On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 20:45:20 GMT,
ANC <xxx_nospam@takeout_adams-blake.com_nospam> wrote:

> No_One wrote:
>
>>
>> And that would be the problem with fluff...inaccurate and conclusions
>> supported by assumptions and air.
>>
>
> Well, I would not agree with your analysis, but I'm sure many others do. In
> my circles, "fluff" is a piece that is usually of low importance to the
> overall objective of the publication. It's often an opinion piece BUT it is
> SUPPOSED to contain content that can be fact-checked, substantiated, and
> which will stand up to at least a cursory examination. I still think my
> piece meets that standard. YMMV (and it obviously does.)
>
> Since you obviously don't have a lot of regard for Linux-Watch, which
> published my piece, let me ask this. What do YOU read that YOU think sets
> the (gold) standard for truth and accuracy with respect to Linux? Slash
> Dot? NewsForge? Linux Journal. Linux World? Infoweek? A.O.L.S?
>
> It's easy to be a critic, and yes we do need them, but it's a lot harder to
> create imaginative content that can hold the interest of busy readers.
> Unfortunately (as we've seen with the New York Times and CBS News) some
> writers and editors don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.
>
> And just about all of the major media are owned by huge corporate
> conglomerates. It's your choice to believe what is presented to you on TV,
> radio, and in print. But as I've said here often... follow the money. It's
> not about facts, it's not about truth, it's not about accuracy.
>
> Slackware might be the greatest Linux distro on the planet. But Novell/SuSE
> buys the ads and they will get the ink. You can talk to me about the
> "concrete wall' between sales and editorial if you wish. But editors,
> writers, and reporters know what (and who) generates their paychecks. Given
> a choice to do a "fluff" (or "puff") piece on Slackware or SuSE, it's not
> going to be Slackware. Given a choice to write a "hit" piece on SuSE or
> Slackware, it's probably not going to be SuSE.... not when you have to
> answer to some bean-counter from Cap Cities/Dinsey, Vivendi, or News Corp.
>
> http://www.thenation.com/special/bigten.html
> http://www.mediachannel.org/ownership/chart.shtml
>
> ANC
>

Sadly all of this is too true and the reason I have given up on
mainstream media entirely. I don't want revenue based marketing news
delivered to me in any way shape or form. I'm not sure if blogs are the
answer, but community news sites and services seem to hold less bias
than any corperate entity. If only it was a perfect world.

--

/dTd
gpg-key: http://badlands-nwn.com/tbdownloads/dtd-pub-key.asc

On 2005-09-24, ANC <xxx_nospam@takeout_adams-blake.com_nospam> wrote:
> No_One wrote:
>
>>
>> And that would be the problem with fluff...inaccurate and conclusions
>> supported by assumptions and air.
>>
>
> Well, I would not agree with your analysis, but I'm sure many others do. In
> my circles, "fluff" is a piece that is usually of low importance to the
> overall objective of the publication. It's often an opinion piece BUT it is
> SUPPOSED to contain content that can be fact-checked, substantiated, and

....and that's the problem. Fluff --> opinion piece --> glorified letter to
the editor.

An opinion piece is just a glorified letter to the editor by
another name. By definition, such things consist not only of "facts" but
the writer's concept of what constitutes a fact.


> Since you obviously don't have a lot of regard for Linux-Watch, which
> published my piece, let me ask this. What do YOU read that YOU think sets
> the (gold) standard for truth and accuracy with respect to Linux? Slash
> Dot? NewsForge? Linux Journal. Linux World? Infoweek? A.O.L.S?

This will sound pretentious, I don't read online mags. I prefer real ink
and paper publications. Someone has spent real money for ink, paper and
distribution. An investment has been made. On that basis alone, it has
value.

Online mags, publications, whatever....anyone with $12.95 can rent some
server space and and dispense "knowledge" and "facts."

You get what you pay for....


> Unfortunately (as we've seen with the New York Times and CBS News) some
> writers and editors don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

This is particularly true of online publications...

> And just about all of the major media are owned by huge corporate
> conglomerates. It's your choice to believe what is presented to you on TV,
> radio, and in print. But as I've said here often... follow the money. It's
> not about facts, it's not about truth, it's not about accuracy.

The internet is not the place to find truth. It's a great place to find
people with an axe to grind...but truth...well it's there but....

