I think it's yet another article seeded in journalistic sensationalism, which is tragically irresponsible. My feeling is, if you can't write the truth (or at least SAY you don't know for sure if that's the case), then don't write anything at all.
On Thu, 2004-02-05 at 09:36, Karthik Poobalasubramanian wrote: > > Maybe I'm wrong, maybe there is something in place > > within the press community. Maybe it's just not being enforced with > > regards to technical stuff, because they don't have the knowledge > > and resources to do fact checks? > > the fact is if its technical stuff like. > "...website brought down by sending email...." or something like that is fine > if it comes form a journalist with a non-cs/it background. Differentiation > between email and http request is unclear. but he/she could have done some > homework and read reports from symantec or any other anti-virus company to > know what exactly happens. but saying something like ".... Two years ago, SCO > claimed that it owned more than 800,000 lines of the system which had always > been available for free and to anyone since its invention in 1991.." is lazy > journalism. What does it take to findout the day when sco started making > accusations ? do people need a technical knowledge to do that? as someone > noted on the /. fourm its not a biased writer but rather a lazy novel writer. > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
