Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
Music

Submission + - Slashdot Reverses Facts about Radiohead 1

Apro+im writes: The popular news aggregation website, Slashdot today reported that the new Radiohead album, In Rainbows was pirated more than it was procured via legitimate means, setting off a flurry of speculation on their online discussion board as to the implications of this "fact". Strangely overlooked in much of the discussion, however, was the fact that the article they linked contained the exact opposite information, stating:

"The file was downloaded about 100,000 more times each day — adding up to more than 500,000 total illegal downloads. That's less than the 1.2 million legitimate online sales of the album reported by the British Web site Gigwise.com"
Questions about what this implies about Slashdot's editorial practices and readership remain unanswered.
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashdot Reverses Facts about Radiohead

Comments Filter:
  • Maybe we should have a poll to find out how many /. readers ever actually check the links and how many just assume its accurate because its on Slashdot.

    I would fall in the latter category. When I read that it was pirated more, I just assumed it was true. Partly because I read it here, and partly because if it were true it wouldn't be much of a surprise.

    Here's another good one: How many /. readers are Radiohead fans? Of those who are fans, how many paid for it? How much did they contribute? If I buy

Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz

Working...