It's Boris-season in the press at the moment, for obvious reasons. Sadly, this article is very poor, seeking to harness anything vaguely related to tech (apparently, that is - a garden bridge?) and spin it negatively, whatever the real situation.<p>Within the article, he's criticised for:<p>* supporting ideas which were explored but abandoned (the estuary airport idea, and the garden bridge) - when surely this shows a leader who is willing to be imaginative but who is also willing to listen to reason... which I would have thought would be a good model to espouse?<p>* supporting people in his wider organisation in exploring tech ideas which were innovative (the gang matrix, for example) - when surely we should praise our governments for adopting more of a tech-style approach to be willing to try new ideas and fail fast?<p>* things being popularly named after him, whether they were controversial (Boris buses), highly successful (Boris bikes) or unsuccessful (Boris island) - when none of these would have been officially named like that by him (they would probably have been thus named by the press due to his prominence in their creation or start-up, and his newsworthiness, approaching meme status) and when it would have been impossible for him to influence the popular name once adopted by the public.<p>Don't get me wrong - I'm genuinely not a Boris supporter. But this article is nonsense, jumping on the zeitgeist with weak, trash journalism.