From a journalism point of view, yes, you trust a newspaper with pedigree to be correct and to encapsulate all you need, so links aren't required. However, on the web, you can't assume all sites have pedigree, or all stories have a journalist stance or a story stance. Links provide citation-- in a well written piece, users will be happy there are links, but not actually need to click on them.

I do agree with the author that different stories have different link requirements. A site like TechDirt, for example, has the formula "Situation X [link] is complex, our take on it is Y, our solution is Z." The link is needed because it is part of their format.

The author also confuses the editorial process with the story result; the practice of 'related links' done right is not "a lame list" but a duty of the author, but that's something they can work out with their editor.

That said, the article's "P-I-C-K" formula is really old-school web and quite true: have as few exit doors in a piece as possible. If your links are exit doors, rework until they are in a more appropriate place. Sandy http://projectCalliope.com