Very interesting, but I found two things a bit odd...
First, they referred to Pierre Salinger as a lackey. He was a press secretary and JFK's campaign manager. Not what I'd call a a lackey.
Also, they refer to 1994 as being the beginning of the dot com bubble. Bubbles don't really have a beginning. It should be referred to as the boom, and if they chose to refer to the bubble, they should point to its peak. The beginning of the bubble would be difficult to nail down.
These are two things the Economist should get right, and not be loose with the facts.
[Reply]
Originally Posted by Footbag:
Very interesting, but I found two things a bit odd...
First, they referred to Pierre Salinger as a lackey. He was a press secretary and JFK's campaign manager. Not what I'd call a a lackey.
Also, they refer to 1994 as being the beginning of the dot com bubble. Bubbles don't really have a beginning. It should be referred to as the boom, and if they chose to refer to the bubble, they should point to its peak. The beginning of the bubble would be difficult to nail down.
These are two things the Economist should get right, and not be loose with the facts.
Were I asked, I would have pegged the start of the dot-com bubble to 1995, when the Web was first opened up to public use and people started coming up with all kinds of gee-whiz, way-out-there ideas to profit off the new technology, which ultimately snowballed into the Bubble.
And while Salinger was Kennedy's press secretary, on that awful February day in 1962 he was nothing but a tool that JFK used for his own benefit, without telling any of his cigar-smoking friends what he was about to do. So at that moment, I'd say he was indeed a lackey.
[Reply]
