I don't think it's accurate to label the The Verge a "failure", however the article does bring up a larger, more interesting question - namely, the idea of "van

I don't think it's accurate to label the The Verge a "failure", however the article does bring up a larger, more interesting question - namely, the idea of "vanilla" reporting on tech/gadget sites, especially concerning reviews. I'm not sure how I come down on the issue, but I do get the strong sense that reviewers at major tech sites are extremely reticent to take even a mild stance on a piece of technology, because they're afraid of the massive number of mail/comments their going to get from fans of said technology. For example, look at what resulted from Josh's comment on a previous podcast about Windows being "poison". He said it in a joking/light hearted way, but anyone who follows him regularly knows he's clearly not a fan of the Windows OS. Consequently, he spent the next few weeks apologizing and backpedaling, even going so far as to devote a segmen of the Verge talk show to "prettifying" Windows. One of the few sites that takes the opposite stance is Tested.com. If those guys think a piece of hardware/tech is shit, they will say plainly that they think it's shit, and give you their reasons why. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not offended or regard them as "biased" when they state a clear opinion with reasons attached. Sometimes I agree with them. But it's perfectly ok with me when I don't.