4 ms·

I never advocate changing titles, but this one is in need of work. It took me a bit to realize what was going on. Also, this seems like a non-issue. As I under

I never advocate changing titles, but this one is in need of work. It took me a bit to realize what was going on. Also, this seems like a non-issue. As I understand it, they've built a version that doesn't require activation and takes a special serial number, so they can phase out the CS2 activation servers. Some blogger (shocker, at Gizmodo) being fast and loose with the facts, well, got that wrong. Other blogs copied that mistake (a real problem in the "blogosphere"), Adobe took down the page that was linked, Monday rolls on. We're talking about software that won't even run on an Intel Mac here, people. The rest of this story is, "hey, check out the beating Adobe is taking on their forum!" Thanks, blogs. You win again.

richforrester 14y ago
Candidly, it's not just "in the blogosphere" - it's a staple for media in general, to the point where one could forgo labeling it a problem, and just call it an aspect. Other than that, agree with your post.
- jspthrowaway2 14y ago
  I agree, but the entire premise of the blogosphere makes it worse. Ethically gray publishers like Gizmodo make it even worse still. Traditional journalists would be smart enough to check with Adobe for confirmation before telling the world what Adobe is doing. (Quit making me type "blogosphere". I'm going to develop a rash.)
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- eli 14y ago
  I agree that this problem is not exclusive to the medium, but it is endemic. I mean, many blogs speculated about Adobe's motivation for releasing "free" software, but did anyone pick up a phone or send an email to ask them about it?
  - FredFredrickson 14y ago
    Of course they didn't. Mostly because they just wanted to have the story "first", and secondly because most of them either don't have editors / fact-checkers or don't care about them. It's the price we pay for getting news as fast as we do.
    - jspthrowaway2 14y ago
      If it is the price "we" paid, I didn't agree to pay it. I'd much rather read a slower source that, you know, doesn't libel people at the drop of a hat and without apology. I honestly wish, as damaging to the free flow of information on the Internet as it would be, that victims like Adobe would start cleaning bloggers out for shit like this. I know I'm harping on Gizmodo/Gawker/whatever, but I know they're definitely not the only blog slum lord out there. The expectation for immediate news is damaging in a lot of ways, this one is just the worst and most visible.
      - keithwinstein 14y ago
        I don't understand -- if you want a slower news source, read one! It's up to you. You can read the New York Times Sunday Review, the Economist, the New Yorker, the daily New York Times... whatever you want. All of these outfits reported this story correctly, which is to say, they didn't write about it. Nobody is forcing you to read Gizmodo. The idea that getting things fast and wrong is a staple of "media in general" is ridiculous. The vast majority of the media acquitted themselves fine here.
        jspthrowaway2 14y ago
        Former investigative journalist here, though I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with the topic at hand. You'll notice, if you read carefully, that I didn't say anybody was forcing me to do anything and instead I took issue with being lumped into the sweeping "this is the price we pay" assertion made by the comment to which I was replying. I'm perfectly aware of what I can read. I wish blogs were a bit higher-standard, so I could enjoy them as well without the reservations that it requires. EDIT: Okay, now that you've ninja-edited in a second paragraph, I'll respond to that too. Even CNN is guilty of this. "This Just In" during Hurricane Sandy ran some Twitter troll's report of the NYSE flooding. Remember Ryan Lanza? Yep, "This Just In" as well. Half of the rest of the world sees the story on CNN.com and says, hey, that's a confirm, it aired on CNN! It's probably an associate producer manning the desk straight out of J-school, and that big "Publish" button is pretty God damned alluring. Something about blogs, even under the CNN umbrella, seems to make facts a second-class citizen. "Breaking" doesn't mean the same thing that it did a couple decades ago, and integrity is crumbling with Internet journalism.
ars 14y ago
> Adobe took down the page that was linked The links are not down. Someone listed them here: http://www.hotukdeals.com/freebies/adobe-cs2-creative-suite-free-1437132 http://www.hotukdeals.com/freebies/adobe-cs2-creative-suite-... I tried a few and they appeared to start (although I didn't actually download them).
- jspthrowaway2 14y ago
  The page that was linked means the URL the blogs gave as the link. Click Gizmodo's link here[1]. So, yes, the link is down. [1]: http://gizmodo.com/5973730/grab-photoshop-and-cs2-for-absolutely-free-right-here http://gizmodo.com/5973730/grab-photoshop-and-cs2-for-absolu...
clarky07 14y ago
Yeah I think a mod needs to change the title here. This title isn't the title from the page, and it doesn't come close to conveying the actual situation.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

richforrester 14y ago

Candidly, it's not just "in the blogosphere" - it's a staple for media in general, to the point where one could forgo labeling it a problem, and just call it an aspect. Other than that, agree with your post.

