What does Uber have to do with the story, other than to demonize the company?<p>Was the suspect also a "milk drinker", and if so, why not put that into the story as well?
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.<p>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.
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.
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.<p>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.
I agree this is scaremongering at Uber's expense. I'd like them to be transparent about their interview/hire/employ process.<p>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?