LinuxWorld Senior Editorial Staff Resigns 344
sachmet writes "In light of the interview with Fuat Kirccali, James Turner has announced on his blog the immediate resignation of the LinuxWorld senior editorial staff." From the post: "We regret that Sys-Con Media has
been unable to apply a standard of journalistic ethics that we can comfortably operate
under. We feel that recent articles published with the consent of Sys-Con Media fail to
meet minimum generally accepted journalistic codes, and because the management of
Sys-Con Media has failed to acknowledge that the articles are by all informed judgment
ethically unsupportable, we have decided we must find other avenues for our work."
Honesty (Score:5, Insightful)
It is sad that it took this mess for it to be shown.
I wonder if slashdot might be hiring or its parent company might have a home for these people. Even if it is just for PR purposes.
Good to see some people have integrity (Score:4, Insightful)
I applaud the integrity of the LinuxWorld senior editorial staff and wish them the best. Hopefully they will be picked up by a publisher that does respect journalistic integrity and just plain human decency.
Re:Honesty (Score:5, Insightful)
Kudos to a group of people who made a difficult decision and did the right thing.
We showed them (Score:3, Insightful)
Is NOT having someone with our point of view in that position going to cause more problems than those that caused their resignations?
However, I applaud the editors for their integrity.Re:Honesty (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree.
It's worth pointing out that even though you know it's wrong, it's fundamentally against human nature to stand up to authority figures like your boss.Milgram's experiment [wikipedia.org] showed that 65% of people were willing to inflict considerable amounts of harm on somebody, even though they didn't want to, simply because an authority figure told them to.
I suspect a lot of people complaining about O'Gara's piece would not have resigned if they were in that position themselves.
Ex Linuxworld editiorial staff (Score:5, Insightful)
If I owned a publishing house I would hire them immediately.
Re:Honesty (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:In a Linux magazine you can't say... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't always agree with Pamela's point of view, but I don't publish mom's address to invite harm to her.
Admiration... (Score:4, Insightful)
I want you to know that whatever publication snaps you up, I'm buying a subscription (or subscriptions)!
The Proper Way to Respond to such things (Score:5, Insightful)
The proper way to respond is to vote with your dollars.
1 - If you currently subscribe to a Sys-Con publication, cancel the subscription. Don't do this via email or a web form. Do it via a published toll-free number (this drives their telco costs)
2 - Check the advertisers list. If you've got a receipt for a purchase from a competitor laying around, send the advertising department of the Sys-con advertiser a POLITE and business-like letter. In that letter state that the broad facts of the case and that due to their continued support of Sys-con you've decided to make your purchases elsewhere.
Avoid the temptation to threaten fire brimstone, retribution, or DoS attacks. Such tactics are not in the best interests of anyone concerned. The LW senior editorial staff left via the moral high-road. Please ensure that any community reaction joins them there.
Re:Free Software Terrorists... DoS attacks. (Score:2, Insightful)
I love this world it can be so funny if it wants.
Clueless IT rags just need to fade away.
Do we care? (Score:2, Insightful)
There is a large amount of sites on the internet that do have integrity and where the persons involved have enough maturity to write about Linux, about open source and about technology without bothering with sys-con like stupidity.
I salute the Editorial Staff (Score:2, Insightful)
All I can say now is that I salute those who have resigned. There are some things more important than money, and one of them is being able to look yourself in the mirror each morning, squarely in the eye.
It is so refreshing to see that there are people with integrity around, especially with all the sleezy CEO's who seem to get so much press.
I don't know where the Senior Editors are going now. But whereever it is, I want to know so that I can start reading their publications.
Re:and others will fill their places (Score:2, Insightful)
So who exactly is going to be reading a clearly unethical publication? Let them try and replace the staff which left. I for one will be viewing what the former Editorial staff has to say, because I respect them. I won't waste my time with SYS-CON's stuff any more. And I know I'm not alone.
In order to have greed, there has to be cash. And it seems like SYS-CON has managed to drive a lot of cash flow away.
