Sys-con dumps O'Gara [LWN.net]

Maureen O'Gara, the author of a set of increasingly vicious attacks on Linux and some of its defenders, has now been dropped from the lineup at Sys-con the publisher of LinuxWorld and several other sites. This change came about after LinuxWorld editor James Turner took a public "Maureen or me" stand. Whether Ms. O'Gara will resurface elsewhere remains to be seen.

to post comments

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 16:19 UTC (Tue) by pksings (guest, #93) [Link] (4 responses)

What about the editor who chose to publish or allowed to be published that vicious attack? And editor should know better. And the responsible one(s) should also be removed....

The (probable) legal action resulting will probably greatly influence this decision by management but there is no reason for an industry magazine to participate in such personal viciousness. And no excuse.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 17:48 UTC (Tue) by clump (subscriber, #27801) [Link] (3 responses)

What about the editor who chose to publish or allowed to be published that vicious attack?

Thats a very good point. Articles don't appear out of thin air. My understanding is that you have editors that do things like ... oh... remove home phone numbers and home addresses? Would any of us that are of the editing/writing persuasion care to comment about typical editorial processes?

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 19:13 UTC (Tue) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] (1 responses)

I'm an editor.

Editorial processes vary all over the place, especially in technology journalism. Some sites run like a traditional newspaper with multiple editors in the pipe, and some sites run like a blog where one person can put content up. So it's hard to generalize about how many people saw a story before it ran.

"When do you reveal someone's secret identity" is one of the big questions in journalism ethics. I once cancelled a subscription to a newspaper because I though they made the wrong decision on revealing someone's real name.

If "PJ" turned out to be the same person as someone who's already a public figure under another name, a reasonable editor would almost certainly run that person's name. Likewise if PJ turned out to be an employee or contractor for one of the parties in one of the cases, that would be newsworthy too. Her home address is almost certainly not newsworthy unless it turns out that she's living with a public figure or one of the parties to one of the cases.

But the O'Gara story was basically consistent with what the world already knew about PJ, so I don't see any news value in revealing any of her contact info. Likewise, it wouldn't usually be newsworthy to publish contact info on people working for the SCOX side. When the intimidation effect is much greater than the news value, it's a good sign not to run the information.

There is a hole in the article that a reasonable editor would have asked about--what's the source of the information that a certain phone number was used to call SCOX?

IMHO it would be a good thing if a Linux community person who knows GNU Mailman and is safely independent of any of the publications or major advertisers in the Linux media were to start up a mailing list for discussing it. Discussions would probably flow best on a list that people in the media didn't themselves have influence over.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 20:01 UTC (Tue) by Ross (guest, #4065) [Link]

They also posted her phone number, pictures of her house and car, and bits
of an interview with her bewildered mother. I don't think there's any
doubt those stepped over the line -- even for a public figure.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 19:33 UTC (Tue) by jzb (editor, #7867) [Link]

My understanding is that O'Gara was an editor at Sys-con and had the ability to post directly without (other) editorial oversight. (I could be wrong, though, but that seems to be the case.)

It's not terribly unusual for writers on web-based pubs to be able to do that. I write for several pubs, and it's about 50-50 in terms of being able to publish directly. For example, I write for LWN and Jon edits / reviews my articles before publication. Other pubs I post directly without any editorial review prior to publication - like my ZDNet blog.

I don't have a problem with having editorial oversight (or not) but a journalist should have enough integrity not to pull something like O'Gara did with this piece on PJ.

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 16:34 UTC (Tue) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (7 responses)

Everybody who mentioned this infamous article refused to link to it, and now it's gone. PJ posted a tearful denial, but I couldn't even tell what it was she was tearful about. I don't need to read the article itself, but a two-line summary ("She claimed that PJ ... and even ... kittens.") would suffice.

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 16:41 UTC (Tue) by segphault (guest, #27468) [Link] (2 responses)

I dug it up because I was curious and regretted it after I finished reading it. It was really a trite piece of crap. There was absolutely nothing of substance in it. It was a little bit creepy too. Even more lame, there was absolutely nothing in it that could possibly reduce the credibility of PJ, even if you believe all of it. MOG needs to take off the tinfoil hat and get a friggin life.

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 17:54 UTC (Tue) by error27 (guest, #8346) [Link]

It was creepy wasn't it.

The story was written in first person but almost everyone believes that all the real work was done by PIs. Someone on Yahoo looked at the date info embedded in the pictures and didn't think anyone could travel between the two locations that quick so maybe it was more than one PI.

The whole point of the article was that PJ doesn't want people to stalk her or to know where she lives so "Look At Us! We're Stalking Her and Harassing Her Mom!"

The article tried to make PJ sound like she was paranoid, but it pretty much ruined the effect when MoG starts gloating about how a stranger tried to break into PJ's house recently. That's not counting the PIs that MoG or SCO hired... That's scary.

