tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post3017256524912416564..comments2023-08-19T06:19:28.990-04:00Comments on the nytpicker: Tech Guru Tim O'Reilly Claims "Words Put Into My Mouth" By NYT's Ashlee Vance In Monday's Microsoft Story.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-6612784330033265422010-07-09T19:21:12.703-04:002010-07-09T19:21:12.703-04:00As one who grew up on Q-basic and commodore-64, ch...As one who grew up on Q-basic and commodore-64, choosing to hide and downplay all computer mastery for reason of survival, literally, it is curious that the startup crowd is ‘hip’, while hardened developers (regardless of which monopoly eventually sucks them in) are not. I am not one to care to reclaim the hip designator, and generally let it equal to be given little credence, worthless, to be weeded out... whereas in the marketing and consumer manipulation world, it is a very positive term. So could it be that this is where the confusion arose? Again, this may be an overreach, so feel free to correct.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-75126987200720961022010-07-09T08:49:39.453-04:002010-07-09T08:49:39.453-04:00and Tim contd
''Had a followup conversati...and Tim contd<br /><br />''Had a followup conversation with Ashlee Vance about this. We talked about the sausage-making process of journalism, and how what I said about where Microsoft's developer culture was still vibrant got cut from the story in various editing passes. <br /><br />I do think that Ashlee had a story he wanted to tell, and led the conversation with me in a way to get the hook he needed to tell that story. (Michael Arrington talks about that here: http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/08/we-need-more-opinions-in-news-not-less/ ) But I don't think Ashlee intentionally misrepresented me, and it was probably going too far for me to call the story "flamebait."<br /><br />We're talking about making lemons out of lemonade, and doing a followup story together about some of the research O'Reilly has done on the developer marketplace, and just what it tells us about how Microsoft is doing with developers. This is a great exercise in exploring the way that blogging and professional journalism are converging, and how social media changes the rules of engagement between sources and journalists. So we want to use the opportunity and make something good come out of it. Stay posted''DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-11159077416119926932010-07-09T08:48:34.852-04:002010-07-09T08:48:34.852-04:00REILLY con'd
''There are repeated ins...REILLY con'd<br /><br />''There are repeated instances of "Mr O'Reilly said," followed by paragraphs that any reader would assume were a paraphrase of my remarks, when to me, they appear to be a paraphrase of what Ashlee was wanting to say in his own words, and looking for some kind of hook that would allow him to tie it back to me. That's why I said that this was an opinion piece masquerading as reporting. <br /><br />Those of you who've said that interviews should be recorded are right. I will certainly make sure I do that in future. I don't want this to turn into a big game of finger pointing, because I'm sure that Ashlee feels strongly that he reported our conversation accurately. And journalists often take some juicy quote from a long interview, a bit out of context, and you wish people had the context. But if you look at this story, my comments are a huge part of the entire narrative. And it's not my narrative, it's Ashlee's, just made to look like it's mine. <br /><br />Just for the record, I did say “For developers, mobile is what’s hip now, and there are two platforms that matter — Apple and Android,” and I did say "“This [cancellation of the Kin] should be seen as a success for them,” Mr. O’Reilly said. “They grew fat and happy, but are now waking up to their different competitive position.” Both of those quotes sound like me, and I recognize having said them. And they are used roughly in the context that I said them.''DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-77286016365697201762010-07-09T08:47:30.176-04:002010-07-09T08:47:30.176-04:00Tim O'Reilly told commenters on his blog later...Tim O'Reilly told commenters on his blog later:<br /><br />''Ashlee and I had a long conversation. It's certainly possible that in that conversation, I said something like what Ashlee quoted me as saying, but in a very specific context. For example, late in the conversation, I told him about a study our Research group had done several years ago based on our database of millions of online job postings, comparing recruiting for PHP, ASP.Net, and Ruby on Rails among the general developer population, and among self-identified startups. And I told him in that context (and in fact had my research team send him some updates on that research.) And yes, I told him that there was a huge difference in recruiting for those web technologies among startups versus the general population. But there's a big leap from there to make it into a general statement in the present tense, like “Microsoft is totally off the radar of the cool, hip, cutting-edge software developers," especially when my initial response to Ashlee's question was to talk about the idea that there are a lot of markets that matter (and have a lot of money in them) where Microsoft is still a force to be reckoned with. <br /><br />Some of my response is to reading paraphrases that just don't sound like me, or things that I've even thought. For example, in the course of the conversation, I talked about startups using open source and cloud/web 2.0 technologies, but I don't ever remember talking about computer science graduates, or even having an opinion about what CS graduates are studying (because I don't interact that much with that community), yet the comment becomes: "But the recent crops of computer science graduates and start-ups have tended to move far afield from Microsoft, Mr. O’Reilly said."DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-982212911319624682010-07-09T08:47:30.177-04:002010-07-09T08:47:30.177-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-40381692639695737232010-07-09T08:46:48.059-04:002010-07-09T08:46:48.059-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-88843908411963207322010-07-09T08:42:40.006-04:002010-07-09T08:42:40.006-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.DANIELBLOOMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05130493903696077379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-53356678253273381972010-07-09T08:42:01.476-04:002010-07-09T08:42:01.476-04:00RE: According to Wikipedia, Vance was a reporter f...RE: According to Wikipedia, Vance was a reporter for The Register -- a British website that covered the technology industry -- for five years before joining the NYT staff in September of 2008 as a technology reporter...."<br /><br />Yes, and the recent Times story about Ray Kurzweil's Singularity theory, which seemed to be more of a PR posse roundup than a real news story, also quoted Andrew Orlowsky, who still writes for the Register, without the Times giving disclosure about the writer's earlier job there. Just sloppy. But Vance is one good reporter. A Pulitzer is on tap one of these days. Watch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-22996261944785793272010-07-08T11:00:11.109-04:002010-07-08T11:00:11.109-04:00O'Reilly has to be highly experienced in deali...O'Reilly has to be highly experienced in dealing with all sorts of media. With that in mind, he should produce a recording of the interview, even a digital version.<br /><br />Vance's and anyone else's delay in responding clouds and casts further doubt on the accuracy of the article.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-11973924514581257722010-07-07T15:36:40.798-04:002010-07-07T15:36:40.798-04:00While I'm curious to hear what Mr. Vance has t...While I'm curious to hear what Mr. Vance has to say, I know that Tim O'Reilly is a very careful politician who makes plenty of money because of his relationship with Microsoft. Shoot, Microsoft even sponsors OSCON, a conference that's largely devoted to undermining many of Microsoft's business ventures. People like this often start squalking about being misquoted when they say too much.<br /><br />https://en.oreilly.com/oscon2010/public/register<br /><br /><br /> It's kind of odd for a person to say that he generally agrees with the article and the points attributed to him, but complain about how they sound or to suggest they came from someone else. Unless the reporter has real trouble taking notes, I can't think of a reason why he would gather the information from one place and attribute it to O'Reilly. <br /><br />I think O'Reilly got a bit too friendly and forgot the tape player was running-- so to speak. (It would be a bit embarrassing if there's actually a tape of this anywhere outside of the NSA.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8007635024151290238.post-88135926071560002082010-07-07T15:33:44.106-04:002010-07-07T15:33:44.106-04:00While I'm curious to hear what Mr. Vance has t...While I'm curious to hear what Mr. Vance has to say, I know that Tim O'Reilly is a very careful politician who makes plenty of money because of his relationship with Microsoft. Shoot, Microsoft even sponsors OSCON, a conference that's largely devoted to undermining many of Microsoft's business ventures. People like this often start squalking about being misquoted when they say too much.<br /><br />https://en.oreilly.com/oscon2010/public/register<br /><br /><br /> It's kind of odd for a person to say that he generally agrees with the article and the points attributed to him, but complain about how they sound or to suggest they came from someone else. Unless the reporter has real trouble taking notes, I can't think of a reason why he would gather the information from one place and attribute it to O'Reilly. <br /><br />I think O'Reilly got a bit too friendly and forgot the tape player was running-- so to speak. (It would be a bit embarrassing if there's actually a tape of this anywhere outside of the NSA.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com