A new news site, Vox, is rolling out now, apparently claiming to have great new technology. Okay, it's hype, everyone hypes their new stuff, I do it too. But what's not okay is the NYT repeating the claim without substantiating it. This goes back to a piece I wrote late last year about how I wished the Times would respect technology as much as it does fashion, movies, food, travel, the other kinds of creativity that it covers and reviews. #

It's hard to imagine the Times covering the opening of a restaurant, saying they have superior food, without offering examples. Or giving a movie a Critics Pick, without explaining what makes it so great. It's time for tech get a chance to grow up, and until the press starts examining vendors' claims, instead of just repeating them, why shouldn't a vendor exaggerate? There's virtually no chance of them getting called on it. #

On the other hand, Vox is no ordinary product. It presents itself not only as a breakthrough in tech, it's also trying to break new ground in journalism, through an art called explainers. Which suggests the best solution is an explainer that offers justification for the claim that their CMS is far in advance of what else is available now.#

Disclaimer: Fargo, my latest product, is a content system for web sites. I'm kind of an expert on this, and I think our software could easily do what Vox is doing. Not just for their employees, but for everyone. But I might be missing what's great about Vox. #

Update: Jay Rosen provides links to background on Vox's software.#