Hurrah for journalistic integrity (Score:4, Insightful)
I read that interview last night, and came away very disappointed. This guy is so in love with the word media that the meaning of the word journalism simply is not grokked in his vocabulary. I even added to the blog entries there indicating that I still felt he owed PJ a very public apology.
But I fear 2 other things now. first, that he will find other people to fill the vacancies, and two, they will not be so dedicated to the truth.
I was even picking it up from the newstand occasionally, when I hit one in my travels that carried it, but that will be no more.
--
Cheers, Gene
Re:Wouldn't matter much anyway (Score:2, Insightful)
When Linus first sent out Linux 0.1 back elsewhen, I agree that it would have been trivial to change the name. That is no longer the case, and hasn't been for several years.
There was quite a bit of discussion about this a few years ago (when Linus went through the legal motions to get the trademark formally registered in both the EU and the USA). Like I said, it was to avert a major legal mess if it weren't done, rather than ignore the issue. The Linux community really has grown to the size that legal issues have become a major point of contention, and this is something that all people in the computer industry should pay attention to at some point... or any other group or organization once it gets to a certain size (or rocking the boat politically).
Down the rabbit hole... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think this whole situation has been brewing for quite some time because honestly why would MOG care at all about some blogger? I think this began when SCO sued IBM et. all in an attempt to stop the fall in their stock price and in an apparently vain attempt to get IBM to buy SCO's IP for a vastly inflated price. However the free software community in general and Groklaw specifically did something that has never been done before: They exposed the inconsistencies between SCO"s public statements, like the "I have the offending code in my Briefcase" comment the German VP came up with, They exposed the money trail (and hence motives) between Microsoft, Baystar and SCO. So the plan that the SCO upper management had (become Microsoft's Anti-Linux temporary shrill, while cashing out on an obviously failing stock) was essentially foiled. All the paid "journalists" in the world couldn't prevent the truth from keeping SCO's stock where it belonged, in the barrel. So all these folks that thought they'd cash out did not. No wonder Groklaw has garnered considerable animosity!
I'd like to see just where Sys-con gets their advertising dollars from. Because I have to believe there is a money trail straight from those who benefit from either an artificially high SCO stock price or uncertainty in the Linux marketplace to those 'journalists' who peddle this cheap FUD.
So in summary I think we owe all of these folks a little bit of our time and we should do what we do best. Contact advertisers and tell them what's going on, and why we tell dozens of people a day not to buy their products. To me contacting government officials has been demonstrated to be useless and unmitigated harassment of advertisers shows to yield the best results
The parent is a troll (Score:4, Insightful)
2. "Stop it"? Where the heck do you get off patronising the readers of this site in this way?
If you wrote your comment seriously then you are both misled (there was no DDoS attack) and silly (using terms like "terrorist").
If you wrote your comment to astro-turf then you should be aware that the readers of this site, while often petty, react rather sharply to people who try to influence them.
And you just made my foe's list. Congratulations.
Re:Honesty (Score:2, Insightful)
Looking at it from a strictly business-wise point of view it's surprising for me to see how Fuat Kirccali acts.
It's quite clear (although it's only a hypothesis) for me that being a linux user must be somehow co-related with moral sensitivity. Ideas surrounding Open Source are filled with ethical meanings and most of linux users swim in open source world on a daily basis.
Why would a businessman who relies heavily on morally sensitive customers (yes, visitors, not advertisers, are his customers ("bring visitors and advertisers will come") supports immoral acts? Especially that this immoral act was indirectly pointed at Open Source world... that's simply stupid for me. He can't simply do what Gates does (he can repeat "IE is better" over and over and most people will believe), cuz he talks to smarter people.
Ain't it what actually happened? Thousands of people are pissed at Sys-Con...
On the other hand, I'm affraid that show-biznes' rule "there's no such thing as bad press" might work here as well - after all they got a lot of attention.