About the religious stuff: I once had a boss who was Jehova's Witness. Everyone preferred to work for him instead of his competition.

The MOG "unveiling" article

Posted May 10, 2005 18:06 UTC (Tue) by Duncan (guest, #6647) [Link]

I got the /. article covering the resign threat on the rss feed well b4
LWN/Register/etc picked up on it, and read the redacted version of the MOG
article there in the comments. I was left feeling a bit creeped out too,
and wondering just what MOG was trying to do, as while strange, nothing
she wrote would really affect the credibility of what we've already found
to be the level headed analysis of Groklaw in any case.

It doesn't matter if PJ is a street person covered in filth posting her
articles from the library, or the name were a Laura Bush pen name, the
credibility of the everyday man's language explanations of our legal
system PJ has become famous for, remain as common sense reliable as they
always have.

What it almost looked to me like, as I read it, and what was so unnerving,
is that the MOG article didn't read like the writing of a sane person at
all, or she should have realized religion and the rest really don't make a
lot of difference to what has after all developed from the zero
credibility of any old thing one reads online anyway. It's as if MOG
herself has become so monomaniacal about this, that she's losing her own
sanity in pursuing the thing. /That's/ what I found /creepy/ about the
whole thing. It was like reading the ravings of a lunatic suddenly fallen
from a position of formal society respect and power.

... What I haven't seen anyone speculate on as yet, tho maybe it's
because I only skim /. any more, is whether this is indeed the "terrible
truth" Darl threatened in the last SCO conference call, or whether it has
gone so far towards the lunatic fring even /they/ aren't touching this. I
haven't seen any mention of PR from them on it, in any case, while Darl
was just dripping the possibilities in that conference call.

I do keep seeing references to PJ's rebuttal, but don't follow her site
close enough to have seen it. Maybe I should go find it. It's gotta
leave a better taste in my mouth than the MOG thing did, that's certain.
PJ does seem to have a way of raining common sense on even the most
spectacular parades of weird fantasy, and I doubt this one's any
different.

Duncan

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 16:43 UTC (Tue) by kh (guest, #19413) [Link]

You can find the text pretty easily in the slashdot comments:
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/09/1032230...

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 16:43 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] (1 responses)

I didn't see PJ denying anything in O'Hara's article (which was apparently published in three different versions). It sounded like O'Hara, or someone backing her, hired private detectives, and the PIs may have entered her house, stole her mail, or both; then O'Hara published private information, photos of her mother's house, addresses, and the like, attacked her religion, etc. Or maybe O'Hara played Nancy Drew herself, hard to tell. To me it looked like a blatant attempt to intimidate her into silence by making her fear for her personal safety and that of her family.

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 16:45 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link]

s/O'Hara/O'Gara/g

What article?

Posted May 10, 2005 16:48 UTC (Tue) by echodots (guest, #15103) [Link]

lol @ kittens; tear jerking indeed. Sys-con and the editors at linuxworld pulled it off the site because it had some pictures of her and her address and phone number and religious information, all in-which we really didn't need to know. All-in-all, that was a total disregard to her request for anonymity.

JamesG

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 16:35 UTC (Tue) by echodots (guest, #15103) [Link] (2 responses)

Well from what I've heard about sys-con's setup, the publishists can post their own columns, bypassing the editors. That's a special kind of F***edup if I may say so myself. I don't know if you remember from before, J.Turner said something to this liking when some other crap happened between MOG and PJ and those sealed documents.

The hammer should fall down on MOG and the people who allow this to happen, shame is on them all.

JamesG

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 18:21 UTC (Tue) by mcleodnine (guest, #14272) [Link] (1 responses)

Even if the contributors can publish their own content, it is usually relegated to their own personal byline site.

What shocked me the most was sys-con making this story the lead item on Sunday, including pictures. That would have to require some level of editorial/administrative authority.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 18:25 UTC (Tue) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link]

That would suggest that someone else needs to go, not just Ms. O'Gara.

Lame!

Posted May 10, 2005 16:50 UTC (Tue) by b7j0c (guest, #27559) [Link]

Better that she be invited to come and gutted at the podium under a whithering barrage of questions.

This will just embolden her, and is infantile as well...who's afraid of criticism?

