[usmannk]

> I'm surprised Forbes would publish it

Unfortunately much of Forbes has become nothing but a fancy blog, very much akin to Business Insider. With the amount of "contributors" posting to the site nowadays the Forbes name in the URL isn't exactly a positive indicator, if not a warning sign.

[josephjrobison]

Was Forbes ever a respectable publication though? I ask with all sincerity. It seems their volume is super high and that's about it, so they get name recognition from repetition, not sure what else from.

[coliveira]

Opinions vary, but I never though of Forbes as respectable. They are in the "business porn" industry, i.e., uncritically presenting the latest and greatest business moves so the masses will dream about what the rich are doing.

[vpribish]

yeah, it used to be. It's literally 100 years old. As recently as in the 80's/90's it was a medium weight business magazine. Some time in the last 5 or so years it hollowed out and is just a republishing platform. They have a lot of algorithmically-generated articles on the stock market - this made me start blocking them. They are worthless trash now.

[cvsh]

I'm not sure, but I'm sure they aren't now. I'm actually kind of thankful for all the horse shit they throw up before allowing you to actually view an article, because it's almost always effective at fizzling out the curiousity gap and leading me to close the page in exasperation. It's gotten to the point where whenever I see I opened a Forbes article in a new tab I just automatically roll my eyes and close it, like a Pavlovian response.

[PacketPaul]

Yes. Like the Bruno Mars song says "I want to be on the cover of Forbes magazine...". At one time that was a big deal.

[lr4444lr]

You're charitable. I had always chalked that up to Bruno Mars not know what the hell he was talking about.

[gruez]

basically, forbes.com/sites/... = trash