The top story on TechMeme this morning is that PC World Editor, Harry McCracken, resigned his job yesterday cause his boss wanted to be nicer to advertisers and wanted to kill a story he did on Apple. I like Harry a lot. He was in my living room a few months ago during a debate about OSX vs. Vista.
Anyway, Harry, I’d love to work with you again — your stock just went up due to your editorial stance. IDG’s just went way down.
UPDATE: I just striked out the text above because John Welch is right and I don’t know what really happened. I’ve been reflecting on his words and he’s right that we’re only hearing one side of the story. I know that from my time inside Microsoft that usually the story you see in public isn’t the true story and that only the employee who left the company gets to speak because of fears of getting sued. We know that Harry isn’t working for PC World anymore. But we don’t know the kind of story he wanted to run or hear Colin’s point of view.
Either way, Harry was enjoyable to work with before and I’d love to work with him again.
Scobleizer 
Good to see someone taking a stand. The sham that is the magazine business needs to be exposed. Very often, from computer to hi-fi magazines, reviews and other editorial are biased in favour of advertisers.
Almost as bad as pay per post blogging…
Maybe Jason Calacanis could hire Harry for Project X… Like I know what Project X is – it could be a pyramid selling scheme for Jura coffee machines, for all I know 😉
LikeLike
Good to see someone taking a stand. The sham that is the magazine business needs to be exposed. Very often, from computer to hi-fi magazines, reviews and other editorial are biased in favour of advertisers.
Almost as bad as pay per post blogging…
Maybe Jason Calacanis could hire Harry for Project X… Like I know what Project X is – it could be a pyramid selling scheme for Jura coffee machines, for all I know 😉
LikeLike
Goddamnit Robert, you don’t know both sides, nor all the facts, yet you already assume you know the whole story. Pull your head out of your ass for a goddamned minute, and either do some goddamned research or wait until someone else does. Don’t you get tired of jumping on something, then when you find out the facts, you have to print retractions/apologies/etc?
You don’t know any of the details, you aren’t asking the other side, Colin Crawford to talk to you in this, you’re just going on heresay. Again.
Jesus, make this habit something ELSE you left behind at Microsoft.
LikeLike
Goddamnit Robert, you don’t know both sides, nor all the facts, yet you already assume you know the whole story. Pull your head out of your ass for a goddamned minute, and either do some goddamned research or wait until someone else does. Don’t you get tired of jumping on something, then when you find out the facts, you have to print retractions/apologies/etc?
You don’t know any of the details, you aren’t asking the other side, Colin Crawford to talk to you in this, you’re just going on heresay. Again.
Jesus, make this habit something ELSE you left behind at Microsoft.
LikeLike
It’s called product placements, brand integration, tie-ins, etc. People are tired of advertising (psychological reactance), but Magazines have to get paid. Magazines either accept product placement stories, or do the unspoken: I’m going to scratch your back and hope it works out in the future. The problem is, people don’t know magazines are being paid to write about certain products and authors tend to be less genuine or critical.
LikeLike
It’s called product placements, brand integration, tie-ins, etc. People are tired of advertising (psychological reactance), but Magazines have to get paid. Magazines either accept product placement stories, or do the unspoken: I’m going to scratch your back and hope it works out in the future. The problem is, people don’t know magazines are being paid to write about certain products and authors tend to be less genuine or critical.
LikeLike
John: you’re right. I don’t know heck. But there’s lots of people who HAVE done research and who ARE represented over on TechMeme. Including calls to IDG and other people involved. THOSE are the basis of my opinions. Or, are you saying that all the facts being presented over on TechMeme are wrong? Do you have knowledge that they don’t have?
LikeLike
John: you’re right. I don’t know heck. But there’s lots of people who HAVE done research and who ARE represented over on TechMeme. Including calls to IDG and other people involved. THOSE are the basis of my opinions. Or, are you saying that all the facts being presented over on TechMeme are wrong? Do you have knowledge that they don’t have?
