> It is times like these when we can discover who is objective and who is just an M$ minion.
Oh, do tell. We're itching to know how you found out. > Why am I not surprised? Why am I not surprised that you're not surprised? This could be said of any big-name company that sics the hype-machine onto the press (who does that sound like, hmmmmm, who?), that you don't get a consistent story from the used-car salesmen of journalism, the tech reporter. Bing has been out for less than a week and you're surprised that you haven't read The One Truth yet? For my first class when I was getting my journalism degree, we were presented with a conundrum: The Washington Post and The Washington Star (remember them?) had conflicting stories Saturday morning about a well-known Washington doctor who was killed by a burglar Friday night. However one paper had the story right and the other had it wrong. Which one was right? It's been over 20 years and I don't recall the details any longer, but after reading the Sunday editions, you had your answer as to which paper was right. The point is that even big name papers could screw up royally in the rush to get a story out. That many tech writers, who *might* be out of college by now and have *zero* journalistic training beyond cutting and pasting from other web sites, have dueling facts and/or use poor sources for information on a particularly hot topic isn't particularly startling "news." I always wait a week or so before drawing any conclusions about breaking news, no matter the source. The initial reports are *always* wrong. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
