[citation][nom]Halcyon[/nom]Harsh. Not defending but perhaps something more constructive is in order?[/citation]
On the off chance that Kevin Parrish actually reads these comments, i'd provide this constructive criticism. This is a semi-legitimate tech news site, I would suggest avoiding internet slang (parrish) or biased, unbacked "Opinion" articles (Greuner).
I would say write as unbiased an article as possible. Resist the urge to spruce it up by shoehorning your opinion that they're "trolling" or that this is in any way bad business ethics because not only are you ruining your own journalistic integrity by spinning it the way you yourself see it, but you are taking away the neutrality needed for readers to form their own opinions.
If you can't separate yourself from the article while writing it, that's a conflict of interests, and if that's a big no-no in all other professions, why should internet journalism be excluded?
Also, while i'm on the topic, all writers for toms' and it's sister sites should be required to proofread their work before submission, erroneous spelling and grammar should not be acceptable when there are so many tools and resources that can be used to prevent it. A typo in a major news site's article would be a huge gaffe, yet they appear in every other article on toms' sites.
I'm not a writer, i'm not a journalist, I don't get paid to do this, but i do enjoy reading tech articles on toms' as of late. I always knew the writing here was less than professional at times, it wasn't until i started reading the articles at sites like CIO (dot com)
that i realized how unacceptable this is.
Just my two cents.