It may all sound very narrow minded, however, when it comes to truth and
facts about Linux, narrow minded is good.

Ken

No_One wrote:

>
> This will sound pretentious, I don't read online mags. I prefer real ink
> and paper publications. Someone has spent real money for ink, paper and
> distribution. An investment has been made. On that basis alone, it has
> value.
>

I don't know. That 'investment' has to be paid back. I learned this VERY
early in my writing career.

I was a first-year student (they didn't (still don't?) use the words
'freshman, sophomore,' etc.') at U. of Virginia in 1965-66 and worked on
one of the quarterly 'commentary' magazines published by and for students.

Around that time, a book was published by an unknown writer named Ralph
Nader ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed ) that took grave
issue with the safety of the popular Chevy Corvair and General Motors'
advance knowledge about same. I wanted to do a review of the book along
with a hard-hitting sidebar on the importance of car safety as it related
to students who bought cars (or who's parents bought them.) The editor
nixed the story. Whom do you think bought the largest ads in the magazine?
The local car dealers. Without their ads, the magazine (which was
non-profit with a budget of around $3,000, if that) would fold.

In many of the smaller, regional papers, if you took away the car and food
advertising, their doors would close. As for the large media chains? Well,
why did it take so long for them to 'discover' that Celebrex and Bextra and
other similar cox-2 drugs were 'bad.' Maybe because the pharmaceutical
companies spent hundreds of millions on print and electronic
advertisements? You make the call.

You are welcome to believe in the honesty and integrity of our media. Don't
forget about the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and how Microsoft is really a
good corporate citizen that plays fair with their competitors.

Al

On 2005-09-25, ANC <xxx_nospam@takeout_adams-blake.com_nospam> wrote:
> No_One wrote:
>
>>
>> This will sound pretentious, I don't read online mags. I prefer real ink
>> and paper publications. Someone has spent real money for ink, paper and
>> distribution. An investment has been made. On that basis alone, it has
>> value.
>>
>
> I don't know. That 'investment' has to be paid back. I learned this VERY
> early in my writing career.
>
> I was a first-year student (they didn't (still don't?) use the words
> 'freshman, sophomore,' etc.') at U. of Virginia in 1965-66 and worked on
> one of the quarterly 'commentary' magazines published by and for students.
>
> Around that time, a book was published by an unknown writer named Ralph
> Nader ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_at_Any_Speed ) that took grave
> issue with the safety of the popular Chevy Corvair and General Motors'
> advance knowledge about same. I wanted to do a review of the book along
> with a hard-hitting sidebar on the importance of car safety as it related
> to students who bought cars (or who's parents bought them.) The editor
> nixed the story. Whom do you think bought the largest ads in the magazine?
> The local car dealers. Without their ads, the magazine (which was
> non-profit with a budget of around $3,000, if that) would fold.

The book had already been published by Grossman and, likewise, received a
number of national reviews. Perhaps your editor just decided it had already
been done. All the info in Nader's book was available in the mainstream
press soon after publication....six, seven months, I would guess. A compus
newspaper with a limited base dealing with info already in the news is
well....who cares. The info is out there, just not in your small campus
newspaper.

>
> In many of the smaller, regional papers, if you took away the car and food
> advertising, their doors would close. As for the large media chains? Well,
> why did it take so long for them to 'discover' that Celebrex and Bextra and
> other similar cox-2 drugs were 'bad.' Maybe because the pharmaceutical
> companies spent hundreds of millions on print and electronic
> advertisements? You make the call.

Maybe you ought to read how the FDA relies on the Phar industry to quality
control the products already on the market and, in effect, subsidizes the
FDA enforcement of this activity.

> You are welcome to believe in the honesty and integrity of our media. Don't
> forget about the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and how Microsoft is really a
> good corporate citizen that plays fair with their competitors.

....and you're willing to believe some putz who spends 13 bucks a month for a
website and answers the email in their underwear....God bless you ANC

ken

No_One wrote:

A
> compus newspaper with a limited base dealing with info already in the news
> is well....who cares. The info is out there, just not in your small campus
> newspaper.
>

Out there where? There was no internet back then. TV reception in small
towns was poor and college students didn't have TVs which were fairly
expensive. Hell, we barely had phone service... long distance back then was
like 75 cents a minute on a pay phone. We knew what the newspapers printed
and they got their news from the AP and UPI teletype which was slow. And I
don't think "all news" radio started for another year or so (WINS in New
York being the first that I can remember.) Charlottesville only had two
radio stations anyway, one of them a CBS affiliate. Most of us got the
Washington Post or Richmond Times Dispatch in the morning and whatever was
in there was what we knew.... about the war, politics, sports, everything.


