[63621] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: News coverage, Verisign etc.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Tancsa)
Wed Oct 8 15:26:44 2003
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2003 15:28:41 -0400
To: up@3.am, nanog@merit.org
From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.44.0310081503430.9807-100000@richard2.pil.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At 03:06 PM 08/10/2003, up@3.am wrote:
>In these days of corporate malfeasance scandal coverage, you'd think that
>Verisign's tactics would have whetted the appetite of some bright
>investigative reporter for one of the major publications.
Too difficult and obscure a topic to make interesting. Its even worse than
the S&L scandal of the 80s. Things like ice statues pissing vodka at
private million dollar parties are easy to cover in that a picture says it
all.... There is no easy way to convey this issue to the general public in
just a few words and at the same time not put them to sleep....
---Mike
>On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, 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.
> >
>
>James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor
>up@3.am http://3.am
>=========================================================================
