Groklaw Refutes LinuxWorld Story About AIX Sources

rimberg writes "Maureen O'Gara printed a story about what allegedly was said in the last court hearing between IBM and SCO. Groklaw had eyewitnesses at the hearing. None of them reports seeing Ms. O'Gara there. Furthermore, none of them heard any of what she 'reports' about IBM supposedly claiming not to be able to find code. Let me repeat that. IBM never said anything like that, according to groklaw eyewitnesses."

Comments

Sources ?

[noselasd]

Indeed interresting.
Now, where did the rumor that IBM said it couldn't find the sources come from ?

Good point

[erick99]

Groklaw seems rather peeved at SlashDot. Is it deserved? I'm not sure, but, it's worth thinking about.

I have not provided a link deliberately. If you wish to read her article, you can find it, I'm sure by a Google search or off of Slashdot, since they made what I consider the unfortunate editorial decision to give the story more widespread readership than it otherwise would have received.

Re:Good point

[tod_miller]

I commented a while ago regarding the news source definition of /.

Google ran a title from /. that misrepresented the very story they were aggregating. Thus /. dilluted the truth on this occassion to the detriment of the news reading folk.

Now a link in the very same /. that proclaims this stupid story here points out that groklaw put things to right.

However, groklaw v slashdot readship... so while I think this story is a bit redundant in news terms, it does go some way to patch up the and clearly show linuxworld.com to be a bunch of twerps.

I say each sotry categorically states its news source(s) linking to a modded style news source rating (which moves up and down etc)

Then msn.com/msnbc.com can royally go and fsck themselves in -1 universe.

The story google picked up on was the Kodak / Sun claim case. I think google shouldn't link Slashdot stories - as they are not news sources, but commentary on news sources.

Re:Good point

[igrp]

God - really common sense has to occasionally be used. Though I'm not in favour of censorship, such a blatant and unrealistic article should have at least been delayed a day or so before release.

Well, in my humble opinion, that's the real beauty. You not only get to make up your own mind. You get to read what others think about a statement, an assertion or a broader concept and make up your mind based on that.

It's a two-way approach, if you will. Unlike a newspaper, not a single entity decides if a story is "true" (if there even is such a thing). Sure, the editors decide if it's newsworthy, ie. if it gets approved and if it makes the frontpage. But the determination if what the story is about is non-sense or not is left to the reader.

And since Slashdot has such a wide-ranging readership, there are usually plenty of people to point out mistakes, misconceptions and straight-out lies and add insight to a story. That's actually why I keep coming here - because I'm interested in other people's views. I usually already have an opinion before I read the first comments (I actually do the articles, at least most of the time). But there's always a comment that makes me go "hmm, I never looked at it like that".

That's what's so cool about having a global readership - diversity and perspective.

Re:Good point

[strider44]

The problem with the article is that it just has more openly glaring factual errors or misrepresentations than the "get the facts" campaign. I'm all for printing facts and letting the reader determine what's right or wrong. But really, half of the readers of slashdot just read the summaries. They don't read the comments or the articles. Look at the summary - it looks fine, told in the usual slashdot vogue. Click through to the story and you'll see crap, but half the readers won't be enlightened by the multiple layers of crap in that article, and will believe that the summary is true, that IBM are in trouble, have broken the law, and are dishonest.

Now nothing came out of it this time since there was a virtual retraction posted not long later, but slashdot, like it or not, is a respected news website with what I've heard is a million readers. Many people trust what they read without reading the articles, and public harm can come of it.

Re:Good point

[fermion]

this only makes Groklaw look like they are hiding something. truth does not emerge through the selectrive printing of prescreened propoganda, but through the widespread distribution of varied opinions and points of view, some of which are probably propoganda. The truth is further served by acive discussion on those opinions, a think for which /. is quite good.

By whining that /. posted a unfavorable story, groklaw is establishing itself as exactly the fan stie other accuse it of being. There was likely nothing amiss with /. editorial decision. An interesting point of view was submitted, posted, and generated active discussion. An opposing point of view was then submitted posted, and will again generate discussion. That last part is the difference between freedom and not. As I often say, if you can't handle the responsibilies and dangers of freedom, move to someplace where you don't have them.

Re:Good point

[global_diffusion]

If you take it that slashdot is a place that performs editorial checks on submissions then yes, but I don't think it's designed to be that. It's a link dump with a place for us to comment.

But you could also argue that since slashdot has become such a major player in internet news, that it should think about playing to higher journalistic standards. Kind of like how the news media is pressing Jon Stewart to ask more "hard-hitting" questions in his interviews after his cnn/crossfire comments.

O'Gara has an anti-Linix/anti-Open Source history

[ezraekman]

Well, quickly browsing through other articles she's written, a pro-microsoft/anti-linux bias can clearly be shown. This isn't the first time GrokLaw has reported on O'Gara. She also seems to go for more sensational headlines, in general. I can't say I'm terribly surprised. Here's my favorite quote:

O'Gara's fondness for anonymous sources and unattributed quotes diminishes the corroborative value of the story.

