Taylor Swift’s Legal Rep Tries To Kill Critical Blog Post With Bogus Defamation, Copyright Claims | Techdirt 

As an initial matter, your letter misquotes the blog post by omitting the word “seem,” a term signaling that what follows is an opinion. This omission suggests that you well understand that the actual post is stating an opinion, protected by the Constitution. If you are going to write a letter accusing a person of misrepresentation, you should avoid misrepresenting what she wrote.

Slate’s Incorrect Claim That Apple Is Going to Share Face ID Data With Third Parties — Pixel Envy 

Fun fact: that Animoji link goes to another Slate article with the title “Three reasons why Apple’s iPhone X animojis are worrisome.” Those three reasons are: they are so good that users will be encouraged to use them! in public! with audio! and that can be annoying; that they are so good that they will become a selling tool for the iPhone X; and that the author gets confused about the difference between the Face ID feature and iOS’ ARKit APIs. A distinction which, as it turns out, Bonnington buries in her ostensibly panic-inducing article

Slate is a bad publication and this is shameful. If you think their articles are good, consider where they draw their line for investigative reporting versus click-bait. My guess is that every article they publish has similarly bad research behind it.

View all of the posts in the archive or subscribe to the feed for all posts.