I have had over a dozen positive articles about me written in newspapers, blogs, and TV segments over the years. Every single one of them misrepresented key fac

I have had over a dozen positive articles about me written in newspapers, blogs, and TV segments over the years. Every single one of them misrepresented key facts, exaggerated my accomplishments, and oversimplified the invention/process. Initially I was shocked at the inaccuracies but over time I realized that despite the journalists' best intentions, they have to look at my story from different points of views and pick the angle that best fits the column's theme/focus - prodigious kid invents technology even Microsoft can't (David vs. Goliath), smart techies whip up app on weekend (HP/Apple garage-style startup), friendly-neighborhood IT guy takes a stab at unrelated field (everyone's a hidden genius). One could argue that news must be devoid of any such slants, angles, or specific POVs but then we get caught in a debate about boring news that won't sell vs. sensationalized news that is meant solely to increase sales. Just like for programmers it is a constant balance between quality, deadlines, and cost, for journalists it is between truth, importance, and sales. '12 more people dead in blast in Tel Aviv' is truth and important but not sensational enough to sell. 'No-name D-list celeb gets caught speeding' is truth and sensational but not important. In articles like this, they're trying to make it sound important and sensational while skirting around the limits of truth. In personal articles we've been involved in, they play the angles to show importance and make it sensational while not caring much about the factual accuracies.