Re:Honesty (Score:2, Insightful)
I've been using Linux since '93. I'm writting this post on Firefox running on Gentoo, with a NAT'd internet connection supplied by a Debian server. I think SCO is a sleazy company looking to steal money and momentum from the success of Linux. I am extremely grateful for what PJ has done. Her contributions to the Linux community have been invaluable. But the simple fact is that PJ stepped up and made herself a public figure in an extremely controversial case. And there is no constitutional or guaranteed right to remain anonymous.
Public figures deal with this kind of poking and prying all the time. Celebrities deal with paparazi. Politicians deal with people digging into every nook and cranny of their life. Innocent, ordinary people who are thrust into the spotlight have all sorts of private details published and pored over.
I'm no fan of O'Gara. But she's no worse than scores of other reporters out there, and to claim her story was a gross violation of journalistic ethics is a biased response. (The Google cache of her story [64.233.161.104] is still available. If you haven't read it, read it yourself.) If Daryl McBride's personal information had been published (and it seems like at some point it was, although I can't find the story now), everyone would be cheering the public's "right to know." Daryl has complained about threatening letters and phone calls, and fearing attack, and we haven't leaped to his defense and insisted on his right to privacy. But since it's our ox being gored, we're all ready to go to war.
The response to this piece by many zealots has been much more unethical than the publishing of the article. I realize that the response, in particular the DOS and threatening email, is attributal to only a small minority of OSS and Linux supporters, and that many of the leaders in the field have spoken out against them. But the denial of those actions has been almost perfunctory. We should be screaming about those who smear the Linux and OSS name with illegal and unethical attacks at least at the same volume we're screaming about O'Gara and Sys-Con.
If you choose to put yourself in the spotlight, you can expect to have the press breathing down your neck. You don't have to like it but you might as well get used to it. It's a part of American life. It's the obverse side of the "freedom of the press" coin. Would you really prefer to live in a place where the press is constrained? There are those reading Slashdot who do, in fact, live in such a place. Ask them which is preferable.
Re:Ex Linuxworld editiorial staff (Score:3, Insightful)
Probably that's why you don't own a publishing house.
Re:Speaking of journalistic standards (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, we can have a debate about that, but what's not debatable was that the offending MoG article was totally over the line. It included spurious details about this woman's aged mother, and her religion, and calling her an "elusive harridan". What possible relevance do those things have to the content of Groklaw?
Re:Relevance (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you pushing the Republican line at every slight opportunity, do you honestly not see the difference, or are you just trolling?
Re:award winning linux workstation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's a case of female jealousy. (Score:3, Insightful)
Turn the tables (Score:2, Insightful)
I suggest we turn the tables by sending PJ and PJ's relatives candies, flowers, thank you cards, and plush toys. The ones they don't want they can give to good will.
Re:Honesty (Score:4, Insightful)
You argument is nonsense. The O'Gara story *was* a huge violation of Journalistic Ethics. Not just because of the publishing of PJ's info, but the stalking and publishing of her family's info. *That* was one of the major problems.
Put up or shut up buddy (Score:3, Insightful)
Name some names.
Re:Unfair comparison (Score:1, Insightful)
Then why was CNN running "Is Jennifer pregnant??" articles last week.
Re:Ten Ethical Principles (Score:5, Insightful)
I feel that there are far too many journalists in the media today. They all want to present every story in such a manner that in reenforces their personal, political and/or social world view. There always seems to be an agenda. This is true whether it's MSNBC, CNN or Fox News. We as a society have become so inured to listening to journalists, editorializing (journalizing?) that we don't even realize it any more unless we hear a journalist from "the other camp" and then we just assume that "our" journalists are just giving us the facts and that "their" journalists are heavily biased.
All-in-all, my sense is that PJ does a good job of presenting the facts (she provides publicly verifiable sources) and when she provides opinions, I can usually tell they are opinions. But then again, maybe it's just because she's a journalist in "my" camp...
You know, just give me a good old-fashioned reporter and let me figure out where I stand on an issue. I'm a big boy, I think I can handle it.
