Editorial responsibility - somebody got reamed
So 2 days ago a post was created with sensationalism at it's core. Click baity tittle and all.
Of course I'm talking about "Skype attempts to whitewash wiretap concerns by announcing features etc etc".
NOTICE: the title has been changed (but the URL reveals it's true title) and the post has been updated.
The writer assumes that in announcing a new feature or capability, Skype is really just trying to get people's attention away from PRISM. I probably don't know as much as the writer about PRISM, but what I do know is that other companies that were listed as being somehow involved with PRISM have announced features or devices and the focus of the announcement isn't treated the way this Skype announcement was.
Can you imagine "Apple attempts to whitewash privacy concerns by announcing iPhone 5S"?
That article was a complete DISGRACE to TheVerge. Truly reveals a writer's lack of devotion to technology and his "averageness". I often like to imagine that the writers aren't just writers and are as passionate about technology as much as we fans are. I guess in this case it isn't so.
I wonder what goes through the writer's head when they are creating and later post such a sensationalist piece? I wonder if he was told to write it that way?
I wonder if when he wakes up the first thing he does is check TheVerge and catch up on what's going on while getting ready for work. I know that's what I do.
CHERISH that TheVerge. DON'T LOSE ME, there are other options vying for my attention.
Sincerely, one of your readers