Back in the day, mainstream tech publications were notorious for taking biased, inaccurate, vendor-produced press releases and publishing them as original articles without even a modicum of fact-checking. It’s one of the reasons tech blogs have done so well and why tech rags have tanked so quickly: when offered two separate biased and inaccurate media outlets (tech rags vs. blogs), the strong preference is toward the one that’s not a blatant PR delivery device; or, when both are blatant PR delivery devices, whichever one has the least number of punch-the-monkey style adverts running along the banner.
I don’t often read tech rags anymore. Every once in a while, though, you see an article from some rag make its way around the blogs just so everyone can doodoo on it. And that’s kind of nice, really.
Take this InfoWorld piece on Java performance improvements, for instance:
Scripting languages are ideal for smaller programs but Java is the choice for larger programs, he said. “As your program grows in size, the lack of strong typing basically kills your ability to handle a very large program and so you don’t find the million-line Perl program,” he said. One-million-line Java programs are plentiful, Click said. Strong typing refers to the capability of knowing the type of memory objects.
If anyone feels it necessary, we can go through the motions of addressing the individual issues presented in the aforementioned paragraph (i.e., doodoo on it), along with the rest of the article, in the comments. (Chromatic has already reproved much of it, although much too politely for my taste.)
Me? I’ve reached a stage of acceptance with this kind of lazy hack work and no longer feel the inclination to offer a rebuttal. It’s just no fun doodooing on something for accuracy knowing all along that the people who published it never made accuracy a priority in the first place.
That being said, there are a few things the tech press holds dear and are therefore more appropriate for criticism, like copy-editing:
Java Virtual Machines and garbage collection, for example, have improved and Java itself has come along way, the technologists argued.
Now that is a goddam crying shame. Is there anything the tech press does better than blogs at this point?
Discuss
I’m surprised you’re picking on InfoWorld. Here’s what InfoWorld said in their end-of-year summary of underrepresented tech stories: http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/12/28/52FE-underreported-java_1.html
“Now that Java is no longer the unchallenged champ for Internet-delivered apps, it makes sense for companies to find programmers who are skilled in the new languages. If you’re a Java developer, now’s the time to invest in new skills.”
(There’s a lot more Java bashing, Rails hyping, WS-* criticing, Save XP campaign, etc, just browse through the archives)
And the article you pointed to is an event summary. It’s no different from Engadget live blogging an Apple event, or the posts that follow a DHH keynote at RailsConf. Quote the highlights, reflect on them later.
The only tech publication I still read is InfoWorld, because they actually do have a spine, they’re not afraid to express an original thought or opinion, and dismiss vendor mouth pieces.
— Assaf on Wednesday, April 02, 2008 at 02:11 PM #
Assaf: thanks for the push-back. I was kind of shooting for a nice, quiet day of mindless bashing, but whatever ;)
I dunno, looks pretty bad to me: Application Development, Open Source, and Networking archives. I don’t have the stomach to link to the SOA category. The Special Reports section seems to revolve around Vista, which I’m not very interested in, personally, but that’s not the point.
I don’t have a problem with Java/SOA/.NET/whatever coverage, I just don’t see why the articles covering Java need to inaccurately portray everything else. The “scripting language aren’t strongly typed” argument needs to go (it’s false, 90% of the time) or be revised to use correct terminology. The subjective arguments (LOC based non-sense) would be easily challenged by any second year CS student (I hope).
The articles covering my pet technologies: Python, Ruby, Rails, other dynamic languages, XP (which I don’t especially care about), web arch, REST, etc. should be kept to same standard. If an article on REST includes factual inaccuracies about SOAP, they should be taken out and subjective opinions should be balanced.
Out of curiosity, how can you tell it’s an event summary? I’d feel kind of bad if it’s just Paul Krill live-blogging but it sure looks like a full-blown article to me. Are you drawing that conclusion based on the opening sentence (“technologists stressed Wednesday during a presentation at TheServerSide Java Symposium in Las Vegas”) or is there something obvious I’ve missed?
I’ve actually been a fan of InfoWorld in the past but mostly due to Jon Udel’s old blog. I’m not sure I’ve ever appreciated the print version of the rag all that much, except maybe when Jon was introducing the world to del.icio.us and whatnot.
At any rate, thanks for the comment, Assaf. I don’t see you around here enough anymore ;)
— Ryan Tomayko on Wednesday, April 02, 2008 at 03:03 PM #
I read Paul Krill regularly, he does a lot of these post-event notes. They’re usually really good: cover the major talking points, variety of opinions, well summarized, and clear he’s talking to developers, not PR shrills.
I definitely have issue with the statements and half-truths made by some of the speakers, but that’s a separate issue. I wanted to know what people attending the events heard, and that’s exactly what I got.
Obviously the subjects they cover are for general interest, can’t blame them for talking about .Net or IBM mainframes, neither of which I care for. The coverage is pretty good, though. The REST/SOAP discussion was well balanced (though, not very technical). Yes, it was critical, but also factual, which is more than I can say about most blog posts touching this subject. Same with Ruby vs Java, and they pay more attention to Python than your average tech magazine.
I don’t agree with everything they say, but on average, they rank better (coverage and lack of bias) than what I’m reading on blogs.
And I do promise to come back, I read regularly, just don’t always have the time to comment.
— Assaf on Wednesday, April 02, 2008 at 08:21 PM #
Leave a comment