provided to the paper by Tesla is introduced with this beautiful qualifier:
And some board members have expressed concern not only about Mr. Musk’s workload but also about his use of Ambien, two people familiar with the board said.
Board members, blindsided by the chief executive’s market-moving statement, were angry that they had not been briefed, two people familiar with the matter said.
Some board members, however, have recently told Mr. Musk that he should lay off Twitter and focus on making cars and launching rockets, according to people familiar with the matter.
Just days after the agency’s request for information, Tesla’s board and Mr. Musk received S.E.C. subpoenas, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Board members and Mr. Musk are preparing to meet with S.E.C. officials as soon as next week, the person said.
But this has worried some board members, who have noted that sometimes the drug does not put Mr. Musk to sleep but instead contributes to late-night Twitter sessions, according to a person familiar with the board’s thinking.
Some board members are also aware that Mr. Musk has on occasion used recreational drugs, according to people familiar with the matter.
In response to questions for this article, Tesla provided a statement that it attributed to its board, excluding Elon Musk. “There have been many false and irresponsible rumors in the press about the discussions of the Tesla board,” the statement said. “We would like to make clear that Elon’s commitment and dedication to Tesla is obvious. Over the past 15 years, Elon’s leadership of the Tesla team has caused Tesla to grow from a small start-up to having hundreds of thousands of cars on the road that customers love, employing tens of thousands of people around the world, and creating significant shareholder value in the process.”Nevermind this qualifier is entirely unnecessary. They are implying there is an ever-so-slight possibility that Tesla PR made it up. Also note how the paper chose to insert this disclaimer, and no other, at the very beginning of the paragraph.
Masterful.
they’re the worst kind of evil. think about all the other stuff they lie about. pathetic.
fyi,
someone posted an article from wired (maybe 2017) backchannel section...basically about conjecture in journalism and blending opinion with fact, tricking the reader. i had it but lost it. went back like 50 pages but couldn’t find it.
