USA Today Needs a Content Editor

I was reading an article in USA Today (found sitting around the office), and went to look up more about it online. Which led me to an older article about the debut of variable song pricing in the iTunes Store. From that article:

As people got used to buying music online, Apple had trouble arguing that it was simplest if all songs were 99 cents; when it became clear DRM was on its way out, Apple let go of control over pricing in order to keep its service in line with competitors like Inc. [1]

Now, this is a perfect example of something that is grammatically correct, and the facts it provides are basically true, but they way in which they are presented totally misrepresents the relationships between those facts. At least, if every other story I can find on the matter is to be believed.[2,3,4,5] That is, the facts that every other story [a sampling of which I’ve sourced] I can find agrees on are: Continue reading

Malicious, or Incompetent?

OK, it’s not like I had a very high opinion of Fox News before last week. But, still, I expected heavily-slanted reporting, emphasizing things that supported a more-conservative POV, and glossing over or ignoring things that undermined the same. Maybe some heavy spinning. But outright, bald-faced, self-serving [er, conservative-serving, at least]—and transparent—lies? Continue reading