RE: [802SEC] FW: IEEE article - good and bad
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rigsbee, Everett O [mailto:everett.o.rigsbee@boeing.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 11:40 PM
> To: 'Stevenson, Carl R (Carl)'; IEEE 802 SEC Reflector (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: [802SEC] FW: IEEE article - good and bad
>
>
> Carl, This strikes me as typical journalism: make something
> sound like an
> imminent disaster to get folks to read the article, which eventually
> explains that there really isn't a problem after all. I
> don't think many
> folks who read the article will be fooled, but those who just skim the
> lead-ins might be mislead. I do think it is worthwhile to
> let IEEE know
> that we don't appreciate that style of journalism, and would
> much prefer the
> technical info without the "teaser". They may in fact drive
> away the very
> audience they seek to attract with such devices.
Buzz,
That's exactly my concern ... while balanced reporting is
clearly a good thing, to lead with (place the emphasis on)
the negative views of one person (the "train wreck" bit)
seems likely to disuade some who would otherwise adopt,
and reap the benefits of, 802 wireless standards.
I'd like to see a more postitive (yet honest) "spin" on
things coming from IEEE, rather than using FUD as a "hook"
in an effort to get readers' attention ... as you say, some
may simple read the first part, stop there, and think "I don't
think it's wise to invest in a technology that is potentially
going to become unusable in the relatively near term (which
is sort of what Hendricks implies ...)
Carl