[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IFWP] More Bias from Reuters?
At 12:54 PM 9/16/99 , Nick Patience wrote:
>At 11:31 AM 9/16/99 -0400, you wrote:
>>Either NSI has drastically changed positions,
>>or Reuter's is once again employing bias in
>>their coverage of the ICANN process!
>>Here's a recent Reuter's story:
>>>The process has been delayed by wrangling over fees and database
>>>access between the Commerce Department, Network Solutions Inc. and
>>>the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN),
>>>that is meant to oversee the new structure.
>The Reuters story is not the result of a pre-conceived bias or conspiracy
>Jay, it's just a quick re-write of the Dept of Commerce press release with
>a couple of sentences added. Probaby took five miniutes max to produce. If
>there's bias, it's coming from that.
While you are probably correct, that
doesn't change the fact that Reuters
has *yet* to tell their readership the
whole story about ICANN.
And while major publications like the
NY Times and Business Week have picked
up the story, their combined circulation
is a mere fraction of the potential
circulation of a Reuters story.
In other words, most of the citizens of
the world are getting a distorted and one
sided view of the ICANN process.
President, Iperdome, Inc. 770-392-9480
What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is
ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third,
it is accepted as self-evident." (Arthur Schopenhauer)