3 ms·

Exactly, so why bother showing the email at all?

• froo 17y ago
  Well, for one thing, it lends more credibility to the story. But to go on your initial point, why bother writing a follow up piece at all? Because that's what it takes to make a blog that people want to read. As far as they know, the source has been reliable in the past. The source provided them with a good story, they published it and the companies in question danced a jig to make TC out to appear like a bunch of liars. If the story is correct, last.fm providing the information to CBS who then turned it over to the RIAA is essentially the same thing as last.fm giving the information to the RIAA. If its not correct, people will call Michael out on it, no big deal - it's what gets readers. It's the same situation that makes abominations like Perez Hilton exist... people thrive on drama. Drama drives traffic, traffic creates revenue.
  • Dilpil 17y ago
    I have no problem with him writing the follow up story. Heck, I'm glad he wrote it, as I am not one of those who automatically hate Michael Arrington.
    • froo 17y ago
      Me either, I just think the "bash arrington" meme seems to go too far at times, but to be fair - your points implied dislike for arrington (given the negative tone) even if you don't
  • deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]