Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Open Source Media' vs 'Open Source Media, Inc'

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the in-the-grim-future-of-hello-kitty-words-are-weapons dept.

Karl writes "Last week OSM (Open Source Media) launched to what some are calling an odd start. Most notably naming a controversy has ensued with Christopher Lydon's public radio show Open Source, a production of Open Source Media, Inc.."

3 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. Communist Propaganda Media by Pampusik · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anybody else notice that most of their "current headlines" come from China's propaganda agency, Xinhua News Agency?

    Odd start indeed...

    1. Re:Communist Propaganda Media by superdude72 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Anybody else notice that most of their "current headlines" come from China's propaganda agency, Xinhua News Agency?

      It's funny because they're right-wing and presumably anti-communist, but I expect this is simply lack of competence on their part. Xinhua is available with a lot of newsfeed packages and is very, very cheap. Might even be free. We used to get Xinhua when my company subscribed to a newsfeed a few years ago.

      Still, if they doing any filtering of their newsfeeds I wouldn't expect they'd let Xinhua flood everything like that.

  2. Full of themselves by Army+of+1+in+10 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Despite the current controversy over their choice of a name, they downplay it. Take this excerpt from their website:
    Some OSM readers have expressed consternation over our new company name, so please let us take a moment to explain--in the spirit of full disclosure--the story of its origin. At the outset, we formed a company under the masthead "Pajamas Media," after that now-famous remark about bloggers being "just a bunch of people sitting around in their pajamas." Then, as the idea for the company grew, we cast about for a new name that would reflect our ethos long after the joke grew old. Some of the unsuccessful names rejected along the way were "Alpha Media" and "Jellyfish Media," so don't be so hard on us about "OSM"--it could have been worse.

    Not only did they launch themselves with an anti-open source attitude (prohibitive copyright terms which they've since removed from their privacy policy), they didn't do a simple google search to make sure that no confusion would occur as a result of their name selection. OSM should have stuck with "Pajamas Media"... there's nothing wrong with that and it pokes reverent fun at those who shrug off bloggers.

    --
    I am an Army of 1 in 10