LinuxWorld Editorial Machinations 498
James Turner writes "The editors of LinuxWorld Magazine have been fighting a quiet war with the publishers (Sys-Con Media) for half a year, trying to get hack-journalist Maureen O'Gara purged from their site. Well, with O'Gara's recent vile attack on Pamela Jones (which I won't give any more free publicity by linking to), enough is finally enough.
In my latest blog, I've basically told Sys-Con that it's either her or me. I suspect, given the amount of page views O'Gara's tripe brings to the Sys-Con sites, that they'll choose her." James isn't the only one either.
Shame (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Link to the offending article... (Score:5, Insightful)
They get paid by the viewer. The more viewers the better. This is why a lot of web news is no better than tabloid journalism, it brings in the page views.
Better that we all go cold turky on all sys-con links for a week or two.
Re:Shame (Score:1, Insightful)
LinuxWorld Magazine (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Blog?? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think he's just trying to protect his professional reputation by stating, openly and publically, that he is challenging LinuxWorld on this issue. That's quite brave, but if they do "call his bluff" and let him go, his reputation will be intact... he stated an ultimatum in public, they refused. Much better than giving the ultimatum in private, being pushed out and then loads of rubbish being wrote about why he'd left.
Re:got text? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Blog?? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:misuse of the word hack (Score:4, Insightful)
It's been a popular term amongst journalists for quite a while now to refer to a talentless writer.
Re:Blog?? (Score:3, Insightful)
This bold move on the part of the Senior Editor in question makes his ultimatum quite clear to his employer and at the same time makes his ultimatum something clearly in the public space. By doing so, we will very clearly know why he or the alleggedly offensive reporter (I have never read any of her work.) changes employment status.
Re:Link to the offending article... (Score:5, Insightful)
Use the Google cache [64.233.161.104] of the article instead.
Fantastic! (Score:4, Insightful)
First, thanks for doing that, I assume you showered afterward.
Second, this actually a very good thing. Previously, whenever people would claim she wasn't professional, it sounded mildly of whining and an ad hominem attack intended to discredit the reporter. Even though the claims were probably true.
Now, one need only point to this article, which is absolute filth, and clearly betrays something substantially beyond bias.
The article's sources (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps someone should have a gentle word with this individual not to be quite so open when discussing the affairs of the tenants. After all, a portion of their rent money is used to employ him, and I'm reasonably certain that no part of his job description includes making private details about his (indirect) employers available to anyone who just happens to turn up and asks him politely. However, if he was paid for his information, he really should be terminated.
From MOG's description of PJ's apartment, I'm wondering if the super even let someone look around.
Lowest tabloid trash.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think if I read this article on the site without looking at the other articles I might have though I was reading some of the lowest form of tabloid.
Re:Holy Cow!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Newspapers would be very boring indeed if all they contained were hard facts. Some informed opinion is what turns a dry list of times & events into something worth reading, and worth thinking about.
Likely A Complete Fabrication (Score:5, Insightful)
It's barely possible that she investigated a Pamela Jones: the wrong one.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Holy Cow!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
See, in a democracy (or even in a republic), when the government violates the law, the people need to know so they can decide whether it's time to change governments. When an individual criminal violates the law...well, it's still news, but it doesn't have the same level of import and urgency.
Re:Blog?? (Score:4, Insightful)
The big problem with the Maureen O'Gara articles is while she has no affiliation with LinuxWorld, all of the Sys-Con Linux subject articles from other publications show up on the LinuxWorld website, giving readers the impression she writes for LinuxWorld. Every time O'Gara writes an article, not only do the Linuxworld editors get all upset that her crap is showing up on their website, they receive a boatload of nasty email that assume they ok'd it!
Why don't the editors just do something about it? Well, in the new world of "journalism", Sys-con central decides what goes on the websites, and the magazine editors only have a say over what goes in the print version.
Technical magazines never used to pay much for articles-- when I was writing articles $750 was average, but I'd spend weeks working on it. Now there's so many people still out of work they'll work for free just to keep a foot in the tech. industry somehow.