>
> ...and you're willing to believe some putz who spends 13 bucks a month for
> a website and answers the email in their underwear....God bless you ANC

It was the guys in their underwear who brought down Dan Rather. Not your
staff reporters from Time, Newsweek, or the NYT. Where were the
print-oriented "Woodard and Bernsteins" of this generation? Yeah, they were
on the web in their shorts. Think about it.

Al

On 2005-09-25, ANC <xxx_nospam@takeout_adams-blake.com_nospam> wrote:
>
> Out there where? There was no internet back then. TV reception in small
> towns was poor and college students didn't have TVs which were fairly
> expensive.

Then read the paper, go to the book store and read the paper.

>Hell, we barely had phone service...

Get real...90% of the population had televeision, black and white
maybe, still..... People watched the war via TV every evening while eating
dinner. National and internation newspapers were available at any newspaper
stall in any moderately sized city.

It was the New Republic that sparked interest in Nadar and not because of
his book.

It wasn't the stone age.

Al, get real. The info I supplied came from the nader website. I thought
my memory failed me...I remember the nadar book, so I double checked. I did
some research, you know research, r-e-s-e-a-r-c-h.

>
> It was the guys in their underwear who brought down Dan Rather. Not your
> staff reporters from Time, Newsweek, or the NYT. Where were the

Who on the internet had the story before the Republicans broke the "news" on
Rather....give me a name, give me a website to check. Provide the
information and I'll prove you wrong.

ken

On 2005-09-23, ANC <xxx_nospam@takeout_adams-blake.com_nospam> wrote:
<snip>
>
> Al Canton
> (singing own name since there is another Al C... who is not me!)
>

"singing" ? A little freudian slip perhaps?

I'll try to read the article, if i can find the time.

--
Best Regards,

Mike Reynolds

Le Sun, 25 Sep 2005 18:05:42 +0000, ANC a écrit*:

> In many of the smaller, regional papers, if you took away the car and food
> advertising, their doors would close.

Ah, yes, just like Microsoft and McDo'; if they didn't push the
feeling they don't sell stuff but "way of life" ...

Besides, isn't that the way to restart a car under Windows,
to close all the windows, doors then start again ?-)
Seems there's some coherence in the end ;-)

> You are welcome to believe in the honesty and integrity of our media.

Well, you'd better or they'll send the tooth fairy to see your gums.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In alt.os.linux.slackware, No_One dared to utter,
>> What do YOU read that YOU think sets
>> the (gold) standard for truth and accuracy with respect to Linux? Slash
>> Dot? NewsForge? Linux Journal. Linux World? Infoweek? A.O.L.S?
>
> This will sound pretentious, I don't read online mags. I prefer real ink
> and paper publications.

You should read Linux Weekly News at http://www.lwn.net. The articles
are factual, well-writeen, generally lacking in bias, and informative
on a variety of subjects. These guys are real honest-to-God tech
journalists for people in the OSS community and well worth the small
subscription fee for the latest content. Additionally, the editors are
very responsive to their readers, correct errors if you point them out,
and willing to publish real "Letters to the Editor". I personally find
it a great read.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDOE5XzLTO1iU1uO4RAvw0AJ9AxLxWRo1MgXSn3O5pP7 8bPXbG+ACgoCNK
3RP2tq4FsZ2hw5Fwo6TuNkE=
=eK0q
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On 2005-09-26, +Alan Hicks+ <alan@lizella.netWORK> wrote:
> You should read Linux Weekly News at http://www.lwn.net. The articles
> are factual, well-writeen, generally lacking in bias, and informative
> on a variety of subjects. These guys are real honest-to-God tech
> journalists for people in the OSS community and well worth the small
> subscription fee for the latest content. Additionally, the editors are
> very responsive to their readers, correct errors if you point them out,
> and willing to publish real "Letters to the Editor". I personally find
> it a great read.

....and it's perfectly usable in a lynx browser...wow. Thanks for the link.

ken