LikeLike
Let’s see:
Kim Zetter’s story only has a few quotes from McCracken, nothing from the other side, and some anonymous quotes. Harry declined to go into specifics for Kim’s post.
C|Net’s article is essentially a repurposing of Zetter’s, no direct information from Colin here either.
Guardian Unlimited’s source? Wired. No quotes from Colin.
Rojas’s article’s SOLE source? Wired. No quotes from Colin.
So let’s see, out of four articles on this on Techmeme’s front page, there’s on original story, (Zetter’s) and three others that are echo-chambering that story. So in essence, at least according to Techmeme, everyone but Kim Zetter is basically an echo chamber here, and to date, NO ONE has any direct quotes from Colin Crawford.
The only *facts* are:
Harry McCracken resigned based on fundamental disagreements with Colin Crawford. He has to date declined to comment on the nature of those disagreements.
The rest is rumor and heresay.
Anything else?
LikeLike
Let’s see:
Kim Zetter’s story only has a few quotes from McCracken, nothing from the other side, and some anonymous quotes. Harry declined to go into specifics for Kim’s post.
C|Net’s article is essentially a repurposing of Zetter’s, no direct information from Colin here either.
Guardian Unlimited’s source? Wired. No quotes from Colin.
Rojas’s article’s SOLE source? Wired. No quotes from Colin.
So let’s see, out of four articles on this on Techmeme’s front page, there’s on original story, (Zetter’s) and three others that are echo-chambering that story. So in essence, at least according to Techmeme, everyone but Kim Zetter is basically an echo chamber here, and to date, NO ONE has any direct quotes from Colin Crawford.
The only *facts* are:
Harry McCracken resigned based on fundamental disagreements with Colin Crawford. He has to date declined to comment on the nature of those disagreements.
The rest is rumor and heresay.
Anything else?
LikeLike
John: One of the things that has changed in our world over the last few years is the model for reporting opinion on the news. Today, commentators (like Mr. Scoble) comment in near real-time based on the information that is available.
The experience, knowledge and intuition of the commentator are considered by readers when reading the comments. Back when newspapers had twenty-four hours (and multiple reporters) we could pretty much count on the basics of the story being reliable. (Well, Harry Truman might argue some election results.)
If you want a near-100% accuracy level, you should probably wait for a weekly newsmagazine or monthly. If you understand the pressures of time and the market, you add a few grains of salt with anything you read.
From my experience, this site doesn’t need much salt.
LikeLike
John: One of the things that has changed in our world over the last few years is the model for reporting opinion on the news. Today, commentators (like Mr. Scoble) comment in near real-time based on the information that is available.
The experience, knowledge and intuition of the commentator are considered by readers when reading the comments. Back when newspapers had twenty-four hours (and multiple reporters) we could pretty much count on the basics of the story being reliable. (Well, Harry Truman might argue some election results.)
If you want a near-100% accuracy level, you should probably wait for a weekly newsmagazine or monthly. If you understand the pressures of time and the market, you add a few grains of salt with anything you read.
From my experience, this site doesn’t need much salt.
LikeLike
The only thing I want to say is:
I miss Byte magazine ……
LikeLike
The only thing I want to say is:
I miss Byte magazine ……
LikeLike
“commentators (like Mr. Scoble) comment in near real-time based on the information that is available.”
Agreed – and that’s generally a good (or, at least, an interesting) thing.
But, when that commentary makes assumptions or is based on “facts not in evidence”, it makes the commentator look like a knee jerk reactionary.
LikeLike
“commentators (like Mr. Scoble) comment in near real-time based on the information that is available.”
Agreed – and that’s generally a good (or, at least, an interesting) thing.
But, when that commentary makes assumptions or is based on “facts not in evidence”, it makes the commentator look like a knee jerk reactionary.
LikeLike
John: One of the things that has changed in our world over the last few years is the model for reporting opinion on the news. Today, commentators (like Mr. Scoble) comment in near real-time based on the information that is available.
