Given: the debate about the neutrality and sourcing (human vs. algorightm) of the "Trending News" widget in the sidebar of Facebook is a worthy one to have.

Problem: the nuance of that debate requires a patience that sometimes escapes the mainstream media - a problem exacerbated when the genesis of the story is caked in generalization and hysteria.

This morning, the writer of the Gizmodo story went on CBS This Morning, and gave an interview. In the middle of the interview he delivered this soundbite, which was then spliced out and replayed across the CBS Radio Network all morning long:

"What we found is that a select group of about 20 journalists - young 20-somethings, often ivy-league educated, or from private, East coast schools - are the ones that are sorting through the News Feed, and determining what people are able to see and, more importantly, what they're not able to see."

Let aside the generalizations about education, what will be heard by most people in this soundbite is "random people are choosing what I see in my News Feed." The insinuation is wrong, and being this imprecise with language is irresponsible.