If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boing Boing)   Remember when CBS told CNET what to cover and not cover? Turns out that's company policy going forward   (boingboing.net) divider line 41
    More: Asinine, CBS, CNET, Columbia Journalism Review, technical writers, Jim Romenesko  
•       •       •

4001 clicks; posted to Geek » on 26 Jan 2013 at 2:07 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-01-26 11:27:47 AM
CNET is the new Engadget: Bought & sold by their corporate masters, they only exist to sell you crap now.
 
2013-01-26 11:32:01 AM
Well, I guess they can just go ahead and stop calling themselves a news outlet, then. Just an editorial soap box. I guess I should be upset or something. But, really, are there any actual news outlets anymore? Anyone who actually does investigative reporting? Anyone who isn't yellow?
 
2013-01-26 12:50:34 PM
In other news, CNET is still around. I don't believe I've visited that site in many years.
 
2013-01-26 12:59:43 PM
eh happens everywhere, NBC never reports on GE, ABC never reports on Disney...

/If only there was some way to stop the consolidation of media ownership
 
2013-01-26 01:37:04 PM
 
2013-01-26 02:37:23 PM

whither_apophis: eh happens everywhere, NBC never reports on GE, ABC never reports on Disney...

/If only there was some way to stop the consolidation of media ownership


The liberal media at work.

All of this started with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Clinton has ruined us in so many ways CBS and others would dare not report.
 
2013-01-26 02:44:00 PM
This is all just CONSPIRACY THEORY. So many people with ill-intent can't POSSIBLY be acting in concert in such a way.
 
2013-01-26 02:45:54 PM

whither_apophis: eh happens everywhere, NBC never reports on GE, ABC never reports on Disney...

/If only there was some way to stop the consolidation of media ownership


I think it is actually pretty funny that after years of being the butt of jokes on the show, GE's been running farewell ads for 30 Rock.
 
2013-01-26 02:55:34 PM

Nemo's Brother: The liberal media at work.

All of this started with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Clinton has ruined us in so many ways CBS and others would dare not report.


Is this sarcasm?
 
2013-01-26 03:00:20 PM

thamike: Nemo's Brother: The liberal media at work.

All of this started with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Clinton has ruined us in so many ways CBS and others would dare not report.

Is this sarcasm?


Either that or ignorance.
 
2013-01-26 03:10:19 PM

Nemo's Brother: The liberal media at work.


Like Fox News would report on FX
 
2013-01-26 03:10:34 PM

Duke Skymocker: thamike: Nemo's Brother: The liberal media at work.

All of this started with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Clinton has ruined us in so many ways CBS and others would dare not report.

Is this sarcasm?

Either that or ignorance.


I vote ignasm.

/Ew
 
2013-01-26 03:10:42 PM
CNET lost credibility when the site it ran, download.com (who for many years promised that the software they host is free of malware, trojans and other crap) started to use the same tricks other freeware companies use to install toolbars, malware, crappy anti-virus software and other crapware a last year.
 
2013-01-26 03:14:48 PM
It's really sad that CBS was once home to Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow.
 
2013-01-26 03:17:05 PM
[well-bye.jpg]
 
2013-01-26 03:17:29 PM

Duke Skymocker: thamike: Nemo's Brother: The liberal media at work.

All of this started with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Clinton has ruined us in so many ways CBS and others would dare not report.

Is this sarcasm?

Either that or ignorance.


Yeah, fark the Fairness Doctrine, that, although not completely dead by the time Clinton's presidency started, had the final nails driven into it by his administration.

Yes, I think we can all agree that we'd all be worse off if the Fairness Doctrine was still in effect today.
 
2013-01-26 04:48:36 PM
Oh please. The movie "Network" prophesized that news divisions would be compromised. This CNet thing should be the least bit surprising.
 
2013-01-26 04:52:16 PM

RoxtarRyan: CNET lost credibility when the site it ran, download.com (who for many years promised that the software they host is free of malware, trojans and other crap) started to use the same tricks other freeware companies use to install toolbars, malware, crappy anti-virus software and other crapware a last year.


Yup.
 
2013-01-26 04:54:12 PM

skinink: Oh please. The movie "Network" prophesized that news divisions would be compromised. This CNet thing should be the least bit surprising.