Re:Holy Cow!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
The fact that, to you, the immigration status of a murderer (or an accused murderer - I'm not familiar with the case, so have no idea if a verdict has been handed down) seems to be of greater import than their mental state, or possibly even guilt, leads me to suspect that you believe that this appalling individual act should have been reported more widely to draw attention to what you maybe perceive as a wider problem with illegal immigrants. Sadly, that simply suggests you have a fundamental problem figuring out what facts are relevant, and makes me glad that it's not you in charge of editorial policy on a major international newspaper.
Re:Blog?? (Score:1, Insightful)
That depends... O'Gara's continued presence could be seen to impugn his personal integrity, and some employers might like people who stand up to protect themselves.
aw shit... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry again...
Re:Blog?? (Score:2, Insightful)
First, he's not telling them he's quitting. It's an ultimatum: Do X or I quit.
Second, given the phenomenon of the Slashdot Effect, I'm thinking that somebody has now read it.
Third, this is known as an open letter [wikipedia.org] and is a common technique when there's a public aspect to a private issue.
I'd definitely interview him... (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed, and it's definitely working. I don't even know him, but if I was running a company in his line of business I'd bump his resume' near the top based on that alone.
Taking a principled stand against O'Gara's over-the-top shill work and credibility that rivals only the Weekly World News [weeklyworldnews.com], I've wondered just why the heck LinuxWorld hasn't dumped her years ago.
Number of hits, you say? That's eating your seed corn. Short term hits at the expense of long term credibility isn't a good survival strategy in today's flood of Web-based alternatives.
Please Mod Parent Up! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:A little background? (Score:5, Insightful)
Does it add anything about SCO vs. IBM? About how Groklaw works? About the relationship of Groklaw to the parties involved in the lawsuits? No, no, and no.
Those points might be newsworthy. This story doesn't touch though. This story is not news. It's an offensive invasion of privacy.
Steven
Umm.... now who is funding this exactly? (Score:5, Insightful)
The article begins:
So, I wonder where she got the idea to "attack the person, not the argument".
A real gem is later:
Sentence fragments aside and obligatory "pot calling the kettle" comments aside, some "opinions" are back by evidence, at which point they become "arguments". Others remain merely the flatulence of mind.
Seriously guys, if someone's writing crap like that, she's clearly on a payroll. If you pretend to some sort of journalistic integrity, you don't work with them. The outcome of this can only be Mr. Turner's resignation; this is like the bouncer of a tittie bar writing the manager, threatening to quit because the girls are prostitutes. Who do you think is profiting from the arrangement?
Re:Read a little deeper (Score:4, Insightful)
They were working for the government, therefore they were the government.
Advertisers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:redacted article (no addresses) (Score:4, Insightful)
As of today i am blacklisting all of O'Garas Advertisers in protest , that will allow me to stay informed and not fund this filth.
I suggest we all do the same
Personaly i dont care what Pamela Richards gets up to in her free time
She does alot of good work and has Ethics , and for that i respect her.
O'Gara ethics are on par with the Given reasons for the recent Iraqi conflict.
If i read a linux news site i want News on linux , I dont want to have to read tabloid grade personal attacks on individuals
O'Gara will continue to get press and fame over this and the only way we can send a message (as i see it) is to blacklist her sponsers and make that fact known to the sponsers.
Re:Shame (Score:5, Insightful)
I will agree that for profit journalists and media bring in more cash for themselves and have the resources to make more noise and be in more peoples faces. However, the attention they get is not due to demand for their product no more than rubber neckers at a train wreck create a demand for more train wrecks.
And in case you haven't noticed, those same for profit journalists, media, and their corporate backers with deep pockets are funding a massive attack on the linux community because the community threatens their for profit revenue streams. The level of education and susceptibility of the community have little to do with the unethical actions of those who would attack the community.
burnin
(doh, forgot to post anonymously, maybe next time)
If anyone is a "harridan".... (Score:5, Insightful)
I stopped looking at LW's web site long ago specifically because of MOG's poorly researched pieces and her bitter style. Why they allowed her to publish details of a journalist's personal life when it's entirely possible that there really were threats to that journalist's life is beyond me. Now, of course, if anything does happen to the woman (PJ or not) whose mother lives at that Connecticut address the cops there will certainly have something to say to MOG. And lawyers will be involved. What if publication of those addresses led to someone being killed?
