Backfill post- Dun and Bradstreet company history as an episode

Having written so many episodes, it's now a bit easier to analyze this...

The writing style of the company history fits well with the way an episode might be written. It is very concise, direct, and informative-- it gives the who's and the what's and the why's of company growth and innovation. However, while the writing style works as an episode, the subject matter does not. Rather than focus on one "episode", the company history describes a series of events in chronological order. In effect, it is a "history" composed of a series of episodes (the company merger, the company's creation, rivalry between the Bradstreet Company and the Mercantile Agency) that might be found in something like the Summers book. Also lacking is an event described from the perspective of a primary source.

Of course, if the Dun and Bradstreet company history were submitted to the History Engine, questions would also be raised about the account's objectivity. The history is a series of endless praise for the founders and operators of the company, the company itself, and its business practices. Particularly interesting is the company's spinning of recent history: "D&B has undergone a period of restructuring in recent years, designed to make D&B a smaller, more tightly focused company. A.C. Nielsen, Cognizant, Reuben H. Donnelley and Moody's Corporation were all spun off to allow each company to pursue focused strategies for its specific business." This sounds more like a corporate spin-doctor's way of saying "we overexpanded, hit some hard times, and had to cut back on employees and operations", than an accurate description of what has happened to the company.

I think it's safe to say that corporate histories should be kept out of the History Engine.