Exclusive: Microsoft and Nokias Plans for Marketing Windows Phone in 2012.

I dont want to reveal more, and Ive been sitting on this information for weeks so that Microsoft can make its big announcement at CES this coming week. But with these leaks, as with the equally inaccurate LTE leaks last week, I felt the need to set the record straight. The way tech blogs work these days is that any information, no matter how inaccurate, is simply parroted between all the gadget blogs and then, inevitably, to the increasingly lazy mainstream news as well. So lets at least get it right.

Mr Thurrott, perhaps if you didn’t sit on stories for so long other people wouldn’t break them. Your responsibility is to your audience, not Microsoft’s CES launch plans.

8 thoughts on “Thurrott Comes Clean

  1. Matt,

    At the same time I would think that if Paul were to just “tell all”, he wouldn’t have his information source for very long.

    I think this access in the end does help his readers since MS will give him pre-release product access before anyone else – giving him time to do a good review of new Microsoft software.

    1. Journalists can push sources, be honest and harsh, and still maintain them. Kara Swisher is a great example of this.

      If MS is not running a tight ship, meaning things are leaking anyway, they’re not really holding up their end of the bargain they made when asking Paul to sit on something until their official announcement.

      By the same token, Paul shouldn’t whine and try to tack an “Exclusive” header on his too-late stories when other journalists use the best sources they have to get information to their audience as soon as possible. He did a good thing releasing (he believes) correct information, but he should have done it first, not as a reaction to someone else.

  2. In all fairness, he also has to answer to his sources. If he’s provided confidential information in exchange for him agreeing to “sit on it” until a specific date, it does him no good to disregard his end of the deal. If he isn’t trustworthy to his sources, he’ll be stuck “speculating” like everyone else.

  3. I’m no Paul Thurrott defender or apologist. But let’s just say for argument Paul got his information from someone who shouldn’t have shared it, or maybe he got it under NDA and now he’s a giddy schoolgirl about sharing it. That’s not being irresponsible to his audience.

    It might be unseemly and undignified, but it’s not a crime.

  4. His “responsibility” might also be to his non-disclosure agreements. Microsoft use Paul a lot for slipping information to the public, and often has NDAs in place.

  5. Seriously? Your kick someone because they believe a little bit in integrity? If more (alleged) journalists and bloggers sat on stories a little longer, they would have the time to get the information right, instead of repeating the same junk that is diluting the overall reporting. The current state of affairs leaves an increasing number of people in the dark. They just don’t know it…

    Look, I’m not saying I’m Thurrott fan, but he believes his responsibility is to get the RIGHT story for HIS audience. And if that means getting a company to TRUST him with information, well, that’s his call, not yours.

    Unfortunately, your attitude on the matter shows that you are fine with giving out inaccurate information. That means YOUR audience needs to spend more time filtering your output. I know I will.