

Station responds after reporting on girl who quit college because of Linux - chris11
http://addins.wkowtv.com/blogs/behindthenews/archives/84

======
ShabbyDoo
Sadly, neither of the two blog entries related to the story explained why the
student was allowed to claim without any investigation that not having a
Windows PC forced her to drop out of college. Given that a $200 laptop (or $50
desktop) likely would have been sufficient to get through school, was it
really rational for this woman to put off her life for a year, even if she had
to buy an extra computer? The whole thing sounded like an excuse for mom and
dad.

------
adbachman
This just warms the heart.

I have to side with the reporter here. From the comments it looks like they're
getting a lot of digg and reddit traffic (hell of a lot). It serves as a
strong reminder of why I left those sites a long time ago.

<http://xkcd.com/386/>

------
petercooper
The problem with the initial news report was not that the woman just couldn't
figure out Linux, it's that the news outlet _took sides._ Instead of bothering
to research their story, they instead came to the immediate conclusion that
Ubuntu is some sort of shady ersatz Windows that doesn't work. That's not the
job of a news outlet and _was_ shoddy journalism.

~~~
anamax
> The problem with .... it's that the news outlet took sides. Instead of
> bothering to research their story, .... That's not the job of a news outlet
> and was shoddy journalism.

"Taking sides" and "inadequate research" is how news outlets typically work.
Moreover, it's pretty much the only possible outcome of "change the world
journalism", the dominant form these days.

In short, the news outlet did its job and it's typical journalism.

Of course, maybe they know what they're talking about on subjects that you
don't know.

~~~
petercooper
_"Taking sides" and "inadequate research" is how news outlets typically work.
[..] In short, the news outlet did its job and it's typical journalism._

You must be from the US. That is not good journalism and not what standard
journalistic practice mandates. Sadly poor research in the media does seem to
be predominant in the US media.

The news outlet did not do its job unless its job was solely to rile up its
local readership. Perhaps they do consider that their job - it's a common
issue with local news outlets - but that's not how journalism is supposed to
operate.

 _Of course, maybe they know what they're talking about on subjects that you
don't know._

Maybe they do, but if they're not honest about what they do and do not know,
then you have no basis on which to trust anything they say.