Lots of things that aren't surprising are still sad when they happen.
 
2013-01-26 04:55:51 PM
They should look at the BBC in the UK. Not only does (state owned) BBC frequently report bad news about the government (like exposing Blair faked the 'Iraq has WMDs' report) but in the recent Savile scandal we even had one BBC news programme running a critical report about another BBC news programme. That's editorial independence!
 
2013-01-26 04:58:11 PM

Goodfella: Yeah, fark the Fairness Doctrine, that, although not completely dead by the time Clinton's presidency started, had the final nails driven into it by his administration.

Yes, I think we can all agree that we'd all be worse off if the Fairness Doctrine was still in effect today.


OK, what do you think you're talking about?
 
2013-01-26 05:02:43 PM
and people talk about the decline of centralized news organizations as if it is a bad thing.
 
2013-01-26 05:16:12 PM
The loss of CNET's journalistic integrity would have been a huge scandal in 1998.
 
2013-01-26 05:21:52 PM
img834.imageshack.us

Gee, if only a wisecracking talking head had warned us about this in the mid 80's so we could have done something about it...
 
2013-01-26 05:29:47 PM
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57565974-93/cea-backs-dish-in-hopper- copyright-lawsuit/

interesting this was posted on cnet.
 
2013-01-26 07:30:38 PM
Never doubted their credibility until now. Sad day for CNET.
 
2013-01-26 07:31:16 PM
Honestly, I feel bad for the CNet staff. Not a great site, but I think they had decent stuff for the non-technical crowd. For any of them that have any ethics, this is going to be a tough time.
 
2013-01-26 07:41:43 PM

Honest Bender: Well, I guess they can just go ahead and stop calling themselves a news outlet, then. Just an editorial soap box. I guess I should be upset or something. But, really, are there any actual news outlets anymore? Anyone who actually does investigative reporting? Anyone who isn't yellow?


Sure!
 
2013-01-26 08:38:37 PM

BarkingUnicorn: Honest Bender: Well, I guess they can just go ahead and stop calling themselves a news outlet, then. Just an editorial soap box. I guess I should be upset or something. But, really, are there any actual news outlets anymore? Anyone who actually does investigative reporting? Anyone who isn't yellow?

Sure!


That was one of the few times I blindly clicked on a link and would have rather seen the goatse or Lemon Party sites.
 
2013-01-26 09:02:34 PM

Flint Ironstag: They should look at the BBC in the UK. Not only does (state owned) BBC frequently report bad news about the government (like exposing Blair faked the 'Iraq has WMDs' report) but in the recent Savile scandal we even had one BBC news programme running a critical report about another BBC news programme. That's editorial independence!


This.

However as a non-Brit, it always stunned me that everyone there was annoyed about having to pay their TV tax every year for the BBC. It's a freaking bargain if you ask me.
 
2013-01-26 11:26:51 PM
CNET will be going belly up.  Not that I was a huge follower of CNET, but will anyone think they have journalistic integrity going forward?
 
2013-01-26 11:42:50 PM
As much as I abhor CNET (for various reasons), this meddling sux even worse. Previously they were ignorant hacks; now they are bought and paid for stoogie ignorant hacks.

Just a quick list of things you can use to replace the various functions you might think you need from CNet:

Tech News: Google News
Product reviews: Google and Amazon
Software downloads: Google

There. Have fun.
 
2013-01-27 12:44:25 AM
i was looking for a free app the other day (forget what it was) and CNET came up in a google search. i read the review and was about to download it until i scrolled a bit further and saw all the comments that basically said "THIS WILL INSTALL MALWARE ON YOUR COMPUTER"
 
2013-01-27 06:12:46 AM
Yep, CNET is dead to me. I'm sorry, CNET writers, editors, and staff. But CBS screwed you, and screwed you hard. My hope is that those of you who disagree with CBS's interference will be able to find a new employer that at least pretends not to pimp you out like corporate whores.

Those CNET employees that have no problem with what CBS is doing should find that their qualifications will help them find top-flight jobs in either the food service or housekeeping industries.
 
