864
SpaceX executives worried Elon Musk was on drugs during 'cringeworthy' all-hands meeting, WSJ reports
(www.businessinsider.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
864 points (97.4% liked)
News
35749 readers
2158 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I will admit, him being on drugs did not occur to me as a possible explanation for his 'taking tesla private' tweet that torpeedoed his networth, but having been confronted by it now I am having a hard time not believing it.
Just FYI
Means "We have no source for this and are probably making it up"
Business Insider is a tabloid shitrag these days
Just FYI, "according to people familiar with the matter" generally means people who are speaking on background and asked to have their identifies protected. I guarantee you that the reporters and their editor(s) know the people involved and have good reason to believe they're familiar with the situation and are reliable sources of information.
Were it a respectable publication I'd agree, but Business Insider has gone rapidly downhill the last couple of years, and is now Daily-Mail-Level tripe
So is the Wall Street Journal also “Daily Mail level tripe”? Because they are the Business Insider’s source for the story.
SO POST THAT THEN AND STOP GIVING BUSINESS INSHITER CLICKS 😂
Did you just miss the reply to you where I said point blank I linked to BI instead of WSJ because of a paywall, or naw?
OP already said they did that to avoid the paywall.
Attacks the source. Then attacks the publication. Then complains further despite that this publication link is just to avoid linking the original paywalled article (from a publication you apparently trust) wherein the same sources provide the same info.
You could have just downvoted and moved along, but instead gestures all around thread.
This is based on a Wall Street Journal report (which I didn’t link because it’s paywalled), so your strange anger at BI is a wee bit misplaced.
Dude is hanging out in a dedicated misogyny porn community.
10 to 1 a MuskRat and just angry his man is being talked about badly.
"Hey there nice post. Unfortunately, here is some bullshit I dug up from your comment history which clearly demonstrates that you are unworthy of expressing your opinion"
Not defending that guy, just really wish this type of behavior would just die along with the rest of r*ddit already. Something something ad hominem falacy
Oh I tend agree, if I was arguing directly against him it would be foul.
However looking through peoples past comments and where they tend to hang out can infer a lot about the person.
No. Media bullshit is sitting at the core of a lot of today's problems and the massive polarisation on basically any topic.
Anger at low level journalism rags and even more at outlets trying to look respectable while actually having a similiar quality (and that definitely includes Business Insider ever since they were bought by the shithole of journalism that is Axel Springer SE) cannot be misplaced at all.
I mean, I'm all on board with anger at BI. It's not that. It's the WSJ article is the OP topic, it's like ranting about Star Trek at a Star Wars convention. Not that it's wrong, just misplaced or at least out of context.