Even when it means publishing rumor as fact or near fact? The model for accuracy and integrity hasn’t changed, this is just scoop-ism writ large and fast. It’s bullshit. The current echo chamber will become fact, because even if the truth turns out to be far less exciting, no retraction or correction is going to get a tenth the play.
The experience, knowledge and intuition of the commentator are considered by readers when reading the comments. Back when newspapers had twenty-four hours (and multiple reporters) we could pretty much count on the basics of the story being reliable. (Well, Harry Truman might argue some election results.)
BAAAAHAHAHAAHAHA…nonsense. The assumption is “if it’s on the intarweb it must be true.” If that were not the case, then Snopes wouldn’t be nearly as busy as it is. Time and speed are no excuse for fact checking before you attempt to shit on someone’s rep. This is about to become an feeding frenzy, because no one gives a rat’s fuck about the whole story, just the salacious bits.
If you want a near-100% accuracy level, you should probably wait for a weekly newsmagazine or monthly. If you understand the pressures of time and the market, you add a few grains of salt with anything you read.
LMAO…”If you want accuracy, go back to MainStreamMedia. We only care for excitement and speed on the internets.” And people wonder why I consider the “blogsphere” a joke.
From my experience, this site doesn’t need much salt.
Oh you mean like when Robert publicly reamed someone from Microsoft Australia, and only AFTER his comments pointed out he was full of shit did he bother to contact the guy and find out that he had been misquoted? That’s not the first time Robert’s done this shit, just the most egregious example.
Any time Robert appears to be quoting a fact, you better check the shit out of it.
LikeLike
John: One of the things that has changed in our world over the last few years is the model for reporting opinion on the news. Today, commentators (like Mr. Scoble) comment in near real-time based on the information that is available.
Even when it means publishing rumor as fact or near fact? The model for accuracy and integrity hasn’t changed, this is just scoop-ism writ large and fast. It’s bullshit. The current echo chamber will become fact, because even if the truth turns out to be far less exciting, no retraction or correction is going to get a tenth the play.
The experience, knowledge and intuition of the commentator are considered by readers when reading the comments. Back when newspapers had twenty-four hours (and multiple reporters) we could pretty much count on the basics of the story being reliable. (Well, Harry Truman might argue some election results.)
BAAAAHAHAHAAHAHA…nonsense. The assumption is “if it’s on the intarweb it must be true.” If that were not the case, then Snopes wouldn’t be nearly as busy as it is. Time and speed are no excuse for fact checking before you attempt to shit on someone’s rep. This is about to become an feeding frenzy, because no one gives a rat’s fuck about the whole story, just the salacious bits.
If you want a near-100% accuracy level, you should probably wait for a weekly newsmagazine or monthly. If you understand the pressures of time and the market, you add a few grains of salt with anything you read.
LMAO…”If you want accuracy, go back to MainStreamMedia. We only care for excitement and speed on the internets.” And people wonder why I consider the “blogsphere” a joke.
From my experience, this site doesn’t need much salt.
Oh you mean like when Robert publicly reamed someone from Microsoft Australia, and only AFTER his comments pointed out he was full of shit did he bother to contact the guy and find out that he had been misquoted? That’s not the first time Robert’s done this shit, just the most egregious example.
Any time Robert appears to be quoting a fact, you better check the shit out of it.
LikeLike
Famous Harry quotes…
“I haven’t tried Riya myself yet, but it demos extremely well.” – Harry McCracken, PC World
I dunno the facts in this case, nor will I rely on publish-first ‘meme types’ as real reporters. And as the wise one hath said, ‘Checking your sources does not mean finding another website that says the same. Fiction is self-perpetuating.’
But Harry has been right up your alley, buying lock and stock all the Valley slop, weird that he’s hard on Apple, and yet let’s all the start-up fraud kiddies off for good behavior.
LikeLike
Famous Harry quotes…
“I haven’t tried Riya myself yet, but it demos extremely well.” – Harry McCracken, PC World
I dunno the facts in this case, nor will I rely on publish-first ‘meme types’ as real reporters. And as the wise one hath said, ‘Checking your sources does not mean finding another website that says the same. Fiction is self-perpetuating.’
