I can't help but ask "so what?" I know the media likes to fascinate themselves with facebook, but adding websites does not really make the bog standard concept of not-yet-released products news.

After wondering why they're reporting on this, I assumed that they might be drawing some conclusions or commenting on what this actually means. They have 6 months of code in the pipe, are they still testing? can't handle the volume of change? think their users can't handle the volume of changes? or just are happy enough in the market that they're comfortable sitting on a few things that are ready to go live? Anything?

Nope. The story came across with the voice of a schoolgirl giggling "he he he, facebook mentioned us." With trite reporting like this, who can be surprised they've implemented the level of control to blind techcrunch at will?