11.19.07
Another Example Where the Press Alienates Free Software and Standards
Follow the money, follow the vested interest
Poor reporting can be a deliberate act, which is made possible through selective queries and sourcing. If we were to learn anything from one-sided Novell coverage, it is the fact that media is controlled by outside corporations and it exists to serve those corporation. When it comes to document standards, there is rarely an exception.
A number of analysts/journalists/bloggers didn’t check their facts and seem to have fallen into the trap, and ascribed a far greater importance to the actions of the [OpenDocument] Foundation. Curiously, these articles all quoted the same Microsoft Director of Corporate Standards. I hope this correlation does not prove to be a persistent contrary indicator for accuracy in future file format stories.
Luckily for us, David Berlind over at ZDNet has penetrated the confusion and gets it right:
…the future of the OpenDocument Foundation has nothing to do with the future of the OpenDocument Format. In other words, any indication by anybody that the OpenDocument Format has been vacated by its supporters is pure FUD.
Several months ago we complained that the media offered almost no coverage of Microsoft’s frauds in its pursuit for OOXML acceptance (e.g. Massachusetts). It was actually much worse because the media passed on Microsoft's lies as though they were facts.
Discriminatory and self-serving reporting truly ought to end, but this seems like an impossible goal when even tax-funded corporations like the BBC get corrupted by the Microsoft money and Microsoft’s own interests. Still, one can always hope for change. █
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
Jeff Waugh said,
November 20, 2007 at 5:30 am
Not checking facts? Shocking! No one else would stoop to such laziness.
Roy Schestowitz said,
November 20, 2007 at 6:17 am
I check the facts carefully when I write articles or scientific papers. Blogging is a separate thing because pace and audience are different; credibility and quality expectations likewise.
Jeff Waugh said,
November 20, 2007 at 6:25 am
Poppycock. If you’re going to call journalists on professional grounds, be ready to back up your own work… But I suppose at least your agenda is absolutely clear from the ridiculous propaganda imagery strewn about the site.
I had hoped that your goal was to provide information and hold Novell accountable for their actions — instead, you’re just jeering, leering and shaking your fists. With more attention to balance, your site might have more credibility and impact.
Roy Schestowitz said,
November 20, 2007 at 7:12 am
I write plenty of stuff, so it’s easy to nitpick and find one flawed argument every now and then in order to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Balance is what the comments are for and this is not a newspaper where I ask Novell for its side of the argument as well (they would not bother anyway). This is a blog that presents the interpretation of the situation from just one side.
When I wrote an article about Gobuntu a couple of weeks back, I did bother to ask Mark Shuttleworth for comments that I could use to add balance.
eet said,
November 20, 2007 at 11:13 am
Roy, as you have before claimed that you would at least correct ‘articles’ of yours if someone found mistakes there, why haven’t you corrected all these articles where I have offered you corrections?
Of course we would all be much happier if you checked your facts _before_ writing! But you seem quite happy without too much contact with facts that contradict your ideological stance.
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll
eet said,
November 20, 2007 at 11:17 am
Basically you say; ‘I write to vent my anger and hatred, regardless of facts, screw you if you don’t like it’.
Did I get that about right?
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll
SundayRefugee said,
November 20, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Not entirely true, trolls. I plan on contributing many articles here. My second one was rejected by Roy, rightfully, because I had not done a thorough enough fact-checking, and he caught an error. No one is perfect, but he DOES try, but volume and timeliness are a necessary evil.
Between the need to cross-verify stories, and a recent personal injury, my submissions are temporarily delayed, but I will be submitting articles (with new styles and subjects not yet examined), and encourage the community to do the same
eet said,
November 20, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Actually I was talking to Roy; you’re not one-and-the-same, are you?
BTW, calling Jeff Waugh a troll is a baaaad faux pas.
Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from an abusive Internet troll
Roy Schestowitz said,
November 20, 2007 at 4:06 pm
SundayRefugee,
Have you sent anything? I have not received any. Nothing was rejected.
Roy Schestowitz said,
November 20, 2007 at 4:07 pm
Oh, by the way, Jeff Waugh is by no means a troll (unlike “eet”, who is anonymous for a reason).
SundayRefugee said,
November 20, 2007 at 4:33 pm
I haven’t submitted anything in the last few days. I wasn’t referring to Jeff (which I hope is obvious), as a troll, I was just trying to not single anyone out
I apologize profusely if that has lead to any confusion! Jeff has forgotten more about Open Source than I’ll ever know, and I’d consider it an honor to be politely corrected by him.
@eet: No, Roy and I are not the same person, any more than you and Miguel are the same person. That is absurd. We don’t even live in the same country…