SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Janrinok writes:
Apology To Microsoft
On Friday, we published a story, submitted by sigma, alleging that Microsoft had attempted to blackmail the UK Government in order to prevent the adoption of UK policy supporting open document standards. Having looked more closely at the linked material provided, the word blackmail is not used but appears only in the submission that we received. As the editor of that particular story I am personally responsible for not having checked the sources sufficiently well and for subsequently releasing the story. I wish to apologise, publicly and unreservedly, for any suggestion that Microsoft attempted to blackmail the UK government. They did not, nor does the accusation stand up to any scrutiny. We have edited the title to prevent any further misunderstanding by our community or others and I hope that this action and my apology to Microsoft is sufficient to atone for my mistake.
Apology to sigma
The editor's role includes that of trying to look at each story from both sides to provide a balanced approach. We are not here to support one particular view in preference to another but to provide material that will inspire discussion between members of our community. I published the story that sigma submitted, but attempted to balance it with the alternative view that suggested it was not specifically a Microsoft trait to defend one's business and that it could be argued that they were also attempting to protect their British workforce. However, I did not make it clear where sigma's comments ended and where my editing began, although I did add an Editor's Comment explaining that the story had been edited and that not all comments were those of the submitter. sigma has, quite justifiably, objected to this action and I must, therefore, apologise to him personally. I do apologise to sigma, again publicly and unreservedly, for any changes that I made to the submission that he feels reflect badly upon him.
Our Role
This was most certainly not my best piece of work and, of course, I must also apologise to the community. The editors do, however, have to edit stories; members of the community should not expect their submissions to be a platform for their personal views. Some stories require more editing than others to be suitable for the front page. In this instance, I made a mistake. We will always try to find a balanced approach to any story that needs it, as described in the Editing Process.
As I have already said, I take full responsibility for the stories that I release, including the one arising from sigma's submission. We value each and every submission, even those that do not make it to publication however, we do ask that submitters do not suggest events or actions that are not backed up by the source material, or are not easily verifiable by other means.
janrinok
Editor
(Score: 1) by Refugee from beyond on Saturday May 23 2015, @06:30PM
So, did it happen or not? The only thing that matters.
Instantly better soylentnews: replace background on article and comment titles with #973131.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Appalbarry on Saturday May 23 2015, @06:35PM
Bloomberg says yes. [bloomberg.com] I somehow doubt that they got a lawyer letter. And yeah, I'd characterize it as "blackmail."
(Score: 4, Informative) by CoolHand on Saturday May 23 2015, @06:40PM
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 4, Informative) by sjames on Saturday May 23 2015, @09:09PM
In common usage, blackmail is often conflated with other forms of extortion. MS's threat was certainly a form of extortion.
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Saturday May 23 2015, @11:07PM
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 3, Insightful) by kaszz on Sunday May 24 2015, @01:00AM
The inquirer also states some thing long the same line. Microsoft bullied MPs over government switch to open source standards [theinquirer.net].
And Microsoft faces claims it threatened MPs with job cuts in constituencies [theguardian.com].
Ie "Nice research facility we gave you there. Too bad if something would happen to it..". It may not be blackmail in the strict definition of the word. But it's certainly a threat and something I would call "unlawful interference in the processes of a democracy".
Bad choice of word? perhaps. But it were in the right ballpark.
(Score: 2) by TLA on Monday June 01 2015, @08:41PM
that's not blackmail, that's extortion.
extortion: criminal offense of obtaining money, property, or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion.
coercion: use of force or intimidation to obtain compliance.
blackmail: Extortion of money or something else of value from a person by the threat of exposing a criminal act or discreditable information.
source: seven years practising domestic civil and criminal defence Law, and the same amount of time in international human rights Law. You just heard it from a lawyer. Not *your* lawyer, *a* lawyer.
Excuse me, I think I need to reboot my horse. - NCommander