Uber driver kills 6(cnn.com)
cnn.com
Uber driver kills 6
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/21/us/michigan-kalamazoo-county-shooting-spree/index.html
29 comments
According to the article, the suspect may have been picking up fares for Uber while shooting people, so his employer does appear to be relevant to the timeline.
Also, Uber was mentioned in a quote by a law enforcement officer, as being part of the context of the investigation:
Also, Uber was mentioned in a quote by a law enforcement officer, as being part of the context of the investigation:
While the company did not address reports that Dalton picked up and dropped off
customers Saturday night, authorities told CNN that it was "certainly part
of our investigation."
"We're looking into his connection to Uber and whether or not he was picking up
fares in between the shootings," said Public Safety Chief Jeff Hadley.
And if he was campaigning for Hillary between the shootings, that would also be relevant?
EDIT: on the second thought... yes, it would.
EDIT: on the second thought... yes, it would.
The cab driver / customer relationship is one of the few places in our culture where we have to set aside the age old wisdom of not getting into strangers' cars, and any hint that that might not be a good idea makes for sensational news. It's the same reason that picture of Gacy in clown makeup is so popular even though he never shot up a birthday party.
> What does Uber have to do with the story, other than to demonize the company?
There's a monetary incentive to put Uber in the headline.
Online media runs on advertising, advertising on hits. Uber is a curiosity right now, and a hot media item, so association ups hits.
Uber–association is particularly valuable if the headline generates emotion. There's innate curiosity about Uber as a new creature. There's emotion for murder. The melange is an often powerful cocktail of clicks.
The masses are not yet sure what to think of Uber, so many will eagerly click on this to help draw a conclusion about the safety of those using the company. People that would not otherwise click on either a murder or an Uber story. The mix ups the value; more people will see ads presented alongside the story.
Of course Taxi drivers have been mass murdering for generations. Of course the headline demonizes Uber. Those, while correct, are irrelevant. It is also irrelevant whether the media companies like or dislike Uber.
All that matters is that the media companies have a monetary incentive derived from the actions of the masses.
There's a monetary incentive to put Uber in the headline.
Online media runs on advertising, advertising on hits. Uber is a curiosity right now, and a hot media item, so association ups hits.
Uber–association is particularly valuable if the headline generates emotion. There's innate curiosity about Uber as a new creature. There's emotion for murder. The melange is an often powerful cocktail of clicks.
The masses are not yet sure what to think of Uber, so many will eagerly click on this to help draw a conclusion about the safety of those using the company. People that would not otherwise click on either a murder or an Uber story. The mix ups the value; more people will see ads presented alongside the story.
Of course Taxi drivers have been mass murdering for generations. Of course the headline demonizes Uber. Those, while correct, are irrelevant. It is also irrelevant whether the media companies like or dislike Uber.
All that matters is that the media companies have a monetary incentive derived from the actions of the masses.
I think he may have had goatee as well. Definitely headline-worthy detail.
According to the article, his role as an Uber driver had absolutely nothing to do with this shooting. He didn't shoot his Uber passengers, or utilize the service to find victims. He was a psychopath driving around and shooting people at random places.
This kind of headline is clearly irresponsible. In fact it's so outrageously irresponsible that I wouldn't be surprised if a CNN executive is an investor in a competing service. There is no reason to even mention what he did for a living, especially in the headline, except for fearmongering purposes.
This kind of headline is clearly irresponsible. In fact it's so outrageously irresponsible that I wouldn't be surprised if a CNN executive is an investor in a competing service. There is no reason to even mention what he did for a living, especially in the headline, except for fearmongering purposes.
How about what he did during the spree, which was work as an Uber driver between slayings.
The reason is more clicks.
In related news, county public health inspector kills 14.
(Edit: ...and an iPhone owner)
(Edit: ...and an iPhone owner)
Is it me or is Uber being dragged into this the same way craigslist was dragged into somehow being a breeding ground for serial killers who were trolling the "adult services" section, which ultimately resulted incraigslist shutting it down.
I think the difference here is that craigslist did not employ the serial killers
There aren't much details available, but it seems that the driver appeared to be a pretty "normal" family man. If the criminal background/etc didn't turn anything up, then why would there be a significantly higher bar for Uber compared to a typical cab company.
I'm no über fanboy, but this certainly looks like a piece trying to stick it to Uber and generating negative PR which could scare future users from using uber. Bring out the pitchforks!
I'm no über fanboy, but this certainly looks like a piece trying to stick it to Uber and generating negative PR which could scare future users from using uber. Bring out the pitchforks!
I don't disagree with anything you said, but I think it is more reasonable to ask questions of Uber than the craigslist scenario that was provided.
Are you saying that the employers of all murderers, rapists, etc are responsible for looking into the future and determining whether or not an employee will do something illegal?
not in the least, but providing a service that allows people to connect but provides no promise of a backgroudn check and simply facilitates offline contact (i.e., craigslist) seems notably different from Uber's directly connecting of customer and driver, facilitation of interaction, promise of background checks, and charging of a customer safety fee.
Presumably, this guy passed the same cookie cutter background check that any employer, including a traditional taxi company, would have used.
oh boy...this is going to turn into a well informed, articulate, and unbiased argument on all sides. I am sure of that.
Taxi driver kills 12:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gun-rampage-taxi-...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/gun-rampage-taxi-...
But that doesn't make for good headlines
It matters that he was an Uber the same way it matters what political party a politician is in when they break the law, or that a person is a preacher when they break the law. There's a narrative, and journalists more often than not emphasize elements of a story that support the narrative.
Narrative being that despite background checks, Uber will let anyone drive for them regardless of safety concerns. Obviously illogical, but I know I've run into some real freaks when Ubering.
Narrative being that despite background checks, Uber will let anyone drive for them regardless of safety concerns. Obviously illogical, but I know I've run into some real freaks when Ubering.
There is another narrative - government ran background checks on him as well before selling him a gun. And it let him walk around freely regardless of safety concerns.
I agree this is scaremongering at Uber's expense. I'd like them to be transparent about their interview/hire/employ process.
I understand they do a criminal "background check" and they have a formal interview, just the same as any cab company. Do they only do a criminal background check in the country of their employment? Or do they also run it in countries they've just moved from, etc?
I understand they do a criminal "background check" and they have a formal interview, just the same as any cab company. Do they only do a criminal background check in the country of their employment? Or do they also run it in countries they've just moved from, etc?
What does this have to do with Uber, other than a careless disregard for one’s appearance to others?
Another random killing by a gun? Would these happen so often if guns were harder to access in America?
[deleted]
Why not "driver kills six"? I'm not an Uber user or fanboy, just curious.
That's why I posted it here. I think it's more of an intentional negative piece on Uber.
I was quite dumbfounded when the whole "craigslist killer" suddenly painted craigslist as a shady place for "weird" people online. I suspect the reality was animosity against craigslist for being disruptive to print media.
I was quite dumbfounded when the whole "craigslist killer" suddenly painted craigslist as a shady place for "weird" people online. I suspect the reality was animosity against craigslist for being disruptive to print media.
I assumed it was a car crash from the headline.
Are cars invoked at all? "Man kills 6".
Are cars invoked at all? "Man kills 6".
Was the suspect also a "milk drinker", and if so, why not put that into the story as well?