3 ms·
I expected better from the WSJ. Even if what the author says is true, he supports his assertion with blanket statements and anecdotes.
by fallentimes 17y ago
I expected better from the WSJ. Even if what the author says is true, he supports his assertion with blanket statements and anecdotes.
- pavs 17y agoWhy did you expect better from WSJ? Most of the time they are horrible.
- fallentimes 17y agoReally? I've found them to be better than the vast majority of publications. But, I guess you could argue that's being the best of the worst.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- NonEUCitizen 17y agoi think the author used to write for FT
- psawaya 17y agoHave to agree with you. If this guy can't do his homework and realize just why AOL and Myspace are sinking ships, then he shouldn't be writing for the WSJ. Comparing all tech companies to those two is, of course, ridiculous.
- csbartus 17y agoThis is why old media is sinking. It is not just about the old channels but old authors too. In the same way I was disappointed by O'Reilly articles recently. Now when choosing to read an article I'm not looking the source (WSJ, Techcrunch, ...) but the author. (like Zed :). But foremost at article's HN comments Old media's only currency is the rating thus they'll have to produce something sensational like this article. New media's currency is community credit and respect so we are producing knowledge