«When the conversation turns to a vivid story from Liberia, where Ebola has overtaken a particular neighborhood in Monrovia, one editor proudly reports that she believes the [New York] Times is the only outlet with a reporter on the ground, which makes everyone happy until another editor says, "I think BuzzFeed actually has somebody there." There is momentary silence.»

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/a14030/how-the-ne...

To be fair, that reads like "did you know twitter has journalists there too" -- it's not really a apples to apples comparison

If they were paid directly for all (or even some) of their articles, it would be important for readers to know that, right?

Buzzfeed is trying to present itself as a legitimate journalistic endeavor, lately. That is indeed the only thing that can make this a scandal of any sort. If they are not living up to how they present themselves, then, like any other journalistic outlet, they should be exposed.

For better or for worse (and I suspect we agree it's probably worse), a lot of people are getting their 'news' from buzzfeed and similar outlets these days. The audience should be educated as to what they are getting.

Honestly, I don't even know if Buzzfeed readers would care. It's not like they go there for outstanding journalism or anything; I suspect Buzzfeed is seen as more of an entertainment website with news articles than the opposite.

Buzzfeed is experimenting with better journalism. I agree that I usually pass Buzzfeed because of their reputation, but there have been a couple of good articles recently.