Here are the two links Dave is referring to:

http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=43873&DE=1

http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=46676&DE=1

It still remains to be seen why a Linux advocate site would need the advertising dollars from Microsoft to do business.

As noted in an email sent to the editors last week, the main site has two Microsoft adverts in VERY prominant positions around the story.
In addition to that, the last entry in the section called "World's Leading Linux Resources" is Microsoft (not known for being a Linux resource so far), with a by-line to the effect that Microsofts TCO is consistantly better & lower than Linux's.

I do not consider this to be the promise of continued support for Linux, but rather an effort to cash in on Linux's good name.

I have yet to hear from them, however I have made my concerns known to the LMI regarding the continued use of the word "Linux" within the name of the organisation that publishes this site.

So you would think that SYS-CON would learn a lesson or two. King Fuat took out his revenge with BEA for dropping weblogics mag by smearing in the sys-con Java developers website which put the editor of the magazine, Joe Ottinger in a similar mess and he quit

I don't read magazines - so this website is my first and only exposure to LinuxWorld. After seeing the O'Gara articles, Microsoft ads, etc. I'd never pick up the hard copy if I did see it in the store.

And now this...

So the hardcopy magazine staff has not control over the web site. Incredible.

Rube Goldberg would be proud! Can't say I'm too impressed with SYS-CON Media - websites that don't display properly, content that makes little sense, ads for products that aren't of interest to the type of readers who would visit the site...

Oh, and if Maureen can get that file unsealed and prove her point I'll happily apologize.

The Mad Hatter

Eduardo,

I am afraid I do not see this as a win, because obviously the publisher still does not get it:

"After reading the letter "From the Editors of LinuxWorld Magazine", our sister publication, we are heartbroken but yet we joined with them and the LinuxWorld publisher Jeremy Geelan to make sure that the two publications are clearly separate from each other. We will no longer provide news content to LinuxWorld Magazine's accompanying Web site. "

Does he really think having two separate publications be clearly identified and recognizable as separate is heartbreaking? What does that have to do with providing news content to LinuxWorld.com, and clearly indicating the source? If he had really read the comments here, and no one should have to tell him this in any case, a clear separation between different publications is common sense. Duh! Especially when the editorial team and policies are different, like between LinuxWorld the print magazine, and linuxworld.com.

Notice also that Feedback is disabled for Mr. Kircaali's article.

I do not say this lightly- I support a boycott of anything under Mr. Kircaali's control. It is apparent that he does not understand basic journalistic ethics and standards, and has no regard for reader's concerns. Personally, I don't care if Ms. O'Gara's columnn continues to appear in linuxworld.com- it's the deceit that bothers me. Obviously I don't know for certain, but all this identity confusion appears to be deliberate. Shame on Sys-Con.

http://www.linuxbusinessweek.com/story/46854_f.htm

I have to say I am really disappointed by the behaviour, childishness and lack of understanding by some of the commenters here.

To the editors, I am glad you took a stand and got your editoral published. I hope you can escape somewhat the clutches of SysCon control and get a chance to make your web presence a complement to your magazine.

Good luck!

Dear Editors,

Congrats on this win, hopefully all of your other endeavors are as successful.

In that vein, any hopes of redesigning the site (I know it's in the works, but why so long?)

Regards,

David Truog

Understanding O Gara and Linuw Business World - a word from their editor:

"We have been serving the Linux Business community since our launch on February 8, 2001 as a leading breaking Linux news site, providing timely Linux stories and breaking *"Linux news that means business."*

You should also understand the O Hara rants against the GPL in this context - they want Linux without the GPL.

You see - there are influential "elements" of big business that doesn't give one little cent about the freedom part of Linux -in fact I'm sure they are jumping for joy because SCO is trying to steal the fruits of that *freedom that made Linux possible* on their collective behalf - so they can get *something for nothing* and make obscene amounts of money. Talking about an attitude of freeloading.

This is, of course, a positive development.

To the LinuxWorld editorial staff:
I myself have been in similar circumstances, although certainly not within the Journalistic paradigm. Your pain is a pain that is, I'm sure, not foreign to all too many of us.

