I tend to read articles and assume that the writer did their homework and included some effort and thought. Every once in a while I know the story before reading the writer's version of reality. When I know the story it's often sad and amazing to see what a journalist publishes. I think it's often laziness that leads to use of cliche thought instead of accurate research. Here's Shoe's side of the story: http://www.shoemoney.com/2006/12/07/forbes-article/ If you visit the story on Forbe's site, please observe how thin, cliche, and simple minded the content is and how much space on the page is used for ads. By the way, they advertise through Adwords. Evil Garbitragers!!
shrug. the more you're actually involved in a story that's covered the more you realize how often they're hilariously off the mark. anyone who's remotely involved in this industry can see the whole article's absolutely insane. paid 25$ a click on adsense? uh, k.
I know this kind of stuff goes on all the time.....If the once might NY times can have lazy and lying reporters then so can Forbes...I bet the reporter that did the story does not know anything about Google, Adsense, Adwords or Affiliate Programs. Does anyone remember the AP photographer who photoshopped some photos of Lebanon then sending it to his editor?