[8773] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: TIME magazine article spreads NSFnet MYTH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Carl Briggs, Public Relations)
Sat Dec 4 14:06:35 1993
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1993 14:04:15 -0500 (EST)
From: "Carl Briggs, Public Relations" <BRIGGS@ab.wvnet.edu>
To: cook@path.net, COM-PRIV@psi.com
X-Vms-To: WVNET::IN%"cook@path.net"
Mr. Cook
Fine words of critique on the _Time_ mag article, but I think it's a bit
strained to spend too much time criticizing a reporter's choice of the
phrase "...and the agency is scheduled to start phasing out..."
Sure, maybe when some "source" told the _Time_ guy there was a "schedule"
to start "phasing out," the NSF talk at that time might have been that. But
what does "schedule" mean? What does "phasing out" mean?
If the head of the NSF had said, "We will terminate funding beginning blah,
blah, blah," well, sure, that would be news.
But schedules can change all the time. Maybe it was some leak or trial balloon.
Maybe it was one person who didn't attend the _most recent meeting_, where, it
turns out, the NSF will _double_ funding. Whatever...
My only point is that reporters rely on junk words like "schedule" and
"phasing out" because real, hard language to predict the future is rather
unobtainable.
I don't know that there is much for the mainsteam press to dig into. I think
technology just keeps evolving, and so a "schedule" to "phase out" can
be changed or updated _hourly_, if necessary.
Until the NSF issues some official "statement of phasing out," I don't plan to
build my life around some cryptic use of weasal words like "schedule."
carl briggs
alderson-broaddus college
P.S. -- In short, it may well be a useless phrase that hardly affects the
overall integrity of the story...maybe the "phasing out" is no story, at all...
