News coverage, Verisign etc.

Wed Oct 8 19:03:19 UTC 2003

At 11:56 AM -0700 10/8/03, Eliot Lear wrote:
>Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
>
>>
>>I have gotten a reasoned response from the technology editor of the 
>>Washington Post, and we are discussing things.  While I wouldn't 
>>have done it that way, he had a rational explanation of why the 
>>story was written the way it was, and definitely indicating there 
>>will be continuing coverage of the issue.  He believes there's 
>>always room for improving coverage.
>>
>
>Care to share?
>
>Eliot

I was thinking about that, and now have a very red face. Eudora, for 
some reason (out of storage without a message?) seems to have lost 
about an hour of outbox messages.  I'm hoping to get a copy sent back 
to me.

In any event, in working with media, there's a time where some level 
of confidentiality is useful, when you are building the relationship 
and giving background.  Let me summarize that the Post initially saw 
this more as a business than technology issue, and gave Verisign its 
chance to tell its side of the story.  I believe the relevant editor 
now believes the issue is much more complex.

I'd want his permission to share the specific response.

Howard