Jeff Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The magazine you were dealing with could just of run out of space to print
>the op ed. That does happen at the last moment.
Nope Jeff, the op ed Editor told me they decided *not* to
use it.
That was after he had told me they would use it.
I wrote asking the editor who sent me to the op ed editor
to ask about it and he said yes they wouldn't use it.
>Have you tried asking them to run it again, in another issue, or have you
>recieved a definate no on this.
I received a definite *no*.
>Has anyone else had this sort of problem with the press?
And they kept me working on it through three days of my time,
claiming they would use it.
They also encouraged me to go to the Washington Congressional
hearing and add my observations from the hearing.
And I had gotten a definite that it would be run, but it
might take a few weeks. That was before the hearing. While
after the Congressional hearing they kept telling me to make
changes.
The online version of the trade journal printed the standard
fair story of how the hearing turned out to be a challenge to
NSI. That wasn't what my op ed said. My intuition is that that
was the accepted line for any report that was to be allowed
describing the Congressional hearing, and my story didn't fit
in that mold and thus was not *allowed* to be printed.
Sadly this is very far from the broad ranging public discussion
that the press should be encouraging on this issue to help
Congress to recognize the problem and to take on to try to figure
out how to solve it.
Ronda
--------------
Netizens: On the History and Impact
of Usenet and the Internet
http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/
in print edition ISBN 0-8186-7706-6
