Joshua Topolsky

Sorry world, but is this what you want your news to look like — and where you want it to come from — in the near future?

Ah yes, famed technology writer Bruce Emmerling. Famed technology writer Bruce Emmerling who can’t grammar or spell-check his work, and writes with a mastery of his subject akin to that of a 6th grader rushing to complete a paper on a book he hasn’t even read.

Honestly, this is what tops Google’s “news” results in science and technology? If that’s the case, we should be kinda worried. We’re quickly moving from citizen journalism (a dangerous / questionable proposition to begin with) to bot journalism… at least that’s how the above article reads.

Remember, you may be discerning, but most people aren’t, and most people will take a story like this — poorly sourced, poorly written — and digest it as fact. Now, there’s nothing particularly inaccurate about this piece of news — except that it’s written like garbage and essentially cites no sources. Plus, most media outlets reported on this last week, so why is it front page news now? And why does the article refer to “reviewers” when no one has actually used or reviewed the device? And who the fuck is Bruce Emmerling?

Examiner.com (and sites like it, hello Associated Content) should be closely watched by those who care about honest reporting and reliable sources. Here is a site that mixes random, unknown entries with aggregated (er, scraped) content from CBS and sites like ours. It is a dangerous and dishonest mixture which most people won’t catch.

I know, some of you will call foul here. Say I’m being hypocritical. Claim Engadget is guilty of all the offenses I’m griping about. But, of course, you’ll be wrong whether you believe it or not. Sure, we’re not a traditional media outlet — not the kind the world has known for hundreds of years — but we do have a stringent process for both reporting news and choosing the people on staff who write that news. It’s not a perfect process — nothing is — but it’s a process. I’m not sure the same can be said for Examiner.

Look, a shifting perception of media / journalism is one thing, but we’re starting to dismantle the basic structures in which we test the validity news, provide an editorial process, and at least pretend to care about some diligence and transparency. With arm-chair enthusiasts cranking out a tsunami of edit-free noise like the above story, being able to find the real story — or dry land — will soon seem like a distant memory.

Ryan mentioned this on his blog, and hopefully you’ve seen all of the Engadgets + PhoneScoop. I thought I’d join in and spread the word a tiny, tiny little bit. Yeah, we’re fighting The Man (aka Deutsche Telekom) big time. Join in if you like — besides, this color is really, really cool.

Update: Paul Miller and Phonearena.com have gotten in on the fun too. It’s a phenomenon.

Bret Michaels, The Joker

Zach Braff, The Douchebag Dating Anne Hathaway

It looks like we’ve got ourselves a real war of words over in Engadget comments.

After Ryan’s review of the new Zunes, our Microsoft friendly readership decided to have a group conniption fit and call for Mr. Block’s head, er… on a block.

Adding insult to their deep-level injuries, Walt Mossberg (an old bat, out of touch Apple fanboy no young computer user could possibly identify with — say the commenters) produced a similarly-minded review, much to the chagrin of our crossover forum readers from Zunerama, Zunescene, and of course, Microsoft Zune himself.

Most of the hate-filled rhetoric comes in the form of, “Ryan Block’s pockets are lined with Apple money,” “Ryan better leave Engadget while he still can,” and my favorite, “If Ryan Block can’t take the heat, he shouldn’t write for a blog.”

All truly educated and insightful points — if you’re 14 — but the fact remains that Ryan had every right to state his opinion (as did Mossberg), and I can’t think of two people more qualified to give an unbiased, honest opinion of a device. Ryan kills — and I mean kills — when it comes to getting scoops, news, and reviews for the readers of Engadget. He (and we, collectively) don’t do it just to big-up ourselves and get rich off of Apple kickbacks. We do it because we love technology, and love sharing that technology with readers (it doesn’t hurt that we get to play with new stuff before it’s out, either).

Throughout my life I’ve owned and used just about every computer platform you can think of, and when I joined Engadget a short while ago, I found the crew of people there to be some of the most open-minded and unbiased cats I’d ever met. The constant cries of fanyboyism (from both the Mac and PC camps) couldn’t be further from the truth. The truth is this: everyone at Engadget just wants the best technology, the best software, and the best user experience — and we want the same for our readers. If we take the time to write about a product, and the end result is negative, it’s because as super-dedicated nerds, we’ve been let down in some way.

Take a look at Ryan’s review of the iPhone — he flat-out trashes components of the device. Is that what you think an Apple fanboy’s review of the most important product the company has ever released should look like?

The hard truth for Microsoft sycophants to accept is this: Ballmer, Gates, and co. have not been in the habit of releasing very compelling or worthwhile technology, and that’s been the case for a long, long time. We get super excited when they announce new products, and we cover those products as fervently as we do anything else, but the problem doesn’t lie with our like or dislike for Microsoft as an entity — it lies with their inability to pull off consumer electronics with the kind of panache that Apple and others do. We’re not going to pretend to see something that isn’t there. Apple makes plenty of mistakes, but they make a lot of other good (or even great) decisions — and that’s what earns them praise from us… just like any other product that gets it right.

The venom from readers over these reviews not only seem overblown, misplaced, and unnecessary, but mean-spirited in a way that serves to dilute people’s arguments — to the point of making them downright meaningless. If you can’t get a handle on your emotions, figure out the truly important points, and make your case in a calm and intelligent manner, you don’t deserve the right to broadcast your cruel nonsense on Engadget.

Allowing people to comment on posts is a favor to the readers, not a God-given right for all internet citizens. We love hearing what people have to say, but that doesn’t mean we’ll tolerate any level of bullshit to keep a few fanatics happy.

But hey, that’s just my opinion.

A good, semi-long read. Interesting stuff.

Glad I don’t work at Balthazar.