PJ's articles stand on their own merit without regard to the age, gender, religion and lifestyle of the writer. MOG just can't stand it that she is constantly upstaged by someone who shows her to the world for the twit she is.
Re:probably a good idea.... (Score:3, Insightful)
A posting to one of O'Gara's sites, along with SYS-CON, the parent of LinuxWorld Magazine, which unfortunately pays O'Gara for her spewings even though they don't pay the editors and authors for their magazines, lists all kinds of personal information about Jones including...
This fact is also hinted at in the link to James Turner's blog (which you were also supposed to read):
Sys-Con pays Ms. O'Gara for her commentary
Therefore, to "get back on his feet", all he has to do is, as you yourself suggested, start his own "zine" or even just a blog. And for others who're saying James Turner is overreacting (and is holding too strong to his own POV) I suggest you read this [slashdot.org] comment which is a copy of O'Gara's article. Unprofessional or not, O'Gara's attack on PJ (which, among other things, makes fun of PJ's apartment and living conditions, suggests that PJ is a psycho and attacks her religious beliefs, but completely leaves out any reference to things that actually matter, like her journalism) is really really pathetic.
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2, Insightful)
My response on Free Software Magazine (Score:5, Insightful)
I am upset. If you write quite a bit, you learn a rule: you must never, ever write when you are upset. In such a state, clarity simply goes and what you thought was a masterpiece in truth was in fact... a pile of incomprehensible, misspelled crap.
I am going to do it anyway. I shall add a disclaimer: I am going to publish this article "as is" - no spell check, no Dave guard which turns my atrocious English into... well, English.
I am deeply upset and saddened by O'Gara's article on Pamela Jones at GrokLaw. To the point that I am absolutely speechless. I mean it. I don't know what to say.
I don't share O'Gara's ways nor approach. She seem to hate Groklaw, and the secrecy around this web site. Hatred is not a nice nor constructive feeling; it doesn't help anybody, and in fact it often goes against you (as it's going against Maureen right now); unfortunately, we all experience it and we all act out our anger sometimes.
This "pill" is here for two reason. The first one, is to ask you to... to forgive Maureen O'Gara. What she did was vile; but it was out of frustration and anger. She is a human being; she has made a great mistake; and she will pay for it. I ask you to forgive her because she is unforgivable, and it is right now that we all have to take out the best of ourselves and feel that even the unforgivable is... well, forgivable.
The second, more important reason why I am writing this (dangerously) unedited "pill", is to ask the question: why is Maureen's article unforgivable? I asked this to myself. In a way, you can even see where she is coming from: there is this wonderful site which is helping the demolition of SCO's absurd case, and it seems unlikely that a single individual could possibly run it all on her own. It is also true that if Groklaw were run by a bunch of IBM's lawyers, well, it would loose at least some of its credibility. I think I have reasons to believe that this is exactly what Maureen wanted to find out. Again, then: why is Maureen's article unforgivable?
Because there is a chance (and for a lot of us that's a fat chance) that Groklaw is run by a wonderful 40 or 60 year old woman or man who is a Christian or a Jehovah's Witness or a Buddhist, who believes in what she does to the point that she is willing to put herself in a dangerous position by doing so. Yes, I said dangerous, and I mean dangerous. There is a (big) chance that Pamela is in fact a woman who lives her everyday life, has a job, does what she has to do, and runs Groklaw thanks to the support of the whole Free Software and Open Source Community.
This paragraph is for you, Maureen: if that were the case, Maureen, you hurt somebody beyond belief. You hurt somebody so much, that I can only hope you will never, ever find out quite how mad the damage was. Because if you did find out, you would never be able to forgive yourself.
Well, that's a big weight out of my chest. But I am not quite finished yet. I want to talk about myself for a minute.
