[63619] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: News coverage, Verisign etc.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Howard C. Berkowitz)
Wed Oct 8 15:08:52 2003
In-Reply-To: <3F845DF1.6060504@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2003 15:03:19 -0400
To: nanog@merit.org, ST-ISC@MAIL.ABANET.ORG, netizens@columbia.edu
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At 11:56 AM -0700 10/8/03, Eliot Lear wrote:
>Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
>
>>
>>I have gotten a reasoned response from the technology editor of the
>>Washington Post, and we are discussing things. While I wouldn't
>>have done it that way, he had a rational explanation of why the
>>story was written the way it was, and definitely indicating there
>>will be continuing coverage of the issue. He believes there's
>>always room for improving coverage.
>>
>
>Care to share?
>
>Eliot
I was thinking about that, and now have a very red face. Eudora, for
some reason (out of storage without a message?) seems to have lost
about an hour of outbox messages. I'm hoping to get a copy sent back
to me.
In any event, in working with media, there's a time where some level
of confidentiality is useful, when you are building the relationship
and giving background. Let me summarize that the Post initially saw
this more as a business than technology issue, and gave Verisign its
chance to tell its side of the story. I believe the relevant editor
now believes the issue is much more complex.
I'd want his permission to share the specific response.
Howard
