I don't think it detracts from previous viable points like OP, but I do think the headline might at first trigger an eye-roll on a lot of readers. It sounds lik

I don't think it detracts from previous viable points like OP, but I do think the headline might at first trigger an eye-roll on a lot of readers. It sounds like an irrelevant piece of trivia that the NYT wants to blow up in an attempt to just keep throwing mud at Facebook. If one reads the article there's a few interesting points-- it includes some statements by Mossberg and info on his book which will probably include some thoughts on Facebook. I try to at least skim stories before commenting on them which is the only reason I opened this one. The title reads like cheap celebrity journalism. Something more fleshed-out, like an interview going in depth about his thoughts on Facebook and tech's impact as a whole, leading to his book, would've been more "NYT worthy" IMO. And a better title.