It is my sincere hope that this development is met with the same approval and relief that I am positive you will see expressed from our community in the coming days; and I commend you on your fortitude, perseverence and restraint over the past days--particularly in the light of the abuse to which you have been subjected by the impetuous among us.

Though not personally a participant in that behavior, allow me to apologize for the conduct of those who most likely will not apologize on their own behalf.

We Won! LinuxWorld will no longer be publishing LinuxBusinessWeek stories, so no more junk from O'Gara.

link: http://www.linuxbusinessweek.com/story/46854.htm

---Eduardo

Thanks to the editors for their explanations. I have been with LinuxWorld since Petreley left Infoworld and am a current subscriber to LinuxWorld magazine. I subscribe to all Linux magazines and have for years if for no other reason than to support the cause. I guess it doesn't bother me to see articles like O'Gara's and it doesn't bother me to see MS ads. It's a big world out there and the exposure just adds to my knowledge....in my area of IT I have to work with Windows whether I want to or not and I couldn't form any opinions if I didn't have information from opposing views. My opinions of SCO and Ms. O'Gara aren't very high right now but they are mine.

I think you all are doing great work and I enjoy your magazine very much...it leans towards the practical Linux view and I like that.

I might get a little porky if you were to fill the magazine with articles from Ms. O'Gara and her kind though.

Keep up the good work!!

Dear P.J. should SYS-CON also stop publishing .NET Developer's Journal? Do you think .NETDJ articles they publish also associated with linuxworld.com? Why don't you leave the linuxworld editors alone and talk to the publisher who insists to keep the story on the front page and ask why he/she is doing that.

Some of the comments posted here are totally unwarrented and unacceptable. The editors of the print version of LinuxWorld have done their best to explain what is probably for them a very difficult contractual and financial situation and how it affects editorial content on the web site.

Expressing strong, polite disagreement is fine. Offensive characterizations and insults to well-meaning peoples' lives and livelihoods are not.

Please clean up your language and attitude folks.

sPh

Dee-Ann LeBlanc wrote "I am really trying to stay out of this part of the issue since I wasn't there and so have no idea of what happened and what didn't, etc."

I think that your defense of Maureen O'Gara's article and her silence regarding the uproar is not acceptable. According to quite a few people who have been there Maureen O'Gara was not there and still her report (?) was and is published by SYS-CON. The article reports from the court room (or more precisely: from a specific position within the court room quite near to the location of the judge). How can that be?

That article in some way became associated with linuxworld.com. I think no editor of LinuxWorld can legitimately say: "I am really trying to stay out of this part of the issue." This is irresponsible.

I understand that the Editors of LW have no control over the website. The best way of letting syscon know of my displeasure however is to cancel my 2 year subscribtion. This seems to be unfair because despite the recent push to nullify the term *free* I generally like your publication. To the best of my knowlege I don't recieve any other sys_con publications so LW will have to stop recieving my money (and I'll do the best I can to convince those I first convinced to buy no long to). I am truely sorry for the editors because I believe you have told us the truth. That seems to make it even more important that I send the strongest message that I can.

To the editors - I get it - you are as much a victim as is the FOSS/Linux community over this. Thank you for your words of clarification and support of those of us disturbed by Maureen's article.

I can only hope that you are sucessful at prying open the eyes of the Sys-con staff so they can see what a mistake it is to operate in the current fashion.

I feel your distress, and thank you for maintaining your collective composure over this.

I sincerely hope that LinuxWorld (.com) can recover from this as you seem to be dedicated and care about what you do.

I am noi in a position to tell you what to do, so I won't, but I certainly would hope that the editorial staff discuss ways to regain control of something that bears your name.

I am sure that sys-con would be up a creek without a paddle if the whole staff left and formed their own, indedendant magazine (I know easier said than done) but you could call it WorldLinux :)

good luck and thanks again!

With so many folks diving for cover and, in the light of no responsible action of retraction of the false articles in question, it would seem that the situation is irresolute to the tolerant satisfaction of SYS-CON Media, Inc.

