Summary: ZDNet or eWeek (Ziff Davis) spins Microsoft’s illegal contracts as Red Hat whining
LAST YEAR we wrote about ZDNet and its modification of headlines by editors so as to provoke readers and disseminate noise. A reader of ours has just complained that the good article from Peter Judge had an improper headline. “Eighteen vs Red Hat,” calls it our reader, meaning to say that a lawsuit from 18 companies was somehow cast as just a lawsuit from Red Hat. There is also the implication in the headline that Microsoft’s monopoly should be defended and that Red Hat is a crybaby.
“So who was responsible for the irresponsible headline that daemonises Red Hat without reason?”Peter Judge is an excellent ZDNet writer and also a supporter of GNU/Linux for the most part. So who was responsible for the irresponsible headline that daemonises Red Hat without reason? Red Hat is among the victims. “From my understanding, it would be the editorial staff which determines the (pro-Microsoft) titles for articles,” claims our reader. “FWIW, the article itself is fantastically informative. However, the title blows chunks. It seems that the editors always have to spin the titles.”
What gives? Peter Judge would never choose such a headline given his biases, but maybe he approved a change imposed by superiors. Either way, this does no favours to his reputation and the editor of eWeek Europe is probably worth identifying. eWeek is a Ziff Davis publication, so it is deep in Microsoft’s pocket. For background see:
- Microsoft Pays Ziff Davis to Promote Windows Vista
- Quote of the Day: Ziff-Davis and Microsoft
- Another Pillar of the Microsoft Press Falls Over
“Eighteen companies are in the law suit but eWeek decides that it is only Red Hat alone in the title,” our reader writes in reference to an article we cited here regarding an incident we last mentioned today. Also see:
- Is Microsoft Breaking the Law in Switzerland Too?
- EPO and the Swiss Department of Justice Want to Make Some Free Software a Crime
- Microsoft Uses Lobbyists to Attack Holland’s Migration to Free Software and Sort of Bribes South African Teachers Who Use Windows
- 3 New Counts of Antitrust Violation by Microsoft?
Unlike ZDNet/eWeek, Heise has just published an article about the event, under the headline “Open source businesses oppose restricted tender in Switzerland.” Yes, it says “Open source businesses”, not “Red Hat”. It’s also about illegal procurement procedures, not Microsoft’s “monopoly”.
A group of open source companies has launched a legal action against the Swiss Federal Office for Buildings and Logistics (FBL). The agency awarded a 3-year, 42 million Swiss franc contract for licence extensions to Microsoft following a “no-bid” process for those extensions. Linux specialists Red Hat, Univention and Collax, groupware vendors Zarafa and Open-Xchange and a range of other companies which earn their living from open source software are now protesting against the award.
Also in Heise, today we find this humourous article which mentions Microsoft, Novell, and TomTom.
The hostile species is Microsoft, of course. The energy moon that exploded, in this parallel is Windows, as Microsoft dug deeper into the franchise it produced Vista which blew up in their faces. Their enemy, the Federation of Planets, would be the open source and Linux communities, who have constantly felt threatened by Microsoft’s posturing over open source. The warring factions have been separated by a neutral zone which few, save Novell, dared to cross. And that attempt to reach out to find détente would be last year’s reaching out to the Apache Foundation and Microsoft’s open source contributions.
That is where we are right now in the story, though with open source, the disruption that threatened the peace was the Microsoft lawsuit against Tom Tom which sent a chill through the Linux community as it mentioned FAT software patents. “See”, the Kirks of the open source community said, “we cannot trust them.”
The convictions of the author are telling. He knows the plot. Thumbs up to Heise and thumbs down (again) to ZDNet or even eWeek, which we wrote about in:
- eWeek Does it Again. Fool Us Once, Shame on You. Fool Us Twice…
- An Open Letter to eWeek
- Jason Brooks (eWeek): Bribed by Microsoft