Just a few days ago I read an unusual, and likely satirical, op-ed in the New York Times. The media pundit, Bob Garfield, was declaiming against a well-known Internet news and views site for its decision to forgo “negative reviews.” Yes, this is an extreme notion, kind of like a news source with only good news. The position we take for Computing Reviews (CR) is that the critical treatment—that is, the analyzed and well-supported critique of the various items—is the most important element we can provide. Some reviewers find this their greatest challenge, especially if the item they've spent time reading is particularly disappointing. We ask that people consider in turn what it takes to make the negative review worth reading: that could be providing context, referencing other literature, and simply avoiding temptation toward ad hominem comments. Mostly, we want the reader of the negative review to take away something useful. Our category editors work to make that happen.
One person among the group of category editors, Claude Walston, stepped down at the end of 2013 after working diligently with CR for 30 years. Stepping in for him is Prof. Sandeep Shukla (Virginia Tech). Other new CEs who joined us in 2013 are Asai Asaithambi (University of North Florida), Mike Murphy (Southern Polytechnic State University), and Haomin Zhou (Georgia Institute of Technology).
Editor in Chief