Since LinuxWorld no longer represents the Linux community accurately; and, in fact, presents unretracted, fallacious, information to the detriment of the community that it claims to represent; it would seem just and prudent for our community, at large, to:
1. assertively repudiate any such claim of representation on the part of SYS-CON Media, Inc., it's subsidiaries, affiliates, proxies, agents and holdings;
2. notify the sponsors of SYS-CON Media, Inc., et al, that we will suspend our patronage of same for such time as the aforemantioned performance of harm to the community persists on the part of SYS-CON Media, Inc., et al.;
3. immediately suspend all subscriptions to any and all SYS-CON Media, Inc. publications rendered in tangible and intangible form and;
4. inform our respective employers, employees, collegues, associates, clients, family and friends of the present state of affairs between SYS-CON Media, Inc. and our community at large; and request their support in this matter.

Dee-Ann:

Just a few words of support for you. Anyone who's read your work knows that you'd be the last person to attack or spread FUD against Linux and open source.

Cheers!

weapons of misinformation disimination.......what's with media that cannot keep to the facts of objective reporting? sensationalism and half-truths seem the order of the day.....

Let's keep it civil, folks. There is no need for name-calling or insults.

Let's keep it civil, folks. There is no call for name-calling or insults.

Jude Suszko wrote:

<< So what do I find on linxuworld.com? Wall-to-wall Microsoft ads >>

Jude,

Thank you for pointing this out. I would never have known it otherwise.

I have not seen one advertisement on this site.

To browse the Web ad-free, just:

(1) Download the Firefox browser - available on the Linux, MacOS X and Windows platforms. Firefox includes pop-up blocking, standard issue.

(2) Add the "Adblock" extension - a simple one-click process.

(3) Add the "Flash Click to View 0.8" extension (aka FlashBlock) - a simple one-click process.

Firefox:

http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/

Adblock:

http://update.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?id=10

Flash Click to View 0.8:

http://update.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?id=326&vid=993

Browsing ad-free is also much faster - you do not waste bandwidth downloading worthless ads.

The difference between web browsing with and without adds is the difference between standing in the middle of Times Square on New Year's Eve vs. sitting quietly while reading a book in a good reference library.

Browsing without ads is liberating.

And most relaxing.

Highly recommended -

Epaminondas

In response to Andreas Kuckartz:

I have never once talked to or met Maureen O'Gara, so I have no idea of what's going on there. She writes for SYS-CON and Linux Business Week, not LinuxWorld.com or LinuxWorld Magazine (I am only really involved in the print magazine, and barely involved with the site). It's up to them and her to decide if she should respond publicly or not, and how she should do so. Hopefully she will reply at least with some form of follow-up article.

With that said, I understand that O'Gara and others have filed to open the court records to provide proof. I am really trying to stay out of this part of the issue since I wasn't there and so have no idea of what happened and what didn't, etc.

@Dee-Ann LeBlanc: The article written by Maureen O'Gara (or someone else?) still has neither been corrected nor withdrawn. What do you say about that? Why is there no reply from Maureen O'Gara?

Your website is currently wasting the time of a lot of people.

It all makes sense now!

The O'Gara that wrote this storie is just the Web-O'Gara! The real O'Gara would never allow this to be printed...

James Turner (and the rest of the LinuxWorld staff),

I want to appologize for the unreasonable attacks from a lot of people here. I started out as one of the attackers, but now I realize this mess with O'Gara is not your fault.

Folks, let's remember what got us upset in the first place. It was an article by O'Gara. It turns out that the LinuxWorld staff has no control over that, and it is Sys-Con that is responsible.

So let's start e-mailing Sys-Con to complain about O'Gara. We can start by hunting around http://www.sys-con.com/contact.cfm to try to figure out the right person to complain to.

James Turner wrote:
"None of the folks on the magazine masthead get paid for doing this. We do it because we love Linux, and want to help foster the community."

Then why not quit and start a new Linux Site/Mag with this team of Linux lovers? Would it not help foster the community you love instead of damaging it like now?

Grokshill (http://www.grokshill.net) has its take on this story.

There is an EASY solution to this mess: This is not the first time Maureeen has posted wrong information. The soultion: DON'T PRINT ANY MORE OF HER STORIES!!!! If she wants you to print her stories ASK HER FOR THREE SOURCES THAT WILL VERIFY HER "FACTS". In short it is time to dry up Maureen's poison pen by making sure she providesd YOU with the FACTS that can be VERIFIED: Either she will be forced to clean up her act and will provide ACCURATE REPORTING, or she can STARVE. It it time to get rid of hack writers.

