One of the false facts wrongfully asserts that Mullenweg coded WordPress in three “obsessive days” when the actual time period was four months. This might seem minor but it’s not because it’s evidence of what Mullenweg points out is poor research that could have been easily verified on Wikipedia.
His critique is thoroughly convincing and shows how he agreed to the interview with openness and the expectation of balanced reporting. His dismay at the results is palpably communicated in his blog post about it.
Nevertheless he goes on to say that he supports journalism and puts the blame on the editor of the article.
He writes:
“I know a lot of entrepreneurs follow me and I don’t want your takeaway to be “don’t talk to journalists” or “don’t engage with mainstream media.”
…this is a good example of where a decent journalist can’t overcome a crappy editor and quality control. I probably wouldn’t be excited to work with Inc Magazine again while Mike Hofman is in charge as editor-in-chief, he’s clearly overseeing a declining brand. But I will continue to engage with other media, and blog, and tweet, and tell my story directly.
When an editor wants to make you look good, they can! If they decide they want to drag you, they can too. Everything in my interactions with David and Inc made it seem this would be a positive piece, so be careful.
We’ll see if Inc Magazine has any journalistic integrity by their updates to the article.”
Rightfully Disappointed
Mullenweg researched the interviewer and verified that they were a competent and respectable writer. From Mullenweg’s point of view the Inc magazine article was poorly researched and heavily slanted against him, what he termed a hit piece.
Read Mullenweg’s account of the interview:
Inc Hit Piece
Featured Image by Shutterstock/tomertu