GAFAM 'Revolving Doors' at The Register and a "Bribe Price List"
I recently got an opportunity to discover what had happened to The Register MS. After I repeatedly criticised it (not before giving an opportunity to respond) I learned that the new Editor in Chief "spent a decade as an analyst at Directions on Microsoft" or "spent 10 years as an IT industry analyst for Directions on Microsoft."
This one says "he was an analyst at Microsoft for 10 years" (The Atlantic's official page about him).
Yes, it says "an analyst at Microsoft"!
Was it just pretending to be an independent company (otherwise, does trademark violation not became a problem)? Sort of like Waggener Edstrom?
Notice where he was based. To quote CRN: "Matt Rosoff, an analyst with Kirkland, Wash.-based Directions on Microsoft, antitrust litigation has become the norm for Microsoft."
Well, "the norm"... he tried to trivialise it. He was paid to write prose to sell Microsoft products. The BillBC quoted him on Microsoft and even almost a decade after he 'left' he still shilled Microsoft. In fact, he continued his focus on Microsoft pieces even more than 7 years later. As editor in a number of online publications he imported his Microsoft bias. Now... The Register MS. And he's bringing in more Microsofters as editors.
We're meant to think he was some Microsoft expert (he's not even technical); the media would quote a Microsoft operative... about Microsoft. Very clever PR trick.
I tried to understand how that happened and I got an answer 2 days ago.
"Your output is good," I told one of the writers there (a long timer). "I don't write to you in bad faith. I can assure you that. The previous editor in chief and I discussed your good work months ago."
It turns out that the previous editor quit; he didn't get the boot apparently.
"So, what, you didn't know Chris had quit?" I was told. "I knew him socially before I ever even freelanced for the Reg. He's gone to Google; it's on Linkedin."
So he went to GAFAM, eating from the palm he was supposed to "bite".
"He hired Matt," I was told, then "Matt hired Aaron. There is no skullduggery, no covert subliminal message."
Well, I see an influx of Microsofters as editors and, accordingly, the publication is being flooded with Microsoft brands.
The interesting part is this: they make jokes about taking bribes.
To quote: "Hell, 13Y ago I wrote _The Register Guide to Windows Server 2012_ and made a few £K from it and that was MS ad money. The Reg is very open about accepting anyone's money. It used to have a bribe price list!"
How is that a good thing?
I had a lengthy chat with the previous editor about how they had taken IBM money, which can compromise their coverage of IBM layoffs and offshoring. He tried to assure me this was not a problem. I didn't agree with him back then and I still disagree on that. Now he works for Google.
This publisher is going downhill and sinking in debt. █