Is it not a compromise of your journalistic integrity to alter your published opinions because a partner/parent company is afraid that the truth makes them look bad?
If TechCrunch had altered their published opinion because they were pressured by their parent company or their subject, then yes, you could take that information and infer they compromised their journalistic integrity.
But that doesn't imply that you can take an instance of them not altering their opinion in the face of pressure and infer that they have integrity, because it's possible that they could do the exact same thing out of pure self-interest.
Even though this one release may not be representative of the company as a whole, at least it gives us some reason to believe in TechCrunch's journalistic integrity.
I didn't mean to imply that this was a total affirmation of TechCrunch's journalistic integrity, only that this was a sign that they may have some of it.
It is if the parent company told you to alter your story. That's not what happened here. What happened was some low level employee whose job it was to be an advocate for the studio asked them to alter the story. They had every right to say no. But it doesn't mean it shows great integrity to say no to a polite request from a low level employee.
