It doesn't exactly put it in a good light. It's quite stomach turning actually. Having said that, I'm a little tired of HN's never ending ability to find something to be outraged about, so despite this particular thing pushing everyone of my buttons I'm going to pass. The internet is a big place, filled with lots of people doing things, and there's probably enough material out there to always be outraged every day of your life if you really want to be.
Merely discussing something is not promoting it. The GLBT community has fought this battle again and again, when various parties sought to suppress any mention of homosexuality in public schools, because that would be "promoting the homosexual lifestyle". This discussion may make more people aware of the Samsung contest, but it is in no way a promotion of it.
Max Clifford I think it was said something along the lines of "there's no such thing as bad publicity".
If people are discussing something then you've made them aware of it, you've shown them "this is worth discussing" and you've displayed it as normative. Ergo promotion.
Samsung have got more publicity from this guy than they'd have got if they paid for it. Indeed the conspiracy theorist in me wants to research whether this is actually the primary method of promotion that was intended ... but that's just madness.
> Merely discussing something is not promoting it.
But in this particular case it is. There will be people who are interested in the contest, and doesn't mind that dishonest promotional tactics was used.
So would you have preferred that the original poster not bring it up on HN at all? I could just as easily claim that someone who was planning to enter the contest before learning about Samsung's practices will now choose not to. We have no data. In the absence of data, I think the OP did the right thing by letting us know about this.
Everyone keeps saying this, but what's the option? Discourage exposing scammy behaviour whenever someone could theoretically profit from the attention?