James, looks like they fixed the Web site problem. I see "LinuxWorld" and "Linux Business Week" as two different magazines on the sys-con main page.

http://www.sys-con.com/

and they are link to:

http://www.linuxworld.com
http://www.linuxbusinessweek.com

The problem is, which "we" are you talking about?

I will swear on a stack of bibles as tall as the empire state building that no one with the title "Editor" on the magazine's masterhead saw O'Gara's piece before it ran. Hell, I'll swear on a stack of copies of the 4.3 BSD internals book.

You have to trust me when I say that the magazine editors have been begging Sys-Con to drop O'Gara for literally months. I've got e-mail to prove it, should I have to. At the moment, there is not a one of the magazine editors who is happy with the situation in the least.

If you think you folks are outraged, you don't have anything on how we feel, because it's our good name being trounced. One way or another, expect news from us soon.

James Turner
Senior Editor
LinuxWorld Magazine

Why have the editors allowed three days to pass without any followup comments from Maureen O'Gara? While this note from the editors is a start, I think that Maureen is not helping her own credibility by staying silent on the issue this long.

This letter was signed by the editors, and I am one of them. However, I was not in town when this whole pie hit the fan, and I did not see this letter until I came home and it was already up for the world to see. Horrified doesn't begin to describe my feelings on this. I would not have approved it as it is (agreeing with the many flaws pointed out here though I will not get into this in public at this moment), and please trust that this issue is far from "over" internally.

My apologies,

Dee-Ann LeBlanc

Mr Brown & Mr Turner,

I appreciate your response (most especially tht it is in public) and have only one further request, could you provide us with the contact information for sys-con or whomever is "in control"? Most especially if it is someone that can constructively address our concerns.

Thank you,

David Truog

Why don't you take some action to stop lies from being PUBLISHED on your site!? Good Cop/Bad Cop is just what it looks like now...

I parse:
We are not the people who published O'Gara's lies, and anyway, even if we are kind of the people who published the lies but not really, we are really super consciencous and would never do anything as bad as those things we kind of didn't really do.
.
That's about it, right?
.
What a load of mealy-mouthing garbage. Tell you what. Why don't you take a deep cleansing breath and try again. I'll give you a hint. The real thing sounds like this: We did it. We broke down and succumbed to the temptation to spread FUD in return for controversy clicks. We are accountable for this garbage. We apologize. We will try our best to earn your trust back. We realize that this will not be easy having made this stupid mistake. Oh, and O'Gara is banned from publishing here again pending her full, abject, and unconditional apology to you, the OSS community.
.
Feel free to cut and paste.

Dear Editors, thank you for the enlightening information.
Seeing the situation, I have just deleted my bookmark for LinuxWorld.

Or perhaps better to say:

"Nice going.... you just shot yourself in the foot"

Are you really pro-Linux?

Reduced readership=reduced revenues. The least you could do now is apologize AND print a retraction. But I think even doing that is too late at this point. You already blown it as far as I'm concerned!

It was not possible for Ms O'Gara to pass off this article as a joke, she already tried that for a previous faus paux and it failed miserably. LinuxGram(tm) is a misnomer, LinuxPoisonGram would be more appropriate. But, maybe she's a natural blond?

The question is: if it proves that O'Gara's article was not true, will sys-con stop publishing her articles?

Now, I expect that even if it proves that her article was wrong, she will attempt to weasel out of it and place the blame elsewhere, but: reporters have to take responsiblity for their writings. If she had quoted someone else as making those claims, that might be a valid (but weak) excuse, but, no: in this case, she put her own name to those claims.

If she was right: then good for her for sticking her neck out. If she was wrong: she should go.

We should remember that this is not the first time she has written articles with falsehoods in them. The premise of this and an earlier article is that IBM does not have the right to use code obtained under the Monterrey project on platforms other than Intel -- well, the Project Monterrey contract is on Groklaw and it is quite clear: the Intel-only requirement applies ONLY to SCO's use of IBM code and not the other way round.

