[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Another Test of Media Bias
- To: Chris DeVoney <chrisd@cybercritic.com>, Becky Burr <bburr@ntia.doc.gov>, "eric.link@mail.house.gov" <eric.link@mail.house.gov>, paul.scolese@mail.house.gov, mark.harrington@mail.house.gov, james.tierney@usdoj.gov, Esther Dyson <edyson@edventure.com>, Mike Roberts <mmr@darwin.ptvy.ca.us>, comments@icann.org
- Subject: Re: Another Test of Media Bias
- From: Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Sep 1999 02:28:21 -0400
- Cc: DOMAIN-POLICY@LISTS.INTERNIC.NET, list@ifwp.org, com-priv@lists.psi.com
- In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.19990830230851.00a24c60@38.232.34.2>
- References: <199908310547.BAA26554@smtp6.mindspring.com>
Hi Chris,
Thank you for being one of the first reporters
to *publicly* respond to my continuing claims of
media bias.
In probably 10 postings now, I've pointed out
how the press has been suppressing the real story
about ICANN. About how ICANN is really about the
establishment of Internet Governance. About how this
Internet Governance may impinge upon civil liberties
world-wide. And about the many, many ways that the
establishment of this Internet Governance has been
fraught with gaming, capture, and questionable
activities from day one.
If ICANN is really about the establishment of Internet
Governance (and many believe that it is), then the press
has an obligation to inform their readers of this. If
this process has been fraught with gaming, capture, and
questionable activities, then certainly, the press has
an obligation to inform their readers of this, as well.
Do you disagree?
On July 22nd, Mikki Barry, President of the Domain
Name Rights Coalition, testified to the Congressional
Committee on Oversight and Investigation on "The Domain
Name System Privatization: Is ICANN Out of Control?"
Mikki's testimony, given under oath and penalty of
perjury, summarized the many, many ways that the
establishment of Internet Governance has been
fraught with gaming, capture, and questionable
activities.
http://www.domain-name.org/testimony722.html
This testimony has not been covered in even *ONE*
press report!!!
So yesterday, when Mikki posted her reply to the
*continuing* Congressional investigation, I posted
the following:
At 01:51 AM 8/31/99 , Jay Fenello wrote:
>FYI -- this was just sent to almost
>200 reporters covering DNS issues:
>
>>To: [My Private Press List]
>>Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 01:46:02 -0400
>>From: Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com>
>>Subject: Another Test of Media Bias
>>
>>Here is what the Congressional Committee
>>on Oversight and Investigation is hearing
>>about ICANN . . .
>>
>> http://minion.netpolicy.com/dnrc/82799cong.html
>>
>>What are you telling your readership about
>>these issues?
>>
>>Your actions, or lack thereof, are being
>>made part of the historical record.
>>
>>The Internet is watching . . .
To which you replied:
At 02:16 AM 8/31/99 , Chris DeVoney wrote:
>Mr Fenello
>President, Iperdome, Inc.
>
>Sir:
>
>I'm tried of your whining.
I post newsworthy information about the
*continuing* Congressional investigation into
the gaming, capture, and questionable activities
of ICANN, and you chastise me for whining!
Curious.
>My actions, or lack thereof, is stopping me from
>exposing the origins of your complaints is a monetary self-interest than
>for benefit of netcitizens.
Since I may possibly profit as a result of exposing
the gaming, capture, and questionable activities of
ICANN and the establishment of Internet Governance,
you should ignore my postings!
Curious.
Unfortunately, you know very little about me.
For example, in my reply to the very first U.S.
Government public process, I suggested *doing
away* with gTLDs like .per and .com!!!
http://iperdome.com/press/noi.txt
In other words, I supported a solution that
would *NOT* have been favorable to Iperdome.
I did this not for personal profit, but because
I believed it to be the right thing to do!
In addition, I have also offered to make Iperdome
a "not for profit" corporation (just like ICANN :-)
if it would solve our current problems. That offer
still stands!
Regardless, I am not alone in my belief that ICANN
is about Internet Governance, and I am not alone in
my belief that the process is bogus. In fact, your
flippant dismissal only raises more questions.
Again, curious.
>Please stop these insipid releases to the press.
I will not, as they appear to be helping to
educate reporters. Here's a very small list
of stories that have broken through the media
blackout:
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/08/biztech/articles/30ican.html
http://intellectualcapital.com/issues/issue280/item6052.asp
http://www.rain.org/~openmind/icann.htm
http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/te/5166/1.html
But Chris, don't despair -- I do honor all
unsubscribe requests. Just let me know.
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
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)
>Chris DeVoney
>Hardware Editor
>Sm@rt Reseller Magazine
>
>www.smartreseller.com
>mailto:chris_devoney@zd.com
>mailto:chrisd@cybercritic.com