Skip to content


Should I trust the press again?

April 22, 2008

Posted by: Richard Steel


Today I received a salutary lesson on dealing with some parts of the media. Last Thursday, I was left a message saying that a Mark Ballard, of the Inquirer, had called about Newham's relationship with Microsoft, and so I returned the call when I had time on Friday.

I generally enjoy a good relationship with the IT press, so am used to speaking honestly and openly with reporters. However, I had some misgivings following my discussion with Mark, as he clearly wasn't following what I had to say.

Nevertheless, I had promised to follow-up with some information, so did so this morning. A little later, 'though, I was contacted by another journalist asking about the story that appeared in "The Inquirer" (a journal I hadn't heard of) which completely misrepresents my comments.

Far from saying that we had "scrapped" our MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with Microsoft, what I actually said was that we achieved all of its objectives except one – benchmarking against other Microsoft accounts, industry wide – which was due to be completed within the next 3 weeks or so. We had therefore agreed new actions with Microsoft in a progress review last year.

What I didn't say, but perhaps could have mentioned as a sign of our strong and strengthening relationship was that Newham, at that time, was also designated by Microsoft as one of only five major local government accounts.

I have the feeling that whatever I say, now, could be twisted or misrepresented so, for once, will take time to consider whether, and how, to respond – but, for now, have higher priorities to address.


Chief among these is preparing for Socitm meetings on business development and sponsorship following our AGM, this week, and reviewing the considerable body of material that we've accumulated on organisational development options. I would like, as soon as practicable to publish an action plan with timeline to the Membership.

Follow highlights from ComputerworldUK on Twitter
Sign up for our Daily Newsletter
The UK IT News widget Get it for your site!

<<newer entry | back to blogs indexolder entry>>

Advert

close

Email this article to a friend or colleague:




PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the recipient know who sent the story, and in case of transmission error. Both your name and the recipient's name and address will not be used for any other purpose.

close
  • This article is now being printed.
close

What are your views on this subject? Use the form below to post a comment on this article up to 1000 characters.


Characters remaining:

close

Click below to add 'Should I trust the press again?' to your blog.



If you do not have a ComputerworldUK Account and would like to use this feature, please Register.

If you are a registered, logged-in user, this will post the title and first paragraph of this story to your blog to share with your readers.

What is this?

Comments received

B said on Wednesday, 23 April 2008

I think in the future you should quickly try and find out whether the news site contacting you can be trusted.

The INQ just want to get as many page views as possible. They are widely known as a website version of tabloid rubbish, and rarely have much good to say about anything.
Anyway, the vast majority of people who read that website have an IQ of a potato, and this is usually well demonstrated in there article comments.

Thomas said on Thursday, 24 April 2008

I think the real question here is, can the public trust what you say again?
Having followed this sorry tale, you have flip-flopped over what you mean more often than a burger flipper at McDonalds.
Instead of blaming the press for doing their job, perhaps you should undertake a seminar in media relations so you can be better prepared to deal with journalists.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro said on Thursday, 24 April 2008

Didn't the original MOU include a "technology refresh" (i.e. upgrade to Vista), which also has failed to materialize?

Pedant said on Thursday, 24 April 2008

As opposed to the article comments here, "B", where no-one would possibly mis-spell a word like "their"?

Dai Kiwi said on Thursday, 24 April 2008

I dare you to refute - point by point- the Inquirer's article at http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/04/18/microsoft-flagship-flounders

military monkey said on Thursday, 24 April 2008

I agree with Kiwi, I would like to see you refute point by point what is printed at http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/04/18/microsoft-flagship-flounders. Until you do, being the cynical person I am, I will assome someone is getting kick-backs.

Advert

WHITE PAPERS

  • Legal risks: Employee use of the internet and email
    Exploring the challenges facing IT Mangers today and vital steps to ensure safe internet an email use by employees.
  • Phishing for victims
    This White Paper examines the phenomenon of phishing. It explains the potentially catastrophic threat it presents to all kinds of organisation. Exploding some widespread myths, it lights up the murky waters where phishing first emerged and where it continues to evolve. But it also highlights what your business can do to blunt the threat.
  • Challenges and opportunities of PCI
    The control framework implicit in the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) provides an enterprise structure for improving operational, security, and audit performance.
  • Social CRM comes of age
    Who is this “social customer”? What strategies and tools does the new breed of CRM provide to do something about this?
  • Risk Management: Protect and Maximize Stakeholder Value
    What has held organisations back from a broader adoption of risk management programs?
*