Hi, I was also quoted in both the WaPo and the NYTimes pieces. I enjoyed speaking with both reporters, but like others was somewhat disappointed by Monica's particular angle in the WaPo article. In addition to the general tone, I found it unfortunate to be misquoted. (I can't imagine I would've said that in two years "we may not even call these things social networks." since I didn't talk to her about social networks in general nor would I have said what she quotes me as saying if I had. I spoke to her about social network sites in particular, two concepts that are unfortunate to confuse.) Mary-Helen mentioned earlier that journalists seem to feel more comfortable discussing quantitative results. That comment made me chuckle. If you only knew how much time I (and I suspect others in similar shoes) spend explaining relatively simple statistical findings to journalists only to have the results misrepresented in the end you would not make that assumption. I suspect it's just another case where that comment about journalists' coverage of other areas applies: if it's not your specialty you're more likely to think they cover it well.:-} Eszter http://www.eszter.com