The article says, in the 3rd paragraph: > By year’s end, Google plans to eliminate cookies for all Chrome users. Which is a false statement, and misinforms us

The article says, in the 3rd paragraph: > By year’s end, Google plans to eliminate cookies for all Chrome users. Which is a false statement, and misinforms users. If it later on contradicts itself it really doesn't improve anything. Furthermore, making an accurate claim later does not excuse making a false claim earlier. I'm not sure WSJ needs any defending here, and I'm not sure why so many people want to excuse their bad practices. What they are doing is wrong, they should not do it, of course they will continue doing it, this is so common that it has a label to describe it, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect [1], but it is still not excusable. Maybe instead of defending WSJ, just expect better from them? [1]: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_Amnesia_effect https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_Amnesia_effect