Well, it was pretty positive coverage. It read like a bunch of facts and quotes from the convention, plus a quote solicited from an educated third-party to give the impression of original research. It's a popular formula.
I can't really blame them, though. There's limited time to cover events which draw 200-300 people, and their readers are likely to care more about the novelty of the story than the thoroughness of the reporting.
Well, it was pretty positive coverage. It read like a bunch of facts and quotes from the convention, plus a quote solicited from an educated third-party to give the impression of original research. It's a popular formula.
I can't really blame them, though. There's limited time to cover events which draw 200-300 people, and their readers are likely to care more about the novelty of the story than the thoroughness of the reporting.