4 ms·
I understand that these other sites have to cover the latest story or else they'll lose pageviews or be considered irrelevant or whatever, but to me that is the
by natep 14y ago
I understand that these other sites have to cover the latest story or else they'll lose pageviews or be considered irrelevant or whatever, but to me that is the sign of a flawed system. If you don't have the resources to fact-check something (because you've laid off so many people), and other sites (like macrumors.com) do, then you should leave that story alone and let others fact-check it. I'm tired of every major news site trying to be all things to all people. We have aggregators now, so only a few sites need to cover any one thing, and people will still find out about it.
I've only partially thought through this argument, so I'm sure it has all sorts of holes and will be easy to misinterpret in every way possible, but I'm throwing it out there anyways.
- arn 14y agoThere is really no possible fact checking on this. This is a 100% anonymous post. Unless you happen to know someone who works in this particular department at Apple.
- natep 14y agoExactly. What we don't know is how many organizations came across this tip and decided not to run a story on it, since they didn't have any such contacts. We do know that some decided to write a story anyways, even though they had zero corroborating evidence, in case...?