|
|
|
|
|
|
by fit2rule
4132 days ago
|
|
|
PR piece: embarrassing.
Hit piece: equally embarrassing. Why are the critical articles more appealing in this case? Is there some inherent desire to see the criticism turn out to be true which is greater than the desire to see the criticism turn out to be unfounded? |
|
|
The problem for Yahoo is that, at the moment, the critical articles are very dense in facts. Take a look at things like this for an example:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2015/03/01/yahoos-in...
As much as you can disagree with the content of this article, it's hard to argue that it's as light and fluffy as the PR piece served up by Levy.
Regarding Carlson's stuff on Yahoo, you might disagree with some of his opinions. You might even think his book is a hit piece. But, at the very least, it's a well-researched hit piece.
Levy only seemed to speak with Yahoo PR and republish their opinions directly. I don't think any reasonable reader could assume that Carlson only spoke to a hedge fund manager short on Yahoo.