> You cannot look at data in a vacuum. I never said you could. We're not discussing the philosophy of objective statements that don't require context, we're di

> You cannot look at data in a vacuum. I never said you could. We're not discussing the philosophy of objective statements that don't require context, we're discussing whether true facts are tainted by subjective elements around them. By definition, they can't be. If the content is good, it doesn't really matter why it's there. But if you believe the context implies that the data is incomplete (aka, biased) or actually wrong, that's obviously relevant. Especially if something was an ad, who cares? The data speaks for itself. You just need to verify the ad is correct and isn't mis-representing itself. In this case, the data is fairly objective, they aren't comparing their product to someone else's, just pointing out an action that a product was able to help perform, and that action produced interesting data about another service. The article didn't come off as an ad, either. My main gripe was that some people complain over any mention of affiliated services. (People also gripe about non-labeled affiliate links by independent-millionaire, popular, respected bloggers.)