| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
One sided reporting continuesOne sided reporting continuesPosted Sep 12, 2003 13:38 UTC (Fri) by eru (subscriber, #2753)In reply to: SCO's McBride on his open letter to the Linux community (ComputerWorld) by rknop Parent article: SCO's McBride on his open letter to the Linux community (ComputerWorld) The sad thing is that his misinformation keeps being echoed, which just lends it an air of credence. While rebuttals get much less exposure. Example: Reuters. The web pages of this large and well-regarded news agency (reuters.com) have a useful feature where you enter a stock symbol and you get tables and a graph of the share value, together with recent news abut the company and its press releases. Try the stockquote for SCOX, and you see only the SCO:s side of the story. No wonder their stock price keeps climbing every time SCO says something, as this is one of the places where investors are very likely to look for company information...
(Log in to post comments)
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 14:24 UTC (Fri) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] I'm starting to get really disgusted with the way the American press is handling this. I sent feedback to ComputerWorld on the matter this morning.I *still* want to know this: If something stinks about what McBride is doing, and private-enterprise Linux supporters know this, where is the opposing coverage in the financial-oriented press? Unless something starts changing, I will begin to wonder exactly how fair-weather our friends are.
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 14:57 UTC (Fri) by error27 (subscriber, #8346) [Link] The problem is that the press likes new things. SCO is always changing there story to keep it interesting. The open source community has kept on saying the same thing over and over.IBM: We have a perpetual license. If we want to be in the news, then we have to start doing new things every week.
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 15:16 UTC (Fri) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] I looked in the "letter from Linus" thread, and found out that people in our sphere may have something big coming up.If it's anything like the speculation, it will definietly be "something different."
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 15, 2003 11:18 UTC (Mon) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link] From the grin on the face of the Cheshire Cat (ESR), I think it might well be a case of "hello court, look at all this GPL code we found in SCO Unix. Can we have an injunction to stop them shipping Unix, please?".All accompanied by mounds of well researched evidence, affidavits by authors, etc etc etc. Bear in mind that in order to get the judge to issue an injunction, you have to have "a reasonable chance of winning", I think they're looking at making it so watertight that they don't have a hope in hell of losing, and the judge will only need one or two braincells to agree with them :-) SCO just won't know what hit 'em ... Cheers,
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 15:57 UTC (Fri) by ccchips (subscriber, #3222) [Link] I also got a nice response from ComputerWorld right away, from someone who apparently believes SCO are nothing but wind (found postings from her on the SCO discussion forum on ComputerWorld.)It's good to know.
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 16:16 UTC (Fri) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link] >The problem is that the press likes new things. SCO is always changing>there story to keep it interesting. The open source community has kept >on saying the same thing over and over. That's not really the issue here. Rather, the financial press is organized to index news by the companies involved and there is a presupposition that whatever press releases a company puts out about its business is relevant and newsworthy (about that business). There is no such presupposition about what other unrelated parties have to say about the business. For example, the New York Times keeps running stories and editorials about IBM's liability/misconduct in operating semiconductor manufacturing clean rooms with toxic chemicals that cause cancer and birth defects during the 1970s and 1980s but you will find few to none of these stories linked under IBM on Reuters. An actual news development about a specific lawsuit probably would make its way there, but not a commentary or general interest piece.
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 13, 2003 3:07 UTC (Sat) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link] Right!!!, like you can read "Where are the WMDs" in the press every day...thought the FS/OSS has really something new everyday!Just admit that "The Press is Controlled to only pass the political dominant will"... And it isn't only America, its everywhere.... GOVERNMENTS LIE DELIBERATELY OR BY OMISSION EVERYDAY, AND TRY TO CONTROL PEOPLE BY DESINFORMATION... This is not a conspiracy theory, its the reality, just admit it... So no real press coverage for Linux/FS/OSS,..., we all got to live with it.
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 17:13 UTC (Fri) by neurocrapper (guest, #14025) [Link] I'm sick of PR lies trumping the truth.So many trusted "news sources" are actually one-sided PR lies. Does Fox/NY Post tell "fair and balanced" truth on Bush? Will Microsoft tell both sides on Sco? [is Jonathan Cohen a 'tech analyst'(which infers impartiality) as the title says?] More on Sco and Jonathan Cohen Of course not, alas. How do we stop one-sided, self-interested spreading of lies more effectively?
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 17:19 UTC (Fri) by murry (guest, #13033) [Link] Our community lacks a nexus of strategic influence and that's why one-sided reporting continues to frustrate us. In the specific examples being given, balance can be achieved if another organization issued press releases and media advisories challenging those issued by SCO. If the org had membership including publically traded corporations, it would increase the likelihood of coverage.Then, the challenge would show up at any financial site when someone types in the SCOX symbol. Likewise, the challenge would naturally generate more media coverage of the OSS position. If the resources could be found to build a nexus of strategic influence, our community could REACT quickly (just as Perens and Raymond have done). It's a job for a quarterback with great contacts and communication skills. Someone extremely fleet on their feet. But, REACT is the wrong approach. Our community needs to be proactive. We need to mount a sophisticated and unimpeachable outreach campaign to the media, and to actually put our story on the road. There is no substitute for person-person contact. Our long term strategy must be proactive, not reactive. And it should be done face to face with carefully selected media. Writing to pubs like Computerworld AFTER they've interviewed Darl is fine, but it makes far more sense to talk with them in advance, and to help them ask the right questions before an interview. Performed professionally, CW would most likely also include the other side of the story in their presentation. A proactive program would arm the media and analyst community with research materials, URL's and most importantly, unimpeachable sources willing to talk on and off the record. I've participated in programs like this for many years -- on both the media and the corporate side -- and can testify to their success. Assuming we actually approach a trial date for SCO / IBM, you can bet the farm that both sides will field proactive teams to preposition media coverage. We can hope that SCO runs out of $$$ long beforehand. Privately, I've been told this will never get to trial. Apart from our valid desire to expose SCO's deeply flawed reasoning and maddening actions, what I am advocating makes sense anyway. Even if SCO never happened, the OSS community needs to engage in proactive strategic outreach. You only have to look at the headlines that Redmond is generating (Linux on the Desktop more expensive than Windows; Linux TCO much higher than Windows; Cost to develop Linux applications much higher than Windows). Which organization is correct for this program? LI sounds right. So does FSF. And OSDL. What do you guys think?
One sided reporting continues Posted Sep 12, 2003 23:35 UTC (Fri) by dooglio (guest, #2604) [Link] Which organization is correct for this program? LI sounds right. So does FSF. And OSDL.What do you guys think? They could help. But I think what would help as well would be if our community actively engaged in a letter writing campaign to major media outlets. For example, we could target NPR--let's try to get a spot on All Things Considered (http://www.npr.org/contact/ index.html). I agree 100% with you on the "proactive" stance. We need stories in the major media dedicated to the open source community--not just our side of the FUD, but who we are and what we represent.
Let us pick our battles Posted Sep 15, 2003 8:11 UTC (Mon) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091) [Link] But, REACT is the wrong approach.On the contrary, it is not our job to mix in these stupid investor games. Since the SCO issue is obviously an investor scam, let us just answer the technical points and ignore the FUD. I think esr, Bruce Perens and the rest are doing an excellent job here: informing the public, but not going into the dirty game. Linux is not a news generator; and being on the defensive is just the right approach, IMHO. Let another one punch this balloon down.
|
|
||||||||||||