David Grove writes:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2000 9:07 AM
> Subject: Re: Need some Help with Advocacy re: Java vs. Perl
>
>
> > Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
> > >
> > > Having a 'portal' where companies can go for a single defined presence
> >
> > Perl.com? Why do people never suggest this?
> >
> > Do we fear that O'Reilly's interest in and commitment to Perl is not
> > single-minded?
>
> In trying to place an ad in the Perl Journal, our company had to get
> permission from multiple O'Reilly personnel, who didn't want us saying
> anything negative about O'Reilly or ActiveState products (even put nicely).
> We couldn't even use a camel or gecko, which, since they are tightly
> controlled trademarks, now seem inadequate as "mascots". Pass over O'Reilly
> entirely, and anything associated with it. They are good advocates, but only
> if you don't compete with them.
This is a little deceptive, David. You submitted an ad to TPJ, which
is fine. But then you formatted it to look exactly like an article,
named yourself the author, and referred to future articles that you'd
be writing. That's not fine. That is why I told EarthWeb to pay for
droids to rip the ads out of the magazines. (Subscribers: you may
notice that the staples in the center of the magazine are a little
looser than normal. This is why.)
As I explained to you over the phone, there are ethical reasons why
publications must keep a distinction between advertisements and
articles. Imagine if the New York Times accepted an ad that looked
just like an article explaining how Vancouver should be destroyed by a
plague of miniature baboons in heat. They wouldn't do it, and neither
will I. It's not that the New York Times or I have anything against
baboons, or anything in favor of Vancouver, or that baboons only
come in size large. It's that ads should look like ads, so that
readers don't think they're articles.
Not only is this common sense, it's codified by the American Society
of Magazine Editors. (They probably don't use baboons as the example.)
Yes, David, I do happen to work for O'Reilly. But my rejection of
your ad had nothing to do with that; TPJ is not owned by O'Reilly, and
O'Reilly doesn't tell me what to put in TPJ. It was solely as the
editor of TPJ that I insisted that your ad not be published, because
an ad like that destroys the credibility of the magazine.
If you want to write a letter to the editor protesting my decision,
you go right ahead. Why, I've even got a spare page in TPJ #18, which
is in press now; get it to me today, and I'll make sure it gets in,
along with my response.
I've tried to be pretty tolerant of your views, David. But when you
paint with such a broad brush about an event I happen to know something
about, it makes me doubt some of the other things you've been saying.
[[[ This is the point at which I started to outline all of the things
that O'Reilly has done to promote Open Source and Perl in particular,
but I think I won't bother. Most of the people on this list don't
need to be convinced, and I get the impression that I'll never
convince you, David. ]]]
-Jon
----------------------------------------------------
Jon Orwant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CTO, O'Reilly & Associates http://www.oreilly.com
