9b385543b1b233f778bc7bd121d8a50a
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0
TODAY'S part, which comes a little later than originally planned (there's no schedule set in stone), is the latest which deals with Linux, the kernel, and the Linux Foundation (LF). We'd like to discuss the problem at hand in more generalised terms and caution people about media patterns suggestive of hatchet jobs 'dressed up' as an act of journalism.
"It's not the last part in this series but the last part in a peculiar tale of Linux 'journalism'."To give a rough gist of the video, some people present themselves as trying to or attempting to genuinely help, even if the underlying agenda is malicious/sinister. They may walk in donning some "concern troll" clothing, but don't be easily charmed, i.e. misled. One person who saw the approaching party cautioned me that they "paint you as a "crazy" person among millions". Over a year ago we saw people approaching Linus Torvalds to help prepare anti-Torvalds pieces. I gave some examples in the video above and even named the 'journalists' at hand; they first pretend to be a friend, then ask very personal questions, then spice up their hatchet jobs with a bunch of quotes, framing the subject of the hit piece as fully cooperative, consenting to the "work".
In an effort to identify the motivation, I was quickly greeted with a strident tone; "he's dodging your question(s)," one person told me, and "he looks like a phony to me..."
Throughout all the videos and this entire series I never (not even once) named the person. He would not be the first person to attempt this and I learned from experience to be a little picky who I respond to and how. In order to see what the motivations are it helps to ask some preceding questions and 'test the waters'. In this case, I quickly noticed the paradox; on the one hand he claimed to be sceptical of LF, but at the same time he justified this splintering of the community. Which side was he really on? He seemed to be trying to interrogate me, not to be in pursuit of actual facts. He decided what the conclusion was, then he started chasing for assorted "tidbits" to support this conclusion. Not hypothesis, conclusion. One can tell he has no background in science. He's not open-minded, either.
"He decided what the conclusion was, then he started chasing for assorted "tidbits" to support this conclusion.""You don't want to become a useful idiot to these people," one person advised me. "IBM and Microsoft have chosen you as their latest high-profile target after LT, RMS, Tso and others..." (Torvalds, Stallman, and a former unofficially-recognised deputy of Torvalds, whom people kept defaming).
This person took note of "ridiculous statements in his first e-mail," calling him a potential "sockbearer" rather than "sockpuppet", and his repertoire of past work was extremely limited. Yet he boasted a lot. To quote the sceptic, "look, I threw some people under the bus, I'm so powerful" (innocent people, too).
One certain gut feeling or instinct said the conclusion might be something to the effect of, "Linux Foundation Announces Plan to Become More Transparent" -- a puff piece with many quotes from "sane" Zemlin with some 'filthy hippies' who are simply jealous because of money. They can spin the reality to make it seem like it boiled down to money, envy. The publicists of Bill Gates have used this kind of spin for decades.
As he did not respond to my suggestion, which was polite, I simply assumed he didn't get me where he wanted me, then bailed out. From what one can gather, he clearly does not use GNU/Linux, nor does he understand it. He can't write code, but he has a degree in history. He sports a vanity page in Wikipedia, possibly written by himself or a peer/friend, exaggerating accomplishments and credentials. Those are red flags.
"In the next few parts we'll take a more holistic view on the issue. It's a lot broader than just a few incidents here and there."I may never know if he's running an interference for Zemlin and some companies, but it does not matter. In the more distant past, each time I responded to Microsoft boosters with a "journalist" hat my words ended up cherry-picked to my disadvantage, lost in the noise of Microsoft talking heads. People who are asking questions in E-mail but end up insisting it be done on the phone (with no transcript available to you)? Why can't a raw interview be done? Why was he trying to "friend" me in Microsoft LinkedIn? Does he not understand how I feel about Microsoft? Can he not read over there that I've not updated that account since 2006?
Either way, I seem to have dodged a bullet there. And I decided to write about it in case other people are similarly targeted. Companies like IBM and Microsoft have endless budget for these things (not even counting front groups of theirs) and the media is generally very hostile towards GNU/Linux as a community.
In the next few parts we'll take a more holistic view on the issue. It's a lot broader than just a few incidents here and there. ⬆