I'm hearing contradictory theories in this thread. Either that the media initially reported on the train derailment and then was forced to stop following up. Or that the media initially tried to cover up the derailment and then gave up and started reporting on it.

Do both of these competing theories have traction? If so, why?

It's hilarious watching the 3 threads on HN surrounding this topic.

First had one brand new account uttering psyop nonstop with zero evidence. All their posts were flagged before the story went from front page to gone in 2secs.

The second one had several accounts saying the exact same message, in the exact format and wording as the first. And a few extras with similar but clearly different people. Also went from front page to nowhere in 2secs.

This being the third I noticed is absolutely full of these opinions. Which are entirely conspiracy theories.

If a group of activists choose this story as their attack vector, so be it. Clearly it is interesting enough to keep on fire. There's also a lot of unanswered questions and nobody has been held to any sort of account.

Maybe if we jail an executive for this we will stop seeing it.

It's just one executive, who cares.