But Harry has been right up your alley, buying lock and stock all the Valley slop, weird that he’s hard on Apple, and yet let’s all the start-up fraud kiddies off for good behavior.
LikeLike
John: Colin can easily comment on this whole situation. He even has a blog. My phone number is on my blog too. I agree with Joe Wikert: http://jwikert.typepad.com/the_average_joe/2007/05/harry_mccracken.html
LikeLike
John: Colin can easily comment on this whole situation. He even has a blog. My phone number is on my blog too. I agree with Joe Wikert: http://jwikert.typepad.com/the_average_joe/2007/05/harry_mccracken.html
LikeLike
Scoble’s brain is dominant on the right side more than on the left. Sitting in his living room will earn you more credit than facts. A million articles on Techmeme will be truer than the one fact checked article.
But then such matters never have “facts”. So the Scobleizer will rule.
The differences between the silicon valley down south and the one up north is diminishing 🙂
LikeLike
Scoble’s brain is dominant on the right side more than on the left. Sitting in his living room will earn you more credit than facts. A million articles on Techmeme will be truer than the one fact checked article.
But then such matters never have “facts”. So the Scobleizer will rule.
The differences between the silicon valley down south and the one up north is diminishing 🙂
LikeLike
John: on further reflections I’ve decided you’re right, so I striked out some portions of the text above.
LikeLike
John: on further reflections I’ve decided you’re right, so I striked out some portions of the text above.
LikeLike
This “Harry” guy is an arrogant jerk that thinks that the world revolves around him. How dare he violate the Prime Directive of tech journalism:
THOU SHALT NOT SPEAK ILL OF APPLE (even jokingly)
:p
LikeLike
This “Harry” guy is an arrogant jerk that thinks that the world revolves around him. How dare he violate the Prime Directive of tech journalism:
THOU SHALT NOT SPEAK ILL OF APPLE (even jokingly)
:p
LikeLike
Thank you Robert. I’m not saying what we’re hearing about Harry is wrong OR right, because we don’t know yet. Any efforts to get the correct story out in the middle of the echo chamber are good, even if it means the story gets delayed a few.
measure twice, cut once.
LikeLike
Thank you Robert. I’m not saying what we’re hearing about Harry is wrong OR right, because we don’t know yet. Any efforts to get the correct story out in the middle of the echo chamber are good, even if it means the story gets delayed a few.
measure twice, cut once.
LikeLike
John: true enough. I doubt you’ll ever hear Colin’s side in public, though. Employees are lectured to shut up when it comes to personnel issues.
It is interesting the pressures that writers are under, though. Pros have to listen to bosses. Bloggers have to listen to readers. 🙂
LikeLike
John: true enough. I doubt you’ll ever hear Colin’s side in public, though. Employees are lectured to shut up when it comes to personnel issues.
It is interesting the pressures that writers are under, though. Pros have to listen to bosses. Bloggers have to listen to readers. 🙂
LikeLike
Question for John: In situation like this, how long do you advocate waiting for Colin to give his side? If he or his employer no comments a request for reaction does it become fair game? If there is no response whatsoever – how long should someone like Robert wait before commenting?
LikeLike
Question for John: In situation like this, how long do you advocate waiting for Colin to give his side? If he or his employer no comments a request for reaction does it become fair game? If there is no response whatsoever – how long should someone like Robert wait before commenting?
LikeLike
Let’s imagine for a second that the rumour was that Harry left due to pressure from Microsoft (and not Apple). Would John Welch be showing such restraint? Would John Welch be urging everyone to hear both sides first?
LikeLike
Let’s imagine for a second that the rumour was that Harry left due to pressure from Microsoft (and not Apple). Would John Welch be showing such restraint? Would John Welch be urging everyone to hear both sides first?
LikeLike
I like to work with Harry McCracken again. From how the PC World handles the editorial reviews on browsers like IE and FireFox, I know the magazine is very fair about their reviews. On the other hand, I am more critical on the browsers from technical standpoint.