I am an ex-cracker born in Italy and living in Australia. When I was 18 and 19, I cracked quite a few computers and nearly went to jail for it. My phones were tapped, and only an amazing series of coincidences saved me. I didn't go through a trial, but a lot of people around me did. I never destroyed a system, but I did read files I should have read. If one day I made somebody very powerful really angry, I can see how they would be able to dig in my past and find all sorts of things that I would find "embarrassing" at least, compromising at worst. They could pick on my past as a cracker, on my religion (I am a Buddhist), on the way I live my life (I don't shop and yet I am not stingy), or on another million things.
Maureen, this is another paragraph for you. I am sure you haven't been a cracker, but if I were to look very, very thoroughly into your l
Thing is, PJ *is* a little nuts. (Score:5, Insightful)
But she keeps publishing true shit. O'Gara can trash talk as long as she likes (I think Jehova's Witnesses are idiots too.) but that won't change whether PJ is providing timely factual information. Sure, she might be completely batty. Doesn't matter. She's batty and she's still more on top of it than Ms. O'Gara. Show us that she's a habitual liar (like... O'Gara) and then maybe she'll get less credit. Don't care if she's a religious nut.
Re:My response on Free Software Magazine (Score:3, Insightful)
> the demolition of SCO's absurd case, and it seems
> unlikely that a single individual could possibly
> run it all on her own.
She doesn't. It is no secret that many Groklaw members assist her.
Re:redacted article (no addresses) (Score:3, Insightful)
> stalking the woman
You presume that O'Gara has actually located PJ and not simply fabricated the whole thing.
Re:Thing is, PJ *is* a little nuts. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, heaven forbid that someone on thier own website takes a side on the whole SCO issue.
Terrible!
Re:Paranoia will destroy ya (Score:3, Insightful)
But at the same time - wouldn't that edge be warrented? PJ has been attacked personally before. This particular case is just another incident - though certainly an escalation over pervious attacks. Little wonder her nerves might be getting a bit raw.
You make a fair point - it'd be nice to see no indication that these attacks are taking any toll (assuming they are). But I'm not so sure it's really that remarkable. That is, unless you're claiming that this edge you're noting is affecting her judgement; that PJ's claims are beginning to stray from the truth?
Here is how you help. (Score:5, Insightful)
Make the connection that advertising on any Sys-Con related publication will lose your business. A hundred of these, and they will think twice.
I write for The Inq, and on a given story, I get ~5 letters out of 20K reads. If any advertisers get 100, they will sure as hell sit up and take notice. Spend the time, write up why you find MoG and Sys-Con so repulsive, and go from there. The more articulate you are, the more effect you will have.
Happy hunting, I have already pulled out the rolodex, and I have sent a few off to some choice individuals. If you know anyone, write them, if not, you can always look things up on the web site's contact or press info pages.
-Charlie
A pattern not a one off abberation-"serial killer" (Score:1, Insightful)
That's incorrect, it's part of a pattern that has been going on for months.
Maureen O'Gara's articles have been filled with subtle and not so subtle digs at PJ for months and months.
For example, in another article O'Gara compared PJ to a "serial killer on the run".
The invasion is the news. (Score:4, Insightful)
So, the "story" is how a pro-SCO "journalist" digs up the phone records of someone running a different web site.
And how that "journalist" posts the address (with pictures?) of the other person's home.
And tracks down someone who may be the other person's mom.
And the police get involved.
This is a HUGE story not only for the invasion, but for the implications it carries for anyone who comes out against SCO.
Smells like fraud Re:You'll Like This Bit (Score:3, Insightful)
Absolutely! Most advertisers request a minimum number of impressions for a placed AD. Putting an AD on multiple sites will increase the number of impressions.
Is SYS-Con defrauding advertisers*
* unfounded and unresearched claim (C) MOG 2005
Re:Likely A Complete Fabrication (Score:3, Insightful)
1. When GROKLAW first started, it was basically a collection of court documents. PJ represented herself as a paralegal who had collected the documents because she was interested in the case and placed those documents on the internet because others were interested in the case.
What supports the paralegal position was that she obviously had access to PACER, and only a paralegal or equivalant would know where to get the documents. The implication that she was currently working for a law firm follows (my guess) is that she was using resources (from her firm) that an individual living as O'Gara represents would NOT have access to.