jspthrowaway2 14y ago
I agree, but the entire premise of the blogosphere makes it worse. Ethically gray publishers like Gizmodo make it even worse still. Traditional journalists would be smart enough to check with Adobe for confirmation before telling the world what Adobe is doing. (Quit making me type "blogosphere". I'm going to develop a rash.)
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
eli 14y ago
I agree that this problem is not exclusive to the medium, but it is endemic. I mean, many blogs speculated about Adobe's motivation for releasing "free" software, but did anyone pick up a phone or send an email to ask them about it?
- FredFredrickson 14y ago
  Of course they didn't. Mostly because they just wanted to have the story "first", and secondly because most of them either don't have editors / fact-checkers or don't care about them. It's the price we pay for getting news as fast as we do.
  - jspthrowaway2 14y ago
    If it is the price "we" paid, I didn't agree to pay it. I'd much rather read a slower source that, you know, doesn't libel people at the drop of a hat and without apology. I honestly wish, as damaging to the free flow of information on the Internet as it would be, that victims like Adobe would start cleaning bloggers out for shit like this. I know I'm harping on Gizmodo/Gawker/whatever, but I know they're definitely not the only blog slum lord out there. The expectation for immediate news is damaging in a lot of ways, this one is just the worst and most visible.
    - keithwinstein 14y ago
      I don't understand -- if you want a slower news source, read one! It's up to you. You can read the New York Times Sunday Review, the Economist, the New Yorker, the daily New York Times... whatever you want. All of these outfits reported this story correctly, which is to say, they didn't write about it. Nobody is forcing you to read Gizmodo. The idea that getting things fast and wrong is a staple of "media in general" is ridiculous. The vast majority of the media acquitted themselves fine here.
      - jspthrowaway2 14y ago
        Former investigative journalist here, though I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with the topic at hand. You'll notice, if you read carefully, that I didn't say anybody was forcing me to do anything and instead I took issue with being lumped into the sweeping "this is the price we pay" assertion made by the comment to which I was replying. I'm perfectly aware of what I can read. I wish blogs were a bit higher-standard, so I could enjoy them as well without the reservations that it requires. EDIT: Okay, now that you've ninja-edited in a second paragraph, I'll respond to that too. Even CNN is guilty of this. "This Just In" during Hurricane Sandy ran some Twitter troll's report of the NYSE flooding. Remember Ryan Lanza? Yep, "This Just In" as well. Half of the rest of the world sees the story on CNN.com and says, hey, that's a confirm, it aired on CNN! It's probably an associate producer manning the desk straight out of J-school, and that big "Publish" button is pretty God damned alluring. Something about blogs, even under the CNN umbrella, seems to make facts a second-class citizen. "Breaking" doesn't mean the same thing that it did a couple decades ago, and integrity is crumbling with Internet journalism.

ars 14y ago

> Adobe took down the page that was linked The links are not down. Someone listed them here: http://www.hotukdeals.com/freebies/adobe-cs2-creative-suite-free-1437132 http://www.hotukdeals.com/freebies/adobe-cs2-creative-suite-... I tried a few and they appeared to start (although I didn't actually download them).

jspthrowaway2 14y ago
The page that was linked means the URL the blogs gave as the link. Click Gizmodo's link here[1]. So, yes, the link is down. [1]: http://gizmodo.com/5973730/grab-photoshop-and-cs2-for-absolutely-free-right-here http://gizmodo.com/5973730/grab-photoshop-and-cs2-for-absolu...

clarky07 14y ago

Yeah I think a mod needs to change the title here. This title isn't the title from the page, and it doesn't come close to conveying the actual situation.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]