UPDATED
Tom Evslin discusses the operations of some “Networked Citizen Journalists at Work” (including himself) as they peered into a small telecom company’s apparent business model. What prompted them? An item in David Pogue’s New York Times tech blog, which left some obvious unanswered questions. Tom writes:
What’s interesting is that the business model left unexposed in David Pogue’s post was successively peeled back by bloggers with subject matter expertise AND THEIR READERS. And all three bogs ended up linked together through their comments so those who were interested could learn or contribute to the story.
Crucially, he adds:
But note that this isn’t all you should expect from journalism. There’s a strong circumstantial case for how the company makes money (which is not a crime although somewhat deceptive). But none of us, professional or amateur, has pressed the company itself for a reply.
Update: David Pogue, in the comments, says he did press the company for an explanation.
on Oct 18th, 2006 at 4:44 am
The question, though, is whether or not this zeitgeist can be corralled–and if individuals are always going to want to have a part in helping journalists.
I simply like the aspect that someone at The Times was caught being a tad lazy. Nobody’s perfect 🙂
on Oct 18th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
“I simply like the aspect that someone at The Times was caught being a tad lazy. Nobody’s perfect.”
Man, you bloggers are a rough crowd.
Turns out the blogger quoted here, Tom Evslin, is wrong when he writes: “none of us, professional or amateur, has pressed the company itself for a reply.”
*I* pressed Futurephone for a reply. I asked its head honcho, Tom Doolin, to explain its business plan. In my initial posting, I reported what he told me (that once it’s built up a name, it will start charging).
Later, I ran Tom Evslin’s theory by him–about the arbitrage of terminating carrier rates. He refused to discuss it.
But that’s not the same thing as my being “lazy” or “not pressing the company for a reply.”
–Pogue
on Oct 19th, 2006 at 3:55 am
[…] Not so, as David Pogue noted in the comments in the original post I made about this, and to Tom himself. I have a lot of trust in both of these gentlemen. Today I have even more. […]