2013-01-27 09:28:40 AM

ChubbyTiger: Honestly, I feel bad for the CNet staff. Not a great site, but I think they had decent stuff for the non-technical crowd. For any of them that have any ethics, this is going to be a tough time.


True story bro--An hour ago I woke from a nightmare in which I worked for TMZ, making $15K a year as their token "Empathy Guy."  I think it sums up why I subtracted myself from professional journalism altogether.
 
2013-01-27 10:17:47 AM

broadsword: Flint Ironstag: They should look at the BBC in the UK. Not only does (state owned) BBC frequently report bad news about the government (like exposing Blair faked the 'Iraq has WMDs' report) but in the recent Savile scandal we even had one BBC news programme running a critical report about another BBC news programme. That's editorial independence!

This.

However as a non-Brit, it always stunned me that everyone there was annoyed about having to pay their TV tax every year for the BBC. It's a freaking bargain if you ask me.


I think so. It's $19 a month and the BBC has four main channels, plus news channel, kids channel, dozens of radio stations, a website and their online iPlayer, all with no adverts.
Plus they can do things like have Clarkson on Top Gear say a car is utter crap without caring what any advertisers say.
Plus there are lots of commercial competitors if you want more choice, and the BBC cooperates with them, like for the Olympics the BBC gave Sky (the Murdoch owned satellite platform) a dozen live feeds so viewers could watch every event live, in full, with no adverts. They even had the opening ceremony with no commentary at all if you just wanted to watch it as is.

Radio 4 also has a lot of shows ( Like So Wrong It's Right with Charlie Brooker ) that often cross over onto TV.
 
2013-01-27 11:30:18 AM
you cant all delete cnet from the list of unbiased comprehensive tech news sites.
 
2013-01-27 11:43:53 AM
Who cares?

I stopped reading commercial tech sites years ago. If I want to know about a motherboard or a piece of hardware, I Google it, find forums and reviews where people who bought it are using it.

It's not just more honest, it's often more realistic. They didn't just try it out for half a day in a lab situation, they used it in anger and can tell you what's good and bad about it.
 
2013-01-28 10:44:21 AM

Snapper Carr: It's really sad that CBS was once home to Walter Cronkite and Edward R. Murrow.


Cronkite was as biased as anyone on TV today.
 
2013-01-28 01:59:22 PM
broadsword: Flint Ironstag: They should look at the BBC in the UK. Not only does (state owned) BBC frequently report bad news about the government (like exposing Blair faked the 'Iraq has WMDs' report) but in the recent Savile scandal we even had one BBC news programme running a critical report about another BBC news programme. That's editorial independence!

This.

However as a non-Brit, it always stunned me that everyone there was annoyed about having to pay their TV tax every year for the BBC. It's a freaking bargain if you ask me.

I think so. It's $19 a month and the BBC has four main channels, plus news channel, kids channel, dozens of radio stations, a website and their online iPlayer, all with no adverts.
Plus they can do things like have Clarkson on Top Gear say a car is utter crap without caring what any advertisers say.
Plus there are lots of commercial competitors if you want more choice, and the BBC cooperates with them, like for the Olympics the BBC gave Sky (the Murdoch owned satellite platform) a dozen live feeds so viewers could watch every event live, in full, with no adverts. They even had the opening ceremony with no commentary at all if you just wanted to watch it as is.

Radio 4 also has a lot of shows ( Like So Wrong It's Right with Charlie Brooker ) that often cross over onto TV.


Absolutely nobody in Britain resents paying the BBC licence fee apart from a few wingnuts.

The only reason you think that is because the rest of the right wing media - who are in competition for the BBC for media eyeballs - make it their business to slag it off at every opportunity (cf Daily Mail, Murdoch-owned Sun etc).

The BBC is awesome. About the only thing left in Britain to be proud of (well, that and the pork scratchings)
 
2013-01-28 05:18:48 PM

farkeruk: Who cares?

I stopped reading commercial tech sites years ago. If I want to know about a motherboard or a piece of hardware, I Google it, find forums and reviews where people who bought it are using it.

It's not just more honest, it's often more realistic. They didn't just try it out for half a day in a lab situation, they used it in anger and can tell you what's good and bad about it.


That kind of breaks down when you realize that companies hire shills to go through and write good reviews of their products.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report