by Mike Masnick
Wed, Jul 15th 2009 9:10am
If I announced tomorrow that some key technology in widespread use today was fundamentally broken, but (oh yeah) that I was selling a solution that would fix it all, don't you think most reporters would first try to track down an independent third party to find out if what I was saying was actually true? Apparently not all reporters feel that way. So take it with a grain of salt when PC Authority writes a gushing article about how one of the internet's original designers, Larry Roberts, claims the internet is fundamentally broken. Roberts has been pushing this line for a while, and it's rather important to note that this is part of the marketing campaign for his company, which is trying to sell a "solution" to the problem. Yet PC Authority focuses entirely on the idea that the internet is broken, checks with no other third party, and only mentions at the very, very end of the article that Roberts' company just happens to be trying to sell a solution. Whether or not you believe Roberts' claims, you would think that a reporter wouldn't put what seems like a blatant press release and pitch it as a news article without at least getting some third party opinions.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Google To France: No You Don't Get To Censor The Global Internet
- Once Again With Feeling: Cord Cutting Is Not A 'Myth'
- Malaysian Government Pushes For Broad Internet Censorship Bill Following Internet Reporting On Gov't Corruption
- Subtle: Iraq Flips The Internet Switch For 3 Hours To Combat Cheating Students And Corrupted Teachers
- Internet Protections Enshrined In Brazil's Marco Civil Framework Under Threat From New Laws