Why Apple is being so sensitive? Without fair consumer reviews, how could Apple improve popular consumer products? Not every bad publicity is bad. What is worse than bad is when you have no publicity.
On PC Magazine side, playing safe may be good for the short term. Not good for long term. Consumers are getting smarter these days. As soon as they find out the magazine is holding back their fair analysis and reviews, these techie smart consumers will quickly switch their reading habbits.
Harry, I drop you email hoping that you could work with us.
LikeLike
I like to work with Harry McCracken again. From how the PC World handles the editorial reviews on browsers like IE and FireFox, I know the magazine is very fair about their reviews. On the other hand, I am more critical on the browsers from technical standpoint.
Why Apple is being so sensitive? Without fair consumer reviews, how could Apple improve popular consumer products? Not every bad publicity is bad. What is worse than bad is when you have no publicity.
On PC Magazine side, playing safe may be good for the short term. Not good for long term. Consumers are getting smarter these days. As soon as they find out the magazine is holding back their fair analysis and reviews, these techie smart consumers will quickly switch their reading habbits.
Harry, I drop you email hoping that you could work with us.
LikeLike
First of all, the idea that Macworld never criticizes Apple is wrong. I’ve done some freelance writing for them on occasion, and the only thing I was ever told was “write a good article”. I never saw any editing done other than for grammar and spelling.
In fact, current writers for Macworld have been so critical of sponsors and sponsor products that sponsors have actually stopped buying ad space.
Like I said, we don’t as yet have both sides of the story, and assuming the first opinion is right is well…wrong.
LikeLike
First of all, the idea that Macworld never criticizes Apple is wrong. I’ve done some freelance writing for them on occasion, and the only thing I was ever told was “write a good article”. I never saw any editing done other than for grammar and spelling.
In fact, current writers for Macworld have been so critical of sponsors and sponsor products that sponsors have actually stopped buying ad space.
Like I said, we don’t as yet have both sides of the story, and assuming the first opinion is right is well…wrong.
LikeLike
Speaking of Colin’s blog: http://colincrawford.typepad.com/idg/2007/05/eic_change_at_p.html
LikeLike
Speaking of Colin’s blog: http://colincrawford.typepad.com/idg/2007/05/eic_change_at_p.html
LikeLike
I find it hard to believe that an editor of 13 years would get up and resign over the non publishing of a fluff article like a “10 things we hate about Apple”.
Come on , he’s a grown man, not some hyper sensitive teen angster.
And it’s not like the publisher over ruled him on an article that was going to rock the world w/ some devastaing evidence about something or other.
IT is telling how blogs are reacting to this (similar to the teen angster, not the grown man).
LikeLike
I find it hard to believe that an editor of 13 years would get up and resign over the non publishing of a fluff article like a “10 things we hate about Apple”.
Come on , he’s a grown man, not some hyper sensitive teen angster.
And it’s not like the publisher over ruled him on an article that was going to rock the world w/ some devastaing evidence about something or other.
IT is telling how blogs are reacting to this (similar to the teen angster, not the grown man).
LikeLike
I found out even Wikipedia didn’t have a bio on Harry McCracken. Now you would have to look up Harry by searching his name on Wetpaint wiki.
Guys, please don’t attack Harry McCracken in open.
It would be extremely hard to find Chief Editor like Harry McCracken who has very good understanding about the business and industry in computer, software, hardware, and web.
Look at the Awards, recognizations and creditability that Harry has bought to PC World. His leadership is obvious. A popular magazine won’t survive with scary-cat type of editorial.
Harry gives me the confidence in PC World when he wrote me that he knew how important the web is and my role is in the web. I am not a scray-cat. I allow open debate between developers and vendors for positive constructive learning. How we suppose to move forward to the next century with technology break-thru when everyone is being scary cat…
No great scientist is scary cat.
