From: "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+@CMU.EDU>
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 02:57:15 +0800
To: stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Bashing "Wired"
In-Reply-To: <199606220824.BAA26718@toad.com>
Message-ID: <sln00c200YUwI2kng6@andrew.cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 22-Jun-96 Re: FW: Bashing "Wired" by
Bill Stewart@ix.netcom.c 
> At 09:32 AM 6/21/96 -0700, Tim May wrote:
> >And notice that increasingly the "journalists" are the quoted thinkers and
> >strategists in important areas? Someone majors in English, starts writing
> >for "Netizen" or "HotWired," and the next thing you know they're debating
> >crypto policy with Conrad Burns and Dorothy Denning. We're in an age where
> >the medium truly is the message
>  
> You don't think the rest of the press is truly any better, do you?
> At least on the net, you get to see the horse's mouth on a bad day,
> and sometimes you can even meet the people and track down the rumors 
> hat eventually become headlines, and pull the wool over your own eyes.

Bashing Wired is, in fact, a bit tired itself. I recommend checking out
<http://www.howtired.com/> for one treatment.

Now I'm no fan of Katz's front-pager -- I thought it maundered about and
was twice as long as it needed to be. But folks who write for Wired like
Jim Warren, Brock Meeks, and Mike Godwin (and Katz) do hang out online,
basically know what's going on, and are approachable.

Somehow, I suspect that cypherpunks aren't Wired's target audience...

-Declan