I call troll. (Score:4, Insightful)
Furthermore, PJ has been quite forthright about who is paying her (nobody), and she's already defended herself against far more clever attacks than your silliness. The simple basis for her credibility is the fact that every commentary she posts is heavily footnoted from court documents, all of which are carefully documented and archived for posterity. If you don't agree with her commentary, you can argue from the facts, which are helpfully provided for you right on the site. There is a strong reason why Groklaw is heavily trafficked by both IBM and SCO attorneys -- and that is that it is an informational site of high value to both parties, as well as to interested observers, which you, apparently, are not.
Bottom line: PJ's identity is irrelevant, and so, my little snowflake, are you.
Re:It's a case of female jealousy -> Sexist? (Score:1, Insightful)
Why do you single out women for your criticism?
Re:Journalistic Standards (Score:3, Insightful)
Tell me again, how does PJ's (para)-legal collection and analysis off documents relating to the SCO case have anything to do with her religion, address, phone numbers, her car, her mother? Has PJ violated the law in anything she has done? When you become a criminal you lose many rights (like the right to some of your privacy - see the police report section of your local paper). When you become a "journalist" you lose some right to privacy as well, but that does not extend to things which are not related to your role as a journalist.
Jennifer violated the law, therefore previous criminal behavior can be argued to be relevant. She and her entire family became the center of media attention over this. She ran away from her own wedding which brings in the relevance of her relationship with her fiancé (not that I give a rip, personally).
When you say "All she did was go for a walk one night three days before her wedding and not come back." you're full of shit. She got cold feet before the wedding (big deal), but instead of handling like a mature adult she claimed to have been kidnapped. That's not only despicable, it's illegal. I'd have thrown the book at her. I have no sympathy for her at all.
I feel sorry for the pain her infantile actions had on her family, friends and community. As someone who has had a family member (my son) disappear before I can tell you that it was the worst time of my life during the searching, the waiting, wondering if he was alright (he was found safe and sound, thank God). During that time all the people who volunteered to help search, all the law enforcement who were mobilized and took time away from their families to search, were affected. Jennifer didn't "just go for a walk" she tore up people's lives - and then she lied about it!
Re:Honesty (Score:1, Insightful)
Jesus Christ, they are apparently trying to publish the address and physical description of all houses and cars of her and all relatives -- sounds like they are being paid by the mafia?
I've never seen such sleaze, even in the sleazy tabloids -- have you ever seen an article published giving the home address and physical description of all immediate relatives of John Ashcroft???
Re:A man would not use that language. (Score:1, Insightful)
> have used that language.
ha
Re:What the hell is LinuxWorld? (Score:3, Insightful)
Good the hear from you -- I think we've met in the flesh once or twice.
Anyway, I didn't know that about Sys-Con's model. I think this incident illustrates a big flaw in that volunteer-editorial model: you don't have that much leverage over your people if they choose to quit in a snit.
Also, it raises an interesting question: if Maureen O'G. wasn't being paid to stalk PJ by Sys-Con, why did she do it?
jf
Re:Free Software Terrorists... DoS attacks. (Score:2, Insightful)
Saying it's bad to DoS is a Troll?
I'll admit to being clueless... why is saying such a thing bad... some possibilities?
To 1... Well that is what my post meant. It is bad to DoS people, especially if you disagree with them. If that's controversial, then my post is even more on target than I thought.
To 2. I don't know whether they had a DoS attack or not. Some people report they did, some say no. Saying it definitely is not happening is a bit unreasonable given that a lot of people (not just Laura Didio and Darl) have complained of such things after doing things considered offensive to FOSS, so it strains credibility that they are all lying or deeply misled.
To 3. Let's see, slashdot has an audience in the millions, it is a free software advocacy site, there are reports of DoS attacks agains anti-FOSS web sites. It is pretty near 100% probability that, if anyone is launching a DOS attack, they read this site.
The only way I can understand that this is a troll is if it is un-acceptable to state that some FOSS advocates are over the top. your mod points are proving my point, folks.
