suggestion to Brian Chen of Wired.com

To Brian Chen of Wired.com: the polite thing to do, after mis-representing two sources (Nobi Hayashi and Daiji Hirata) whom you have never met, would be to APOLOGIZE and fix the mess.
This “Here’s why I didn’t ‘screw up’ and nothing is ‘inaccurate’:” stuff on your Tumblelog is a bunch of spin trying to justify piss-poor reporting.
If you think anyone in technology in Japan will take any questions from you in the future after this kind of bridge-burning, you’re sadly mistaken.
Turning off comments on that particular Wired.com article was also weak, not to mention the fact that your tumblelog has no comments either.

One comment on “suggestion to Brian Chen of Wired.com
  1. One of the (revised with date) snippets:
    “Take for example Nobi Hayashi, a journalist and author of Steve Jobs: The Greatest Creative Director. His cellular weapon of choice when he spoke to Wired.com June 2008? A Panasonic P905i”
    Regarding his “this isn’t inaccurate” defense:
    “1. The article I pulled Nobi’s quote from was published June 2008. So he had a phone more advanced in features than the iPhone in June 2008. Doesn’t that further prove the point that the Japanese are ahead of their time, and the iPhone is outdated by comparison?”
    =============================================
    No, it doesn’t. There are lots of things that the iPhone does that the P905 can’t do that Brian didn’t bother to compare. Apples and Oranges, not superior vs inferior. I think the reason that Brian used the P905 reference (sans date in the original article) was to make the point that even an Apple biographer won’t use an iPhone. The real reason that the Japanese Apple biographer wasn’t using an iPhone in June 2008 is because the iPhone wasn’t available in Japan until July 2008.
    Brian claims that “a link to the older story suffices — and I provided that in the pre-edited story,” but the links are provided as “Related Links,” not SOURCES. And in journalism, Brian, just because you provide the source doesn’t mean you have a license to distort.
    Brian claims:
    “A few words about transparency. I announced my edits of the story on Twitter. And yet people were calling me out to be even more transparent.”
    The proper place to announce edits is directly with the article, not on a completely different medium that most people who read the original article are unlikely to check. The fact that there IS an edit listed underneath the blog entry (“Updated 10:30 a.m. Friday: Added a quote …”) is deceiving because it makes readers think this is the only update/edit that occurred. VERY DISINGENUOUS.
    If people saw how many edits ACTUALLY occurred after publication on the same page as the article, people would question the quality of Brian’s journalism. And he knows it, which is why he didn’t do that.
    Finally, whining about a few unfortunate racist attacks to distract people from the (much much larger) core non-racist criticism of his journalism ethics? Lame.
    I can go on, but basically Gen Kanai is spot on.