Tech Journalism In 4 Tweets

So Brad Sams puts up a story, Daniel Rubino from a rival site questions his sources publicly, then Rubino “confirms” that Sams did not make it up (which is a POS move), and finally Rubino puts up article that just says what Brad Sams said to begin with.

Was there nothing else worth covering?

Here ya go, this is what mclaren ‘3d’ touch, looked like. https://t.co/YRowAzsuEq pic.twitter.com/ChGoRIcLIp

— Brad Sams (@bdsams) April 28, 2016

@bdsams I was under the impression McLaren tech was Nokia’s, not Microsoft Research. Could be wrong, but that’s what I had heard.

— Daniel Rubino ✘ (@Daniel_Rubino) April 28, 2016

Just got confirmation. McLaren/Nokia tech *was* different from MS Research. Not the same. Similar, but Nokia used different methods.

— Daniel Rubino ✘ (@Daniel_Rubino) April 28, 2016

New Microsoft Research video shows 3D touch tech similar to the canceled McLaren https://t.co/8bbaT1hwMm pic.twitter.com/W9ocZvYVnf

— Windows Central (@windowscentral) April 28, 2016