Maureen O'Gara herself refutes the article

[esap]

It seems even Maureen O'Gara thinks the article was not true:
( http://www.linuxworld.com/story/46800_f.htm)

"Maureen O'Gara commented on 23 October 2004:

* I'm really sorry everyone. I want you all to know that this was really intended as a satire piece, but the editors didn't realise and have published it as fact.

It was really hard to keep a straight face while writing it, and I was obviously hoping for the same reaction from my readers.

Oh, the ads here are satire too. Have you read the M$ TCO one? It's a hoot!"

So I think there is nothing to see here.

Re:pwn3d!

[MadFarmAnimalz]

It seems a lot of people have already contacted the LinuxWeek editors; they've posted a link on the front page to the story with the tagline

Fed up with crap articles like this?

Let the management know: lwmeditors@sys-con.com

Way to get mileage out of tis bizarre mistake...

Linux owns Linux trademark, yes?

[Blymie]

Hold a moment here.

Doesn't Linus _own_ the Linux trademark now? This being the case, is there not
some form of direct action he could take, forcing anti-Linux websites from using
the word "Linux" in their name?

Re:Linux owns Linux trademark, yes?

[RAMMS EIN]

``If he were able to do that with a trademark, then Microsoft would have too, and would have censored every anti-MS news site out there.''

Well, that's kind of happening. Lindows had to change names due to trademark suits from Microsoft, and some people I know had their MSN Messenger fan (WTF?) sites shut down by Microsoft (WTF?) for trademark infringement.

As for shutting down anti-Microsoft sites, I guess they could do that if the site uses some trademarked word, or something similar (like Micro$oft) in their name.

I also think the same thing applies to Linus. He _could_ take action against LinuxWorld, but why would he? Better to let the FUDsters make asses out of themselves. Then he can point a finger and say "that's what our enemies are like". In this case, at about the same level as Linux zealots...

Re:Linux owns Linux trademark, yes?

[HiThere]

You mean what's to stop a site like "LinuxInsider" from existing?

Nothing. It does exist. So does "LinuxWorld". Both are sites that are frequently, to my eyes, less than favorable to Linux. In fact, they tend to be sufficiently slanted that I won't bother to read them any longer.

Re:pwn3d!

[LiquidCoooled]

The tagline you are seeing is actually the latest feedback item posted on the article.

Its currently showing:
I call Shenanigans! (read more and respond... )

On the LinuxWorld front page, and on the page you displayed.

I bet the feedback display system works REALLY well for decent stories, but I think its backfiring here - or is it ALL done just for the page impressions....

Their sites ARE overloaded with ads.

Could Groklaw ever admit they were wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not saying they are but their whole claim to fame is debunking SCO stuff so what happens if something turned out to be true? Could they ever admit it? They are so invested in taking the anti-SCO side I don't see them as able to really bring an unbiased analysis. I like the bias in favor of Linux and IBM of course but I don't want smoke blown up my ass if something illegal actually did occur! Mainly because I don't want a nasty suprise after false sense of assuredness.

What is up with IDG allowing this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know IDG has many profit motives for catering to Linux. They haven't had a perfect record. However, they were one of the first companies to 'get it' and I think there is a large amount of respect given between them and the community.

What I want to know is: What does IDG think about this magazine using its trademark? Does it want its expo name associated with it?

If you look at the current list of articles on the site, they seem pro Linux, the have many unique and postive articles. However the 'scoops' that get picked up by other sites appear to be totally biased against Linux. Someone is approving of the spew from Maureen O'Gara. Someone is paying her for this. Is the SYS-CON management/editorial staff looking for yellow journalism as it sells hits?

If so, they are shooting themselves in the foot here in the long run. Just as these are the only articles people read on their site, they will be the only ones people think the write. However, right now they are also damaging IDG's credability by direct association.

Re:What is up with IDG allowing this?

[Fnkmaster]

Is the SYS-CON management/editorial staff looking for yellow journalism as it sells hits?

Look at some of the stuff she's written in the past. It's clear that she and her editors are thriving on the advertising impressions that trolling gets. Slashdot is just encouraging them by giving them attention - they have no concept of negative press or feedback.

Several people have pointed out that Bruce Perens is on the SYS-CON Media "International Board of Advisors". Bruce, I don't know if this gives you the ear of anybody significant at SYS-CON (this could just be an honorific with no meaning whatsoever), but if it does, we would all seriously appreciate you using that ear to express your disgust over this practice.

