The blogosphere is currently up in arms over a recent Time article where they state that the virtual world of Second Life is one of the world's worst websites. Linden Lab's Torley Linden responded in the company's official blog stating: "saying “Second Life is a website” is as accurate as saying “This bowl of fruit is a banana” or “The color red is the rainbow”."
The article's dozens of other inaccuracies aside, this is a good example of something that is becoming more and more apparent: old media outlets are becoming more anachronistic by the day. A measurement of worth according to the unpublished criteria of an anonymous writer for a corporate held publication isn't worth the pixels it darkens on your screen.
Nick and I are coming to the realization that new media demands more of its sources simply because the public demands more of the new media. Articles like this one from Time about something the writer clearly knows nothing about can only be one of two things: a clever ruse to get people to go to the site, or an act of confusion and anger at a world that has passed them by.
Poor Sweden. First they were rudely