S|A: "Most tech sites don't know what they're talking about"

[NTMBK]

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/05/20/amds-volcanic-islands-architecture/

Lol, just lol. Reminds me of our own ridiculous forum post about the same "leak"...

 

[Olikan]

Lol, just lol. Reminds me of our own ridiculous forum post about the same "leak"...

To be fair.... forums users are, many of them, don't actually work or understand what they saw... just a bunch of fanboys
...OMG tesselation OMG!!!

but really, really sad, is the tech sites... i easily spotted that the leak wasn't about a gpu arq... the shader count was incorrect, LOL at 16 cpu-like cores and other silly stuffs...

 

[Nintendesert]

I'm not the least bit surprised when I see the list of tech sites that ran with it.

 

[blastingcap]

Anything for pagehits.

 

[tential]

Wow... I read that tomshardware one. I was skeptical though when it said "seems the 8000 series will be skipped entirely". I just didn't understand the complete 360. AMD says it's a rebrand, then all of a sudden skips the whole series entirely? Made no sense to me.

 

[Cloudfire777]

LOL, Charlie should keep his mouth shut.
Intel engineer say they visit his site to get something to laugh about. That says a lot...

 

[Stuka87]

While I do not think that Semi Accurate is a reputable site, the sites that ran the AMD story should be ashamed. How on earth could you think that was real? We disproved it here on these forums quickly. Somebody who's job is to write about tech for a living should have easily been able to determine the same thing.

 

[Olikan]

LOL, Charlie should keep his mouth shut.
Intel engineer say they visit his site to get something to laugh about. That says a lot...

well, someone at amd should have laughed REALLY hard when he/she saw the leak

... heck, im a newbie civil engineer and i am pointing fingers and laughing at them

 

[Cloudfire777]

While I do not think that Semi Accurate is a reputable site, the sites that ran the AMD story should be ashamed. How on earth could you think that was real? We disproved it here on these forums quickly. Somebody who's job is to write about tech for a living should have easily been able to determine the same thing.

Many techsites only do copy/paste from the rumor site and call it a day. I think many of them try to make an article as quick as they can to be one of the first with the story to get most hits from visitors. Its excuse though, just lazy work

 

[Elixer]

This comes as a shock to no one.
All they care about is page hits, doesn't matter if story is true or not.
Heck even "legit" sites get bribed/threatened based on past reviews, and they are not allowed to "talk bad" about certain things, or else they will be put on a black list, and they won't get any free samples in the future.

 

[hawtdawg]

No one is even pretending that they'll have 20nm ready untill next year anyway. I dont know why so many people were really thinking wed see something like that tbis year.

 

[3DVagabond]

The same s/a forum member posted his "prediction" of what Tahiti would be and a few months later it was all over the webs as leaked info. If anyone is laughing, it'll be him.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Oh the irony from SA!

But again , Charlie wins again. Now foolish people click his site for more views and more revenue.

 

[R0H1T]

Oh the irony from SA!

But again , Charlie wins again. Now foolish people click his site for more views and more revenue.

Ain't that the point of tabloid journalism

In all seriousness though I take every rumor with a grain of salt, not dismissing them outright, then weigh the possible options of it being possible/feasible in that order & lastly search for hard evidence &/or reliable sources to check if its been validated or invalidated ! I say this because alot of posters on this forum outrightly‎ dismiss every other rumor & demand hard evidence for it, wouldn't it be better to try & invalidate it yourself or wait for more info to surface ?

Again I'm not intending this to be taken out of context or to target any number of individuals, just a general observation IMHO ()

 

[Haserath]

Oh the irony from SA!

But again , Charlie wins again. Now foolish people click his site for more views and more revenue.

The site relies on subscriptions now. No ads.

 

[lagokc]

While the fake leak looks like an honest mistake, dailytech REALLY could use a competent science editor to proofread their stories. I don't mean some sort of career scientist, anyone that's passed highschool chemistry and physics would do.

 

[dawp]

It's not limited to tech sites, a lot of 'news' sites do the exact same thing. It's more of 'we have to publish this before anyone else' mentality and damn the accuracy. and most will not print a correction.

 

[imaheadcase]

The title reminds of HardOCP "reviewer". Basicly he has the "I'm holier than everyone else" attitude. Yet still uses the worse graphics in reviews with the worse way to show performance.

 

[Black Octagon]

S|A: "Most tech sites don't know what they're talking about"

Since this thread seems to (indirectly) be about good journalism, I feel compelled to point out that the SemiAccurate article does not actually contain the phrase "Most tech sites don't know what they're talking about." That's the OP paraphrasing, rather than quoting, the article.

Moreover, "much of the tech press" is not the same as "most tech sites." And, despite the article's opening sentence, the author's main gripe appears to be tech journalists' failure to check information, verify sources and investigate hunches (rather than them not knowing what they're talking about).

Finally, to this date I have serious doubts as to whether WCCFTech is a bona fide member of the "press" rather than a glorified blog of half-truths and assorted nonsense.

Blargh! I'm old

 

[NTMBK]

Since this thread seems to (indirectly) be about good journalism, I feel compelled to point out that the SemiAccurate article does not actually contain the phrase "Most tech sites don't know what they're talking about." That's the OP paraphrasing, rather than quoting, the article.

Hehe, I'm glad someone picked up on that. Would have been a bit depressing if none of you checked your facts...

 

[lagokc]

It's not limited to tech sites, a lot of 'news' sites do the exact same thing. It's more of 'we have to publish this before anyone else' mentality and damn the accuracy. and most will not print a correction.

I thought that's one of the things they teach in Journalism school? That the emotional impact of the story is important, the accuracy of the information is not.

 

[Janek1]

ok lol