Regarding my previous entry about blogcritics changing my article title without notifying me, I received an explanation:
"This was all brought to a head when a directly involved party contested aspects of the article, especially the tone of the title. Hence the change."
In other words, Sun or someone else involved made a request (probably through their attorney) and blogcritics caved rather than face legal action. Obviously, the first amendment doesn't mean much there.
*sigh* Why is the world full of cowards? Obviously, integrity and standing by your writers and the truth aren't values that blogcritics upholds.
"This was all brought to a head when a directly involved party contested aspects of the article, especially the tone of the title. Hence the change."
In other words, Sun or someone else involved made a request (probably through their attorney) and blogcritics caved rather than face legal action. Obviously, the first amendment doesn't mean much there.
*sigh* Why is the world full of cowards? Obviously, integrity and standing by your writers and the truth aren't values that blogcritics upholds.
- Location:Home
- Mood:
quixotic - Music:None




Comments
Money talks....
It's a non paying gig. But they have such a large readership (currently 50,000 hits per day), It's a good way to get back in front of many eyeballs.