Falling standards in articles

I read for content.And perspective.

Blogging is a amazing confluence of both; the only caveat being the veracity of the facts stated is not set in gold standard.

Call me old fashioned, but I expect more from syndicated columns. A little beyond facts. If possible, insights that can make me pause beyond a second.

This article on how credit cards cheat customers is an OK blog post but a column in Rediff Money section?

The authoress has not delved into any of the processes working behind the twin issues she had. No dissection at where it is going wrong and some fix-its.
It's a rambling - the sort you hear around your cubicle all day from people who can't actually be bothered to open the bonnet and see how the goddamn thing works.

This article should have been slotted in Blogs. It is only "You know what happened one day to me..." It has no value add in a Money section.

The few understanding I have of the publishing industry, I am distressed at the falling standards in quality and depth. Apparently, one of my friends is supposed to turn in an article within a week on a topic that prev. she had little clue on. And she does this in her free time since she is freelancing along with balancing a job. And the magazines in question are supposedly reputed.

Previously, you could tell a well-read man by the perspectives and insights he had had the advantage to go through and introduce in his thinking - beyond the everyday drawing-room discussions. Now these discussions, rather narrations, pass for insights.