“…McCracken has won numerous honors for his work at PC World, including Jesse H. Neal Awards for “Best Subject-Related Series” in 1998, 2000, 2001, and 2002, a 2000 Grand Neal Award from American Business Media, was recognized with the 2004 American Business Media’s Western Award for Editorial Courage and Integrity, and recently won a 2005 min’s Best Of the Web Award for Best Blog. He has appeared as an industry expert on television and radio programs on ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and the BBC. He also collaborated with Dateline NBC on a multi-state undercover investigation into PC repair in 2000 which aired later that year. A past contributor to USA Today, Family Circle, and other publications, McCracken was named to the Technology Marketing Influencers list in 2002 and 2003. A 15-year veteran of technology journalism, he served as an editor at InfoWorld and Computer Buying World prior to joining PC World in 1994…”
LikeLike
I found out even Wikipedia didn’t have a bio on Harry McCracken. Now you would have to look up Harry by searching his name on Wetpaint wiki.
Guys, please don’t attack Harry McCracken in open.
It would be extremely hard to find Chief Editor like Harry McCracken who has very good understanding about the business and industry in computer, software, hardware, and web.
Look at the Awards, recognizations and creditability that Harry has bought to PC World. His leadership is obvious. A popular magazine won’t survive with scary-cat type of editorial.
Harry gives me the confidence in PC World when he wrote me that he knew how important the web is and my role is in the web. I am not a scray-cat. I allow open debate between developers and vendors for positive constructive learning. How we suppose to move forward to the next century with technology break-thru when everyone is being scary cat…
No great scientist is scary cat.
“…McCracken has won numerous honors for his work at PC World, including Jesse H. Neal Awards for “Best Subject-Related Series” in 1998, 2000, 2001, and 2002, a 2000 Grand Neal Award from American Business Media, was recognized with the 2004 American Business Media’s Western Award for Editorial Courage and Integrity, and recently won a 2005 min’s Best Of the Web Award for Best Blog. He has appeared as an industry expert on television and radio programs on ABC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and the BBC. He also collaborated with Dateline NBC on a multi-state undercover investigation into PC repair in 2000 which aired later that year. A past contributor to USA Today, Family Circle, and other publications, McCracken was named to the Technology Marketing Influencers list in 2002 and 2003. A 15-year veteran of technology journalism, he served as an editor at InfoWorld and Computer Buying World prior to joining PC World in 1994…”
LikeLike
stevekit, it may have been the straw the broke the camel’s back. After all, here we have a case where the former chief editor of MacWorld, and admitted Mac/Apple/Jobs fanboy, comes in to run PC World, and ever since then, has forced PC World to run “Apple is Great” puff-pieces and spiking any and all articles that don’t tow this guy’s “I love Jobs” view of the world. Finally, someone got tired of it and resigned. Good for him! Apple gets a free pass on everything bad thing that they do:
1. Horrible security record. Nearly as many Security Updates as Windows.
2. Using Asian sweatshop labor to create their prime product.
3. Polluting more than any other high-tech company.
4. Backdating of stock options, and claiming that such action was OK’ed at a board meeting that never actually occurred.
5. Horrible build quality. Today, Denmark ruled that iBooks have defective design (screens going bad (just displaying black) after less than a year of use), Apple knew it, and tried to cover it up.
— Apple iBook G4 Design Flaw Proven —
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/03/1458259
The tech media gives Apple a pass on all of these things, and continues with the “Apple is Perfect, Jobs is God” meme. Now we know why. Because editors in chief are Mac fanboys.
LikeLike
stevekit, it may have been the straw the broke the camel’s back. After all, here we have a case where the former chief editor of MacWorld, and admitted Mac/Apple/Jobs fanboy, comes in to run PC World, and ever since then, has forced PC World to run “Apple is Great” puff-pieces and spiking any and all articles that don’t tow this guy’s “I love Jobs” view of the world. Finally, someone got tired of it and resigned. Good for him! Apple gets a free pass on everything bad thing that they do:
1. Horrible security record. Nearly as many Security Updates as Windows.
2. Using Asian sweatshop labor to create their prime product.
3. Polluting more than any other high-tech company.
4. Backdating of stock options, and claiming that such action was OK’ed at a board meeting that never actually occurred.
5. Horrible build quality. Today, Denmark ruled that iBooks have defective design (screens going bad (just displaying black) after less than a year of use), Apple knew it, and tried to cover it up.