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 18:19 UTC (Tue) by jre (guest, #2807) [Link]

If you absolutely have to watch a train wreck, it is still possible to get the Google cache. The O'Gara article was so bad -- really, beyond childish and creepy -- that I paused to wonder if this might be an elaborate hoax. It reads a lot like front-page material in the Onion.
Then I recalled that, yes, there really seems to be a writer named Maureen O'Gara, who has in the past been regarded as a reasonably competent tech journalist. It is hard to tell what happened here, but the stalking behavior and the weird, obsessive writing style are likely symptoms of some deeper problem.
On the bright side, Maureen O'Gara is now getting a much-needed vacation from her duties at Sys-con, and, it is hoped, an opportunity to get some help.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 18:21 UTC (Tue) by thompsot (guest, #12368) [Link]

Read a little part of it and couldn't finish. I didn't enjoy that slimy feeling I was getting. Overtly malicious, not to mention immature and sophomoric, and not worth the effort to find the text. Sys-con should've made that move a long time ago.

I'm Sidious

Posted May 10, 2005 19:12 UTC (Tue) by genius (guest, #19981) [Link]

Kill all Jedi!

Darth Sidious

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 19:52 UTC (Tue) by donwaugaman (subscriber, #4214) [Link]

All I know is, Danny O'Brien shouldn't have to take much time to figure out who gets the "To Evil!" award for this month. I'd nominate first the person or persons behind this rather insane put-up job, followed by Maureen O'Gara herself for being their willing tool.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 10, 2005 23:02 UTC (Tue) by sbergman27 (guest, #10767) [Link]

While this is good news, I must point out that there has been no public retraction of the story which so unfairly violated Paula Jones' privacy, and was so creepily unprofessional that it was actually scary. O'Gara's existing stories have remained on the Sys-Con media sites. And no public appology to Ms. Jones has been issued. Sys-Con's response has not really even reached the level of "common human decency" yet.

What was the purpose of O'Gara's writing?

Posted May 11, 2005 1:55 UTC (Wed) by bojan (subscriber, #14302) [Link] (1 responses)

I really don't understand what she wanted to achieve with exposing where PJ lives, what religion she belongs to and other personal stuff. Did she really think that it would make a difference to what Groklaw is about? Did she really think that we care about who PJ is in her private life?

The whole thing looked like an act of a desperate person, on a mission to prove a point. And then she came up with nothing more than meaningless rubbish and no dirt on PJ to boot. I guess she must have been intimidated by an "amateur" outdoing her in terms readership, so she went on this ill-fated personal attack. Just makes her look even more desperate.

The best way to deal with a lost argument is to admit that you are wrong. If O'Gara did that, she would still have her job. Well, maybe it's better this way.

What was the purpose of O'Gara's writing?

Posted May 11, 2005 5:44 UTC (Wed) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link]

Simple: it was a threat. "We know where you live. We know where your mother lives. We know where your son lives. And, see? We have no scruples of any kind." I am starting to doubt that MoG put the article up herself, without coercion. She must have little stake in how the SCO fiasco turns out, but whoever paid for those PIs must have. What do they have on MoG herself?

PJ well-advised to hide

Posted May 11, 2005 11:37 UTC (Wed) by purslow (guest, #8716) [Link]

I've just read the O'Gara piece via the link to Slashdot.
I've seen very similar stories in one of our local newspapers
covering an accused conman or other alleged criminal,
who had gone missing & been tracked down by a reporter.
However, they didn't publish his mother's address.
O'Gara may have some background in crime reporting somewhere.
I'ld say she didn't need a PI to find out what she wrote,
merely experience in the tougher areas of regular journalism.

Of course, PJ is a heroine, not a criminal, even alleged,
& O'Gara had no business whatsoever publishing what she did.

As for intimidation, I'ld say that really has been going on
& is why PJ has disappeared, probably very wisely,
if someone tried to break into her apartment.

It happened to me once long ago, when I got into the hair
of some senior men at our local transit system
-- they've all long since left & it's now all pure as snow --
about a questionable contract they were trying to get accepted.
A friend, also involved, had his apartment broken into,
but mine was far too secure, so I got an innocent-looking letter
from "Canadian Who's Who" asking for a ream of personal info:
I still have it as a souvenir in my file on the affair.
They did manage to tap my phone for 2 weeks,
but all they heard was what I thought about the men in question,
one of whom went on to become a provincial cabinet minister.

So yes, if you rub some biz or pol types the wrong way,
they have lawyers, who employ PI's, who may even know guys in the mob,
& it's best to be realistic & secure your doors & windows
& have somewhere to vanish to if things get too threatening.

O'Gara is a distraction -- hopefully now banished from the scene -- ,
but there are some much nastier people out there still.
PJ is well-advised to take special care of herself.

Sys-con dumps O'Gara

Posted May 11, 2005 19:15 UTC (Wed) by Lorenzo (guest, #260) [Link]

Hmmm... Here it is Wednesday afternoon (PDT) 11-May and MoG's stuff is still all over LinuxBusinessNews.com, prominently featured at that. Yesterday Sys-Con, owner of LinuxBusinessNews.com said that not only had they dismissed MoG but that they were taking all her stuff down as well.

Is Sys-Con blowing smoke or what?