You know, various conservative webloggers take joy in skewering the New York Times on a daily basis. Josh Marshall commented brilliantly on this phenomenon the other day, criticizing weblog triumphalism. It’s a hell of a lot easier to publish a blog and throw rocks at specific mistakes (or more often, the alleged political agenda of the writers) from the Times than it is to publish a daily paper that covers as much of what’s going on in the world as is feasible. That said, long time readers will know that I detest I realize that they cover the whole computer industry and that they have ridiculously short deadlines, but I just can’t resist mocking them for their obvious errors and poor writing. I generally become most upset when I go there looking for real information and find some poorly written piece of crap that contains as much nonsense as actual fact. For example, I read that Mozilla 1.2 had to be pulled due to a JavaScript error, and there’s a story on the problem. The article doesn’t really explain the problem, says that tabbed browsing is a 1.2 feature, associates dynamic HTML mainly with advertisements, and exhibits a level of general cluelessness that’s downright depressing. The sad thing is, I didn’t expect any better.