— Apple iBook G4 Design Flaw Proven —
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/03/1458259
The tech media gives Apple a pass on all of these things, and continues with the “Apple is Perfect, Jobs is God” meme. Now we know why. Because editors in chief are Mac fanboys.
LikeLike
I hope PC World would recognize Harry McCracken’s past extraordinary contribution and leadership.
I have an eye-catching theme for their executive search. It matches our upcoming meeting theme – Search For the Next Pussycat Engine: Meow! Too Sexy For My UI.
Search For the Next Pussycat Chief Editor: Meow! Too Scary For My Advertisers
LikeLike
I hope PC World would recognize Harry McCracken’s past extraordinary contribution and leadership.
I have an eye-catching theme for their executive search. It matches our upcoming meeting theme – Search For the Next Pussycat Engine: Meow! Too Sexy For My UI.
Search For the Next Pussycat Chief Editor: Meow! Too Scary For My Advertisers
LikeLike
Wow Pedro, I didn’t know Apple was so evil.
Thanks for the info.
LikeLike
Wow Pedro, I didn’t know Apple was so evil.
Thanks for the info.
LikeLike
“Pull your head out of your ass for a goddamned minute, and either do some goddamned research or wait until someone else does. Don’t you get tired of jumping on something, then when you find out the facts, you have to print retractions/apologies/etc?”
Short answer from Robert … hell no!!!
“Any time Robert appears to be quoting a fact, you better check the shit out of it.”
Ya reckon?
Robert says: “John: on further reflections I’ve decided you’re right, so I striked out some portions of the text above.”
Jeez man, do us all a favour and reflect *before* posting, not after.
LikeLike
“Pull your head out of your ass for a goddamned minute, and either do some goddamned research or wait until someone else does. Don’t you get tired of jumping on something, then when you find out the facts, you have to print retractions/apologies/etc?”
Short answer from Robert … hell no!!!
“Any time Robert appears to be quoting a fact, you better check the shit out of it.”
Ya reckon?
Robert says: “John: on further reflections I’ve decided you’re right, so I striked out some portions of the text above.”
Jeez man, do us all a favour and reflect *before* posting, not after.
LikeLike
Sam, where’s your blog? I want to read it to learn how to do this right.
LikeLike
Sam, where’s your blog? I want to read it to learn how to do this right.
LikeLike
Question for John: In situation like this, how long do you advocate waiting for Colin to give his side? If he or his employer no comments a request for reaction does it become fair game? If there is no response whatsoever – how long should someone like Robert wait before commenting?
Read comment 21 for linkies
Let’s imagine for a second that the rumour was that Harry left due to pressure from Microsoft (and not Apple). Would John Welch be showing such restraint? Would John Welch be urging everyone to hear both sides first?
Let’s imagine for a second that you read the articles, and realized that the incorrect meme was that Colin supposedly pressured Harry due to possible pressure from Apple, instead of as you are now saying actual pressure from Apple.
Let’s imagine you actually read the text in the original Wired article. Mmmm…it’s a pretty fantasy, isn’t it.
So, if the supposed reason was a bad article about Microsoft instead of Apple, but the rest of the initial story was the same, would I advocate getting all the facts before making Harry into a hero or Colin into Satan? Yes. Because if it wasn’t true, then It wasn’t true. Microsoft does enough in reality to get ripped on, they don’t need fantasy. It’d still be bullshit for the same reasons.
LikeLike
Question for John: In situation like this, how long do you advocate waiting for Colin to give his side? If he or his employer no comments a request for reaction does it become fair game? If there is no response whatsoever – how long should someone like Robert wait before commenting?
