Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: open
Not least for the baby's sake.
And anyway, we can always start up a new publication called "The Principal" with the tagline: "Ticking off the Register".
Hopefully we support the king because he runs the country well and when he doesn't then we criticise him to make sure that he stops veering off in the wrong direction.
And yes it is possible to criticise the king and still think he's a better alternative than any of the other warring pretenders. Because everything isn't black and white, is it?
However, Andrew strikes me as someone who:
- often doesn't let facts get in the way of his ranting
- rants just for the sake of ranting
- fails to actually balance his rants with ANYTHING positive to say
- gets boring pretty fast
If I wanted to read one-note-wonders, I'd read "policy papers" from far-right or far-left political pundits.
Orlowski is trying to be the Howard Stern of Journalism. It's no so much that Google is bad or evil, rather that many people think that Google is good and God. It's controversy for controversy's sake - for the sake of getting attention. He is well known only because he takes a minority viewpoint. Like Stern, it could very well be that the people that dislike him are more loyal readers than those that agree with his viewpoints.
If he wrote articles about how good Google is, would anyone care?