Maureen O'Gara No Longer Welcome at LinuxWorld

flood6 writes "On the heels of yesterday's article about unrest at LinuxWorld, editor James Turner is reporting in his blog that Sys-Con Media has decided to purge Maureen O'Gara from the print and online publications." From the post: "Sys-con Media listened to what I and my fellow editors, their advertisers and the readership was saying, and made the correct decision. Maureen O'Gara's bylined material will no longer appear anywhere in the Sys-con universe of sites or publications. We have received this commitment in writing from Fuat Kircaali, the publisher." PJ at Groklaw also has commentary on this development.

Comments

Ding Dong the Witch Is Dead

[gowen]

It's not surprising, really, since MO'G's last article on Pamela Jones so clearly overstepped the bounds of decent, public interest journalist.

Incidentally, was I the only person who felt that insinuating that PJ's religion was wacko was particularly ironic, given that Maureen's paymasters at SCO were based in Utah, home of the not-exactly-christian-orthodox Church of the Latter Day Saints.

Re:Ding Dong the Witch Is Dead

[Anonymous Coward]

These jokes about death are not funny.

Remember, this is a case involving a self described gun nut who travels under assumed names

Bloomberg News
Darl McBride, chief executive of SCO Group Inc., says he sometimes carries a gun because his enemies are out to kill him. He checks into hotels under assumed names.

This same nut in a company conference call described hiring people to follow PJ.

This is a case involving "suicides" of people who have disagreements with the SCO management team that even SCO supporters can't explain (DiDio calling it "shocking and mystifying" and even Enderle saying "Why commit suicide right after the settlement when the people you wanted gone are gone? The timing doesn't seem right, given that things were presumably going her way as far as the lawsuit was concerned".

Given the context, death isn't funny, even when talking about wicked witches like OGara.

Re:Censorship!!

[gowen]

It's not censorship, you moron. No magazine or website is morally, legally or ethically obliged to publish anything, by anybody. Especially considering O'Gara will expect them to pay her.

If O'Gara wishes to continue to spout her drivel, there are roughly 27 trillion channels remaining open to her.

Editors

[Talian]

I know editor is a dirty word here on slashdot, but with a supposed profesionally publication where the hell were the editors?

Don't most people expect writers to bring drafts and editors tweak before publishing? I mean did NO ONE on staff read this article before it went live? Did they just hand her a publish account and let her loose?

She sounds like scum, but there's some serious procedure problems as well that allowed this kind of work to happen.

O'Gara May Have Violated Federal Law

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were P.J., I'd be filing charges on O'Gara right now. Her actions are likely sufficient to fall under 18 USC 875(c), the Interstate Stalking Punishment and Prevention Act of 1996. She traveled across state lines in an effort to violate the privacy of an individual who has quite reasonable fear for her safety. O'Gara may also be liable under New York's anti-stalking laws as well.

At the very least, I'd be filing for a restraining order by now.

Furthermore, Sys-Con was exceptionally negligent in ever allowing that sort of thing to be published. Not only is it a gross and blatant violation of journalistic ethics, but it's quite possibly opened them up to a devastating legal action.

It's beyond disgusting that something like that would ever be published - most bloggers wouldn't dream of pulling crap like that, but to have a supposedly "professional" organization allow potentially libelous and obviously private information to be disseminated is absolutely unconscionable.

Re:So who is she

[It doesn't come easy]

Speaking as an avid reader of Groklaw, the problem is not PJ per se. The problem is that Groklaw has been quite instrumental in digging out the evidence that gives lie to SCO's various claims (I wouldn't be surprised to find out after the case is done that Groklaw's research was used by both sides in their preparations).

Whether Maureen O'Gara acted under direction from SCO and company, or whether she is just a biased journalist, remains to be seen. But the recent spate of articles against PJ is more of an attack against Groklaw's effectiveness (and by inference in my opinion, free and open dialog). The fact that O'Gara et al have stooped to personal attacks in itself says a lot about their desperation (again, IMHO).

It's really comical in one sense, yet dangerously close to blatant hate mongering (I can't think of any other way to say it, sorry). For a professional journalist to publish personal details like Maureen O'Gara did is inexcusable (I'm sure Maureen wouldn't want her personal details published on a web page -- imagine all of the anti-SCO kooks out there that might use it for nefarious purposes).

In any case, apparently the only thing that SCO can come up with to counter Groklaw is to try and paint it as an IBM lackey or worse, and so both Groklaw and PJ has been under attack recently. All I can say is, when it comes to trust and integrity, who would you pick: SCO or Groklaw?