yes, but coming from the WSJ which is a lot more widely read by policymakers than, say, TechCrunch this gives the issue a lot more coverage which is probably the right way to think about how it can be addressed by those with the power to address it.

Exactly. It's fluff to us, but it's news to policymakers. It reminds me of a comment someone made about an article that claimed that nobody will read your thesis: something about an informal section to go with the formal parts. Well, more-mainstream journalists reporting on something we already know up in our ivory towers is a way to get the message out there.

Not to disagree with you, but most big news outlets (WSJ included) have been whining about how blogs pirate their stories and re-spin them for Google juice. Turnabout is fair play.

Tell you what, I'll subscribe to the first newspaper that digs up the AT&T/Apple contract.

It's an opinion piece in the opinion section. That means it's likely not hard facts (otherwise it'd be in the news sections). It's a fairly emotional piece in an outlet where this likely hasn't been seen before. Even though we have heard the arguments hundreds of times over...

Agreed. I saw WSJ.com and expected actual reporting. Maybe unsubstantiated, "bloglike" content should have "blog" or "ed" in the domain name (blog.wsj.com).

Headline almost makes it sound like Google Voice is "dead" or like something political happened legislative-wise to prevent Voice from operating. When I saw the author, it actually made some sense; during the Nov. election, I was a poll worker (volunteer) with Kessler's son. In Atherton of all places.