MSNBC follows up ACC/iTunes review...what an idiot.
May 17, 2003 at 2:22 AM Post #16 of 16
Quote:

Originally posted by aos
I think that ANYBODY who doesn't look FIRST at the affiliation of the publisher, REGARDLESS of any quality or apparent validity of claims in an article, is INCREDIBLY naive given the realities of today's world. Do you SERIOUSLY believe editors allow articles to be published without following the official guideline? Days of free press are long over. Don't mock people who have decided not to wear pink glasses anymore.


A biased article would be to have stated that WMA is superior to AAC, and that Micro$oft could probably put out a better service. Sure, MSNBC journalists likely aren't going to be beating up MS products, but that doesn't (nessesarily) keep everything they report on from being true, or all their points from being valid. I can't think of one thing to disagree with in the mentioned articles, besides the obvious error of burning with a bad disc.

And while some people choose to wear rose-colored glasses, some choose to wear blood-red glasses too. Being too cynical gets you just as far as being too naive.

EDIT:
Lando, I agree with you. I mean what do you expect from a person who is paid to write stories, and likely isn't doing his dream job? Folks who are truly interested will write about it for no money. Just like some of the best lossy compression formats (Ogg Vorbis, LAME, MPC) have all been done for free, in people's spare time, because they truly CARE about it. (This is why I'm all for open-source, patentless, public-interest formats & programs. Corporations typically don't care about anything but the cash inflow.)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top