Read comment 21 for linkies
Let’s imagine for a second that the rumour was that Harry left due to pressure from Microsoft (and not Apple). Would John Welch be showing such restraint? Would John Welch be urging everyone to hear both sides first?
Let’s imagine for a second that you read the articles, and realized that the incorrect meme was that Colin supposedly pressured Harry due to possible pressure from Apple, instead of as you are now saying actual pressure from Apple.
Let’s imagine you actually read the text in the original Wired article. Mmmm…it’s a pretty fantasy, isn’t it.
So, if the supposed reason was a bad article about Microsoft instead of Apple, but the rest of the initial story was the same, would I advocate getting all the facts before making Harry into a hero or Colin into Satan? Yes. Because if it wasn’t true, then It wasn’t true. Microsoft does enough in reality to get ripped on, they don’t need fantasy. It’d still be bullshit for the same reasons.
LikeLike
@29 – John, it was good to see that come out. But I’m still curious as to when it is acceptable for someone to comment on a story like this. If the blog post hadn’t been written and there was no response, how long should a blogger wait before it is acceptable to comment based on the available information?
LikeLike
@29 – John, it was good to see that come out. But I’m still curious as to when it is acceptable for someone to comment on a story like this. If the blog post hadn’t been written and there was no response, how long should a blogger wait before it is acceptable to comment based on the available information?
LikeLike
Jayson, that’s hard to say. But I think a few days at the VERY least, maybe longer if it’s really important. If the other side simply won’t comment, then you make sure you say that in your story, so that readers know they are only getting one side.
As well, try to avoid the “Well, I work at PC world and I heard…” or “I work there, and i was i the room…” from unverifiable sources.
LikeLike
Jayson, that’s hard to say. But I think a few days at the VERY least, maybe longer if it’s really important. If the other side simply won’t comment, then you make sure you say that in your story, so that readers know they are only getting one side.
As well, try to avoid the “Well, I work at PC world and I heard…” or “I work there, and i was i the room…” from unverifiable sources.
LikeLike
As much as it pains me, I’ll disagree on John here.
“But I’m still curious as to when it is acceptable for someone to comment on a story like this.”
It’s “acceptable” to comment at any time – seconds after the fact even. What John, I and others take issue with is so many bloggers, “journalists”, columnists and others in the Peanut Gallery drawing black and white distinctions/conclusions *seconds* afterwards.
To (barely) paraphrase John, “I advocate getting all the facts before making Harry into a hero or Colin into Satan…” That’s the issue I personally have with the “tone” of the vast majority of “reporting”, blogging or commenting I’ve seen on this issue.
“Harry is a Journalistic God sticking up for the readers” vs “Colin is a venal, self serving hack, doing Apple’s dirty work” is the tone you see from so many people – *none* of whom have any more facts than are presented in the Wired story.
Full disclosure: I know Crawford personally but Im not defending him (I don’t know him *that* well 🙂 ). I just want to hear more facts, both from Harry (why hasn’t he commented on any of this?) and from Colin (who has commented on it).
LikeLike
As much as it pains me, I’ll disagree on John here.
“But I’m still curious as to when it is acceptable for someone to comment on a story like this.”
It’s “acceptable” to comment at any time – seconds after the fact even. What John, I and others take issue with is so many bloggers, “journalists”, columnists and others in the Peanut Gallery drawing black and white distinctions/conclusions *seconds* afterwards.
To (barely) paraphrase John, “I advocate getting all the facts before making Harry into a hero or Colin into Satan…” That’s the issue I personally have with the “tone” of the vast majority of “reporting”, blogging or commenting I’ve seen on this issue.
“Harry is a Journalistic God sticking up for the readers” vs “Colin is a venal, self serving hack, doing Apple’s dirty work” is the tone you see from so many people – *none* of whom have any more facts than are presented in the Wired story.
Full disclosure: I know Crawford personally but Im not defending him (I don’t know him *that* well 🙂 ). I just want to hear more facts, both from Harry (why hasn’t he commented on any of this?) and from Colin (who has commented on it).
LikeLike