Slate's ill-informed pageview whoring

Isn't Slate supposed to be above the level of "random Internet troll?" One wonders after reading the anti-Drupal rant by Slate Washington correspondent Chris Wilson, who first claims to explain "Why running the White House Web site on Drupal is a political disaster waiting to happen," then fails to do so. Wilson's complaints about Drupal are universally wrong in fact, but the kicker is that he finishes up with this quip:

"As a cautionary tale, the WhiteHouse.gov administrators might look to Recovery.gov, which is devoted to tracking stimulus spending. The site originally used Drupal but soon hired a private contractor—at a reported cost of $18 million—to rework the site. Perhaps the White House site's administrators have learned from their colleagues' mistakes."

Perhaps a smart reporter could find out where that money went, and why, and just who has what political connections, instead of tossing off a sloppy bit of pageview whoring and calling it a day.

Comments

Wait a minute

Slate uses Drupal for its blogs, right?

http://www.thebigmoney.com/

This page is calling drupal.js, doesn't that mean it's a drupal blog?

Slate uses Drupal

Yep.

Is the Morris site management system live?

Steve,

Here's a Drupal (and Django and Word Press) assessment that you may find less loaded:
http://birdhouse.org/blog/2009/11/11/drupal-or-django/
It's by the webmaster at the U.C. Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Twitter-style @usersnames are linked to their Twitter account pages.
  • Twitter-style #hashtags are linked to search.twitter.com.

More information about formatting options