My letter

[Mr.Ned]

Hello LinuxWorld editors,

I was very disappointed with the article "IBM Tells SCO Court It Can't Find AIX-on-Power Code" (http://www.linuxworld.com/story/46800_p.htm) by Maureen O'Gara. I was offended by the demeaning tone of the article which shamelessly mixed personal opinion with reported fact. However, it has come to my attention that the article may not even have fact in it - another reputable news site, Groklaw, apparently had several people on hand at that particular hearing and not only reported that nothing Ms. O'Gara claims to have happend did, but also that Ms. O'Gara was never there. The full article is available here (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20041023 153851359).

I hope you investigate this matter to discover if Groklaw's claims are true. This is a serious breach of journalistic integrity that should not be ignored if LinuxWorld expects itself to be seen as a source of reliable news.

Thanks,

<me>

MS settled the suit they initiated

[bstadil]

Lindows had to change names due to trademark suits from Microsoft,

MS paid them $20M to change names after it looked like they were going to lose the very dubious Windoes Trademark. MS sued and pretty much lost.

I'm not so sure...

[Xenographic]

I don't dispute that the man seems to me like he has a screw loose (and that just from the posts I've seen by him--there are plenty of others who offer evidence that would tend to support the idea that he's clear out of his mind).

Anyhow, if you read this Groklaw story, you'll see that there may be a SCO lawyer connection here. That might be bad, because when they talked to O'Gara, they sure went on a lot about the privilege log and such concerning that privileged document SCO tried to read into the public record (which is *bad*). In other words, it *really* looks like SCO is leaking things it ought not to the media. Now, I can't prove any of that, but I would say that it's certainly beyond the appearance of impropriety to even discuss that with the media.

As for Merkey, here, I doubt he was behind the O'Gara stories here--I suspect O'Gara and a source close to SCO were. Expect IBM to be on the ball here and to start seeing just *what* all SCO has told the media. Now then, you're probably right about him coming up with more wild stories (buying Linux for $50,000 and putting it under a BSD license to "save" it... after he removes all the "SCO-owned" bits).

In other words, we can expect a LOT of crazy stuff before this story is over :] Damn, someone ought to make a movie out of it, though I guess it'd be hard to explain the importance of it to people who didn't follow this...

Re:I'm not so sure...

[stevesliva]

Damn, someone ought to make a movie out of it, though I guess it'd be hard to explain the importance of it to people who didn't follow this...

A story in which a massive multinational corporation defends the right of the little guy with its lawyer hordes in a battle royale against creativity-killing, hard work-stealing greedy bastards from the most conservative of the United States!

Yeah, that would suck.

"Presserat"

[CaptainZapp]

In the German speaking sticks of the globe there's an institution called "Presserat", which translates roughly to press council.

It's not a government organisation, but rather a self control entity by the press.

The idea is, that the public or victim of a press campaign can file a complaint and they will determine if the general agreed upon press ethics where violated by that media and/or journalist.

Of course there are a lot of frivolous complaints around the lines "they shortened my letter to the editor" (which is perfectly fine as long the meaning is not distorted) or "this article hurt my feelings" (which a paper is not obliged to respect in the first place, you can stop reading it after all).

What is a clear violation is to publish gross accusations (Politico Suchnsuch embezzled the church bingo fund and then fucked a pig) without confronting the victim with such allegations prior to publishing. A practical example was a paper being reprimanded for fotoshoping water stains to a blood red color, to make the site of a terror attack more ghoulish.

Of course lying outright, possibly knowingly and heaven forbid! taking payola for such an outrage (alas I don't know if this was the case and would never accuse a fine member of the press of such an atrocity) is about as much violation of press ethics as humanly possible.

Finding are published and the idea is that the media in question is publicly hung up high and dry and shamed into humility.

It doesn't replace a libel court case, though but overall it seems to work pretty nicely.

Re:pwn3d!

[miu]

I've often found her editorial commentary overwrought and hyperbolic, but her information is excellent and her legal analysis is spot on.

I avoid reading that site for that very reason - she may be spot on and an excellent analyst but her fangirl presentation style damages her credibility.

Maureen O'gara has a wife???

[Stephen Samuel]

The actual article is entitled The Trials of Getting My Wife to Run Linux (LinuxWorld) and claims to be authored by Maureen O'Gara. The leading paragraph starts:

My wife runs Windows 98 on her little 300mhz computer and it basically does what she needs - some photo editing, writing of documents, spreadsheets, e-mail, and Web surfing. ...

Not much wiggle room there. I can see 3 possible explanations here:

1. Maureen is Lesbian... I live on the west coast (Vancouver), so that's not only not hard to swallow -- It seems entirely feasable.
2. She's in a polyamorous relationship. Given that she likes supporting SCO, who hail from Utah, This too, doesn't strike me as entirely unreasonable. (yes, I know that most people in Utah only have one spouse, but Polygamy is at least more infamous there than anywhere else).
3. She's fobbing off someone else's as her own and didn't even botheer to do the most minimal of editing before posting it.
4. Personally, I'd say that #3 is the most disturbing of the three.

5. I guess we could add #4, that she's really a transgendered "he", but I'd say you could swallow that inside of #1.