![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
Discussion is locked
True journalism has been taking a holiday at major news sites. Their concept today of a story is to post a paragraph, then post links to alluded comments by 3-4 twitter accounts of celebrities or politicians, then a final comment paragraph. In those cases, a "trash" account with twitter helps.
Can't give them the benefit of my exalted wisdom.
Oh, well. Humanity's loss.
Remember how fb's value sank after its skullduggery was revealed? Good ol' ethical Wall Street. They don't tolerate bad guys.
Latest: "The company, however, regained much of its lost market value after it reported a surprisingly strong 63 percent rise in profit and an increase in users when it announced quarterly results on April 25."
Well, if only a small amount of those who are "in harm's way" really leave the site for good or even care about such leaks, i am not really surprised about the FB development, even while it was the talk of town for nearly a month. If something is convenient enough and gives us a way to make our daily life a bit easier, it is effing hard to make it go away. Blaming WS is not wrong but the demand of the users is the real reason for the rebound.
My point, and maybe the irony wasn't made clear, is that the real drivers of stock rarely have ethical motives. They're not un-ethical, just income-driven. At the time I saw opinions that said fb was being "punished" by Wall Street. No such thing, it was a reaction to possible government controls.