Linux community told to 'get real'

[mikeymike]

The BBC were not biased on the Iraq war.

This is an email I sent to some friends just before the war started:
------
On the news, they were just showing some statistics of public polls about going to war with Iraq.

Regardless of the statistics being over or under 50% (give or take 20%), whenever a statistic was anti-war, they would say "a whole x% were against" or "a massive x% were against", and then "only x% were for"... I mean, can they at least try not to sound so blatantly biased, it's totally pathetic.  After that, they were coming up with statistics that obviously proved that the questions put to the people who voted were also biased, as they came out with things like:

"a whole 45% were against war with iraq, while only 49% were pro war, and even then 40% of those said after another backing UN resolution, and only 3% said regardless of another UN resolution", which means they had to have asked questions that were trying to water down the pro-voters' opinions.
------

[mikeymike]

@ Wain

That's an old article, Novell have since then caved in on those claims.

[Crispy_Beef]

dammy wrote:
Is the BBC corporation still financially supported by British tax dollars, btw?

We aren't quite the 51st state yet...  ;-)

[Rigger]

That's an old article, Novell have since then caved in on those claims.

Link would have been nice.

Novell Statement on SCO Contract Amendment

But still confusing. Novell says they still hold the patents but not the copyright?

[mikeymike]

Link would have been nice.

I couldn't remember where I read it :-)

[Wolfe]

The BBC is so biased that its world credibility is going down hill.  Look at the latest BS about Iraq.  Lies.  Not a slight error.  Lies.

The BBC has its own agenda.  For those who side with the BBC, well I guess its fits your view point on the world.

But make no mistake - They Are Biased on many subjects.

Poor journalism.  Slanted.   8-)

[bhoggett]

@Wolfe

Or it might be that a lot of important and powerful people are sh*t-scared that their blatant lies will be exposed as such and the Iraq war will be seen as what it really was: a blatant military conquest motivated by political and economic self-interest.

As for the article in question, it's not biased, just based on misleading assumptions. They are assuming the Linux community is against SCO for defending their copyright, when in fact the community is against SCO because the indications are that they are lying their heads off.

I'd rather listen to the BBC than US based news services like Fox News, who are nothing more than a jingoistic propaganda channel, or privately owned channels who are obliged to reflect their patron's political and economic opinions.

[Crispy_Beef]

bhoggett wrote:
I'd rather listen to the BBC than US based news services like Fox News, who are nothing more than a jingoistic propaganda channel, or privately owned channels who are obliged to reflect their patron's political and economic opinions.

I think I'd have to agree with that.  During the coverage of the Iraq war I watched BBC News 24, Sky News and also ITN News channels and they all pretty much had the same stories and content.

Yeah, each had a slightly different angle on stuff, but that's representative of a different journalist reporting on something.  On the whole I've never really had much of an issue with the BBC.

If a story is wrong then email them and say so, I've done that a couple of times and they listened and then changed the items.

[smithy]

But make no mistake - They Are Biased on many subjects.

Yeah, I'd agree with that.  But even though they were critical of the war, in general they are quite pro-Blair.

During the fuel strikes last year, every newspaper and TV station were focusing on the price of oil inflated by government tax rises (which is what caused the strikes).  The BBC, and some Labour-supporting newspapers completely ignored the cause of the strikes and took the government line and made their headlines about the effects on the NHS.

[Wain]

Novell Statement on SCO Contract Amendment

But still confusing. Novell says they still hold the patents but not the copyright?

Interesting, but wouldn't Novell's original claim still hold true??   I thought SCO was claiming patent theft, not copyright infingment.

[redrumloa]

Or it might be that a lot of important and powerful people are sh*t-scared that their blatant lies will be exposed as such and the Iraq war will be seen as what it really was: a blatant military conquest motivated by political and economic self-interest.

baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah :-p

[Tomas]

support actions such as the recent denial of service attack on the SCO website.

Unfortunately, the typical response of a Linux user to SCO's claims has been to dismiss them.

Yeah, cause the claims are totally false. SCO did this only to get their shares up, then fill their greedy pockets with money by then selling them.

support actions such as the recent denial of service attack on the SCO website.

How can they claim every linux user supports the attacks against SCO?? Just because some does, dosent mean that everyone does.

[mikeymike]

support actions such as the recent denial of service attack on the SCO website.

What does that achieve?

[Tomas]

mikeymike wrote:

support actions such as the recent denial of service attack on the SCO website.

What does that achieve?

Nothing other than hurting the image of the linux community...
Probably SCO themself who attacked themself  :-P

[mikeymike]

The way you said it, I thought you advocated that...

[Targhan]

First things first.  What exactly is SCO claiming was "copied"?  Next, where should (not is) their blame be pointed to?  Finally, why is it that the users got drug into it?  GPL is fairly clear, and a user only has that to go on when the acquire a Linux Distrobution.

I do want to add that it is utterly disgusting, in my opinion, for ANY reporting body to attack USERS.