Thus the caveats in my remark.
I don’t consider someone who is happy to run their company with unsafe conditions, injuring workers regularly, just because it is cheaper to pay the fines than fix the problems as even “somewhat decent”.
1 Like
I’d need some details on how unsafe it is. Who was hurt and under what circumstances. How it compares to other manufacturers, other occupations, other countries, etc. Simply paying a fine doesn’t say much to me anyway.
I’m not sure if Twitter’s blocking of the Hunter Biden laptop story just weeks before the election actually “created one president”, but it sure didn’t hurt “the big guy’s” candidacy.
I’m well aware your post wasn’t about Biden’s presidency, you (and a few other libby posters on this site) mistakenly think Trump was the only beneficiary of Twitter. You can just ignore my post.
1 Like
Perhaps his ownership will finally make people realize that it’s not a news source.
perhaps. But based on the history of social media, I truly doubt it. I think it’s only going to get worse, not better.
Aah, another false statement from Ranger, faith and feelings over facts is not a model to live by.
It is difficult to get hard data as Tesla has been found to be repeatedly underreporting injuries.
1 Like
Please indicate which part of my post is false. If you’re unable to find a false part, I would remind you that this is not the political topics sub-forum, and attack posts such as yours are out of line. I would expect that you will delete it.
No serious person cares about the hunter Biden laptop story. One side of the media “buried” the story and the other side made you think it was the story of the decade.
Any links on this? I haven’t seen anything singling Tesla as worse than average. Lots of stuff on Amazon lately, but not Tesla.
I’ve given some links above but here are just a few of the many that can be found:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2019/03/01/tesla-safety-violations-dwarf-big-us-auto-plants-in-aftermath-of-musks-model-3-push/?sh=735658ee54ce
Some discussion of historic issues and fines.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-03-06/tesla-left-injuries-out-of-reports-california-safety-regulator-says
Omission of data
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/feb/18/tesla-california-racial-harassment-discrimination-lawsuit
And in case you think they’ve started treating their workers better since 2020, here is a recent example of poor treatment in a different context.
1 Like
Thanks for the links. I think missing data is much worse (me being an actuary) than the fines, but I’m still not ready to jump to Elon is a bad guy.
I guess I just don’t care that much about workplace safety, unless it’s really bad, ie. like an oil rig or a toxic plant, and workers aren’t being compensated or aren’t being informed. But being 10% worse than average, instead of simply average, is kind of meh land for me at first blush.
After reading this thread, I’ve decided the answer to my OP is “No”
6 Likes
One side of the media cared enough to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story when it first became public knowledge. Now they’ve revisited and changed their decision. I guess those aren’t the serious people.
It was widely covered, iirc. It’s just nobody but a complete and utter sap would take Rudy Giuliani at his word on the eve of an election with no opportunity to do any due diligence.
I haven’t followed the story since, but obviously whoever found it should have shared it sooner and through a less obviously shitty medium.
It wasn’t widely covered. The New York Post had a story, Twitter banned all links to it. At the time, both the Washington Post and the NY Times claimed they were unable to verify the authenticity of the emails and feared they might be part of a Russian disinformation campaign (somebody call agent Mueller, the “Russians aren’t playing nicely” again, whatever). Coverage was minimal. It took their crack-shot investigative teams around 18 months to finally acknowledge the authenticity of the emails on the laptop. Curious minds are asking why are they finally acknowledging it? Why now?
Compare and contrast that coverage with the 24/7 coverage of the phony “Russiagate” scandal which has eventually been proven to be fake and the product of HRC’s disinformation campaign.
Two of recent past Presidents knew how to use Twitter to help win their election. The current President had help from Twitter.
2 Likes
for a story no one was able to hear about, how come everyone knows about it?
1 Like
I had heard about the racist abuse issue in Fremont involving contractors. My surface reading of the articles led me to believe Tesla need(ed/s) to get more serious about the issue. Hopefully the $ award in the lawsuit will convince them.
I notice there hasn’t been follow-up in the press regarding 2019/2020 data. Considering union’s desire to re-enter that location I am curious about what that silence means.
By “side of the media” I thought you meant the News. If you want to talk about Twitter, then talk about twitter. Don’t confuse the two, it makes you look foolish.
The News widely reported on it. The News also was very skeptical on it. Not really sure what you want the media to do beyond that. They didn’t actually have the laptop, and weren’t able to check the authenticity. They weren’t even able to read all of the emails. So it was just a rumor. Do you want the NYT to report rumors as though they are true, or what? What would you have done if you worked for the NYT?
Compare and contrast that coverage with the 24/7 coverage of the phony “Russiagate” scandal which has eventually been proven to be fake and the product of HRC’s disinformation campaign.
You could probably compare it to the dossier. With the dossier, the media did have the documents and did have a source. And the media, as a whole, was skeptical of the dossier. As I’m sure you know, the dossier was circulating before the election, but wasn’t leaked until after the election.
And when it was leaked, it wasn’t leaked by the NYT or WaPo. Here’s a Washington Post article, immediately after the dossier leak. I recommend reading it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/11/the-problem-of-too-much-information/
What do you think? Was it inappropriate?
Russia-gate in general was more complicated, since the FBI had been investigating Russiagate, including the Dossier, and it’s the media’s job to report on what the FBI does. And also, of course, Trump actively ruined everything again and again, in the way he always did and still does. Making it virtually impossible for a good reporting. Then if course there was Mueller, and finally the Senate…
But this is all kind of beside the point.
The real question is how do YOU think the media should report on things?
How would YOU report on the laptop?
And do YOU personally take Rudy Giuliani at his word?
Instead of trying to compare left and right, ask yourself how a reporter should report on something.