[10388] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Journalism and the Net
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Glenn S. Tenney)
Sun Feb 20 23:06:44 1994
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 1994 20:04:42 -0800
To: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook), com-priv@psi.com
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
At 6:12 PM 2/20/94 -0800, Gordon Cook wrote:
>Glenn Tenny gets the prize for the most disingenuous comment of the month when
>he said:
>
>The following are some excerpts from postings ***(I don't
>recall from whom or when)*** that I'd like to comment on:
As they say, at least spell the name correctly... "Tenney"
I had been copying various pieces from quite a few postings to the
clipboard and then went back to post something. In reading the lines I
pasted in, it LOOKED like your postings, but I wasn't sure, and didn't feel
it warranted going back to see IF I could be sure, so I said what I did
quite honestly.
>Glenn, if you don't like what I am saying come right out and say it and rely
>less on innuedo than you do here. It would waste less bandwidth.
Actually, Gordon, I wanted to shift the discussion completely away from you
and anything you may have said. It is not whether I agreed or disagreed,
nor whether I like what you said... I wanted to touch on differences of
"reporting" styles and rules on-line vs. "mainstream" press.
As it happens, I feel that what you're digging up is bang on! But that's
not what I was attempting to discuss.
>If my comments upset you Glenn, delete them. When you close with such cute
>and disingenuous remarks as
>
>"so much of the non-mainstream press is viewed as gossip or
>vindictive (speaking in the general case, and not to anything or
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>anyone here -- seriously!) -- like the tabloids in the supermarket
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
>lines."
As I've just said, I meant the above sincerely, and NOT directed at you.
Again... there are significant differences between mainstream media (print,
broadcast, etc.) and on-line --- that's what I was trying to get to.
Absoultely nothing upsetting about your comments, Gordon.
I'm sorry that you seemed to have taken this as a personal attack. It
surely was NOT intended as such!!!!
>At least the net has more information than it otherwise would as a result of
>my diggings. Sorry that appears to give you a problem
That does NOT give me any problems -- I'm quite glad that you and others
are digging such much up. But please, consider that the rules you
operate under might be different than the rules imposed on mainstream
reporters by their editors. The journalists I know from mainstream press,
(at least non-political reporters... don't get me started there) will dig
and report as hard and deep as you, on stories they either have to or want
to cover. Sometimes, though, they can't print the same story that you can
because of their editor -- while you only have to report to yourself (and
be paid by subscribers), they often have more restrictions on how they can
report their results.
Perhaps you can stop taking everything said here so personally so that we
can get on to discussing issues...
So, if anyone wants to, can we discuss the differences between mainstream
non-online journalism vs. on-line journalism -- and where things are
heading...
---
Glenn Tenney
tenney@netcom.com Amateur radio: AA6ER
(415) 574-3420 Fax: (415) 574-0546
