Re: Now it's .xxx

["andi payn" <payn@null.net>]

>At 05:22 PM 9/24/97 -0700, andi payn wrote:
>>The question I have is whether the reporters came to you for clarification
>>or just went ahead with assumptions based on second-hand information? If
>>you've attempted to maintain a good relationship with the press, and been
>>open to their questions, then we have to blame it on sloppy
reporting--which
>>is certainly not uncommon nowadays, especially where the Internet is
>>concerned.

Dave Crocker replied:
> I had one reporter call me, not from the publication cited for this thread
>(and frankly I can't remember which one.)  I have not noted any other POC
>member indicating that they were called by them, either.  Across the
>committee, we spend quite a bit of time talking with the press and
>certainly try to remain responsive to their queries.  Driving along the
>old-time information highway of such publications, mileage really DOES
vary.

OK, so it's just sloppy reporting. That's quite understandable.

Have you considered trying to get them to publish a followup correcting
their error? If nothing else, it gets you two news stories instead of one,
and more importantly it gets the right information out there...