O'Gara may indeed be proven to be correct. The only way we'll ever know is when the court transcript is unsealed

PJ is reporting too today that "that Maureen O'Gara stands by her story and will seek to unseal the transcript"

This is constructive.

http://www.linuxworld.com/story/46800.htm is the link to the story. This is therefor clearly something published by LinuxWorld.

Well this has all been very interesting. Especially noteworthy is the lack of a response from Sys-Con. I suspect that they are happy with getting many clicks- angry readers post more. Just like that other bastion of journalistic integrity, ZDNet. (please note the sarcasm.)

O'Gara may indeed be proven to be correct. The only way we'll ever know is when the court transcript is unsealed, and we'll all be old and gray before that happens. Nowhere in her article does Ms. O'Gara say "I witnessed these events in the courtroom." She does not cite any proof of any kind. "suggested" "alleged" "reportedly"
That's not reporting- that's gossip, if not a deliberate smear.

Y'all so-called "journalists" better get used to the Internet era. Us readers now have the tools to verify for ourselves when you're lying, inventing, slanting, and just plain full of hooey. Take your word for it? Only after you prove you are trustworthy, and even then you better be able to verify your assertions.

This whole shell game from Sys-Con is not amusing, and you have nowhere to hide. "LinuxWorld and LinuxBusinessWeek are two separate entities! Even though they both resolve to the exact same website! And Linuxworld the print magazine is not the same as Linuxworld the website!" Yeah. right. It's a Con, all right.

LINUXWORLD IS OFF ALL MY LISTS!!!

I suggest the only way to handle the situation is to arrange a boycott of LinuxWorld and the other magazines that the publisher owns.

It is unfortunate that innocent people get caught in the crossfire. However, the only way to get corporations to respond is to hit them where it hurts - in the pocketbook.

Until then, they will take their own sweet time in resolving this issue.

It takes a long time to build up a good reputation and only one or two high profile mistakes to blow it away. Rather than try to remember if Linux World is mostly ok or not, I'm filing it under fake news sites next to LinuxInsider.

The state of online "news" is pretty sad, publishers are obviously looking for hits and will post any story controversial enough to generate them. This trash devalues the brand and affects the perception of the print media under the same name.

Fair or not, in the future when we read a bio and it says "former editor of Linux World" we are going to remember this . I hope you can distance yourself far enough but right now you are in bed with a pack of snakes!

Actually you do have the right and or ability to veto her stories - simply don't publish an author for whom you cannot very their journalistic veracity and integrity.

I'm having a hard time figuring out how you expect to sell magazines. I have always assumed that linuxworld.com was representative of the content of Linuxworld Magazine. Indeed, if I do a Google search for "Linuxworld Magazine", the first result is a link to linuxworld.com

So what do I find on linxuworld.com? Wall-to-wall Microsoft ads, and plently of anti-Linux FUD like the recent O'Gara travesty. I want information about Linux, and after seeing this, I'm certainly not going to run out an subscribe to Linuxworld Magazine.

I think you guys have an identity problem. I'm even starting to think that SYS CON is deliberately trying to kill off the magazine by using the website to repel potential readers.

greetings,
Ive been reading this article and its feedback for a couple of hours now (on and off) and it seems to me that there are 2 rather important issues happening here.
The first being that as LinuxWorld is "owned" by another corporate entity... it is in fact operating as a puppet of that entity.

Now, the question I have for the editors of LinuxWorld is simply... Did LW start off as an independent emagazine and was later purchased or was it always wholly owned by the parent company?

If it indeed started off as an independant creation then I feel sad for the previous owners (perhaps they are now the editors with whom we are expressing dissatisfaction), for giving up the rights to have input on their creation and work.

If it has always been wholly owned by the parent, well then... there is your schill and there is where M$ and / or SCOX is throwing its money, who in turn send it off to Maureen O. to do what she seemingly loves to be paid for, inaccurate, lazy reporting.

Maureen, I guess that at one point you believed in jouranlism and its responsibilities to truth, balance and objectivity. What happened to you? Was the easy buck to hard to refuse? Did you lose your passion for truth?

I feel sorry for you.