Re:Free Software Terrorists... DoS attacks. (Score:3, Insightful)
Then they're stereotyping. But you're writing as if you're one of them. Why stereotype people? One kid does a DoS attack and you call the whole free software community terrorists? Do you have any idea who you are talking about?
You say its the cyber equivelent of terrorists, burning down newspapers, and declaring war. First off cyber refers to cybernetics, not the internet. Second, terrorism, wars and arsen kill, injure and put people in real physical danger. Hacking and DoS attacks do not. And hacking is very different than DoS. Hacking involves breaking into computers. DoS simply refuses those computers network bandwidth.
I may not agree with the children who throw tantrums and DoS businesses they don't like, but I certainly wouldn't feel any sympathy for LinuxWorld after reading their unethical propaganda.
Re:huh? (Score:4, Insightful)
Basically, the guy is completely out of touch with journalism ethics and his own conscience, and even if they could ignore their ethical obligation to stand up to him (another journalist ethics thing), they can't be professionally associated with such a hack if they value their careers.
Re:Details on LinuxWorld DoS (Score:4, Insightful)
Given that you say you only have access to five lines of the log data, your assesment of the situation is suspect. You need a lot more data to determine if wget is being used malevalently.
Oh, and wget retreiving the same page can be caused by a number of things besides being used as a DOS attack. Suppose, for example, there is a persistent network error (such as ICMP filtering breaking path MTU discovery). That will cause wget to retry the transfer many times. Or perhaps (based on the Konquerer problems reported earlier) wget was getting some sort of "Temporary Error: browser not recognized" from the server. An error in a script intended to perform some other function such as mirroring can degenerate into fetching the same page. Someone might have even written a script to download your home page at regular intervals with the intent of seeing exactly what changes were made exactly when. The wgets might have had the same IP address but not even come from the same machine if the IP address turns out to be a cache on a large network. The cache could even use wget as its retreival mechanism. Or, more likely, is used by a web to email gateway (of the old fashioned sort that allows email only users to retrieve web pages) or a cell phone gateway. Sometimes wget is also used to get messages into web logs after mail to webmaster bounces. while /bin/true; do
wget -O /dev/null http://www.example.com/your_site_is_handicapped_in accessable.html [example.com] ;
sleep 1;
done
Which has the amusing effect that when they look at the weekly/monthly web logs, the #1 ranked page on the site is a criticism. Waste of bandwidth, yes, but hardly a DoS attack - rather a retaliation to the webmaster's denial of service through incomptence.
Also, sometimes manual wget users load the same page more than once when testing commands such as "wget -O - http://www.example.com/ [example.com] | fgrep -i HREF | sed ..." while writing a script to extract urls from a site. Or, it could be that there were a grand total of five uses of wget and that your ignoramous publisher didn't know what wget was, googled on it and DoS and found that some crude DoS scripts use wget and was oblivious to its legitimate uses.
So, 5 lines in the log show a tool that is occasionally used for DoS attacks but usually used for other things and he concludes that is proof of an attack. Kitchen knives are occassionally used to commit murder, therefore existence of kitchen knives is proof of intent to murder.
I also find the eudora=autourl very odd. Looks like the web link was being distributed by email and got corrupted. Some SPAM filters may filter email by checking the spammyness of any linked-to web sites. wget could be used for the retrieval portion. In that case, the wgets would just indicate that people were bitching about your site by email.
Not to mention the fact that your publisher was a horses ass. After claiming there was a DoS attack (which he described as something like the most massive DoS attack against a publisher in history), he may have been to embarassed to admit otherwise and may have fabricated a few records as "evidence". If he had given you the complete web log five days earlier, I might be more inclined to believe it. But saying, in essence, "on the basis of five whole lines from a web log provided to me by someone who has just proved he is ethically impaired, I conclude that there is some truth to the claims" just doesn't wash. Not that it would take much to convince me that someone launched a trivial DoS attack.
Kudo's for resigning, though. Good luck finding a new gig. Maybe even one that pays.