There was a bit of a slashvertisement [1, 2] in you-know-where yesterday. It was for Microsoft in automobiles. Given the state of SourceForge, it's hard not to think about money trails. One of the reasons Jimmy Wales refused to accept advertising in Wikipedia (despite an estimated value of $100 million) is that trust then erodes. With SourceForge, such loss of trust has already occurred and it affects sister sites, too. There was money on the table.
“Can't people tell the difference between advertisements and actual stories/reports?”Lastly, adds our reader: "Linux and the others are ahead and, as usual, it is Microsoft that is the poor immitation. From what I gather GM and VW use linux and VW even contributes to kernel development, at least at the device driver level."
Another example of paid-for Microsoft PR that journalists foolishly spread for free is that "Mojave" story. Can't people tell the difference between advertisements and actual stories/reports? This sometimes boils down to interests, and the money which sits there on the table. ⬆
"The idea that Bill Gates has appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place."
--Douglas Adams
Comments
mpz
2008-07-30 12:41:57
On the other hand, if they fail to keep their independence, then they will lose users and eventually money. Although they may do some damage along the way. Technology and game sites seem to be most prone to this - or maybe that is because those are the ones I tend to read.
Unfortunately of course there are many more ms 'fanbois' out there than otherwise -- who don't see any problem and in fact may be attracted to such marketing on a blog roll (hell, even groklaw has been spruiking MS PR lately if not intentionally), so maybe it is just a deliberate tactic to gain users. And getting the more rabid fanbois (e.g. apple, etc) riled up never hurt a site's traffic too much did it?