2. PJ has had a great deal of competant and professional help. In my opinion PJ could not have obtained the professional support plus the sponsorship of Ibideo (mispelled?) if her background and lifestile were as O'Gara represents.
3. PJ has demonstrated a very high standard of ethics and tolerance on GROKLAW. In my humble opinion her personality (as demonstrated by her writing on GROKLAW) is not consistant with the personality the O'Gara represents in her article.
Where none of the above are conclusive, I am strongly of the opinion that the characteristics that O'Gara attributes to PJ and the actual PJ are mutually exclusive. O'Gara has the wrong PJ.
Tom
Not paranoid if people really ARE stalking her (Score:4, Insightful)
Other problems with the story (Score:1, Insightful)
What's amusing about the whole thing is that she could write such a mean article and basically say nothing bad about PJ other than she doesn't have a very nice apartment. Her age, religion, and bumper stickers are really nothing negative unless you are bigoted.
Re:Lowest tabloid trash.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Whether or not the story is actually about the PJ of Groklaw, MOG is stalking and trashing some private woman's life. It disgusts me.
Better way (Score:5, Insightful)
If 100 people write polite letters to the sys-con advertisers politely, and I do mean politely, informing them that their support of Sys-Con, MoG and others is costing them your business, it will hit Sys-Con where it hurts.
I write for The Inq, I know how the game is played. If you want attention, polite and cogent letters that hit them in the wallet are the only things that work.
Flaming them only hurts your cause, clicking on them brings them more money. It is pretty obvious that they are out for hits at any cost, that is how their bills are paid. Cut that out and you end the games, play into it, and it gets worse.
If you notice, there is nothing on Groklaw about it, that would be playing the game MoG wants you to play. Don't feed the trolls, cut off their food instead.
I personally wrote several people I know about it, and lets see what becomes of it. Do the same. If someone wants to make a list of Sys-Con advertisers and post it below, great. If you want to hunt down that and contact info, better still. You can find the contact info on most vendor's web pages under contact us or press links. Be polite and firm, and tell them their wallets are at risk. Have fun also.
-Charlie
Re:Shame (Score:3, Insightful)
Therefore if one wishes to have ANY influence on what is said, one must decide what to read or not read based on the opinions of others. (Also there's just too much to read everything...so one needs *SOME* kind of filtering system.)
Prejudice and intolerance (Score:4, Insightful)
I've read through a few issues of the Watchtower, and had decided that the only people who could find it interesting are people who want their opinions spoon-fed to them by an authority figure. So until now, for me, finding out that someone is a practicing Jehovah's Witness would have been an effective means of diminishing my respect for that person. Until now.
PJ has shown what kind of person she is through intelligent analysis, tireless research, and candid admissions of even the most minor error (of which there have been very few from what I've seen). She has demonstrated unimpeachable integrity, pursuing the facts wherever they might lead.
I find it amusing that my reaction was the opposite of what Maureen O'Gara intended. Instead of lessening my respect for PJ, Maureen's allegations (whether or not they are true) have made me realize the wrongness of my prejudice towards Jehovah's Witnesses.
I am grateful to have been reminded that one should judge people by getting to know them instead of by the categories they seem to fit. At least MOG's abandonment of integrity and common sense had one tiny positive effect. I'm sorry that this contribution to my education had to come at PJ's expense.
Best wishes, PJ.
Re:Shame (Score:3, Insightful)
overnight ? It's been two years since the SCO farce began and, in the beginning, Groklaw was just another little weblog run by someone with an interest in Open Source and a paralegal background.
And PJ is not a 'leading "expert"' on Open Source, her expertise is in interpreting legalese into plain English and it is that skill which has resulted in the widespread readership of her site. She has been successful in cutting through the FUD spewed by SCO in their lawsuit with IBM and, because of that, she has won friends (and influence) throughout the Open Source movement.
PJ's success is mainly due to the fact that her readers, who I'd like to think are fairly intelligent, have realised over the past two years that she does her best to report things objectively and politely, something Ms O'Gara has spectactularly failed to do in her latest article.
Jeremy