EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

01.03.08

Dear BBC, Shame on You

Posted in Deception, Europe, FUD, Microsoft at 2:11 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Fool us once, shame on you; fool us for a whole year, shame on us taxpayers

As part of a continued trend at the BBC, which is tax-funded, as well as the media at large [1, 2, 3], it is saddening to see this:

THE BBC is inviting its readers to ask Vole supremo Bill Gates questions.

This has to be seen in context, along with recent developments. The news above is no ‘smoking gun’ in its right. For those who have not followed this saga, it is worth mentioning again that the BBC succumbed to the pressure of Microsoft after those two made a deal. The BBC not only delivers Microsoft’s perspective of the news and gives Microsoft some placements and free columns, but it also acts as an agent of monopolisation with products like iPlayer. Adding insult to injury, the BBC was caught spreading GNU/Linux FUD. This includes claims that only hundreds of Linux-using Brits visit the BBC Web site, which turned out to be a lie of unbelievable proportions.

”It’s just like putting trophies and medals up for sale.“This is a worrisome trend. We live in a world where one can simply buy positive and seemingly-independent publicity. This needs to be stopped. Only a week ago we saw a so-called 'analyst' praising Microsoft twice. It was Frost & Sullivan, which is somewhat of a joke.

It’s just like putting trophies and medals up for sale. Microsoft, which does business with Frost & Sullivan, ‘acquired’ two such medals, where medals is a reference to a quote whose proper attribution I cannot remember. It talks about high society and royals throwing a party with wine, gifts and medals. They exchange awards among themselves to show each other how important they are and then strut around town with objects that symbolize pseudo or non-existent achievements.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

16 Comments

  1. Nick Reynolds (editor, BBC Internet Blog) said,

    January 3, 2008 at 12:58 pm

    Gravatar

    If people are interested in the BBC’s perspective on these inaccurate allegations about its relationship with Microsoft they can read Ashley Highfield’s recent interview in Groklaw.

    http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071118205358171

    see also this:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/ashley_highfield/

    Regarding the question of Linus users Ashley has apologised for this mistake here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2007/11/open_standards.html

  2. alphadog said,

    January 3, 2008 at 4:19 pm

    Gravatar

    “We live in a world where one can simply buy positive and seemingly-independent publicity.”

    Let’s face it, thanks to the ubiquity of the Internet, we also live in a world where more and more people can be disabused of such false advertising. You, and all bloggers, wouldn’t have a personal soapbox with such widespread effect ten years ago.

    Amen to that.

    - alphadog

  3. Mark Kent said,

    January 4, 2008 at 3:02 am

    Gravatar

    I would be interested in the BBC’s justification for spending over 100 million pounds on a skin for Microsoft’s proprietary Silverlight player, something which will never run on any platform other than Windows Vista with Microsoft’s IE, in an environment where the fastest growing categories of user device are ultra-mobile and non-Windows based, and where there are perfectly suitable alternatives which are multi-platform, which even support DRM, such as the Helix player.
    Further, the BBC’s own research department developed the Dirac codec for the specific purpose of avoiding paying licence-fees to a third-party – why is it now okay to pay 3rd parties with my licence-fee cash?

  4. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 4, 2008 at 3:13 am

    Gravatar

    I suspect that Mr. Reynold felt the need to come here with plenty of hot URLs because there is a lot of scrutiny that his department comes under, and rightly so.

    I have read literally hundreds of articles and blog items about iPlayer and related writings on the BBC’s online media ambition. Every time I read something like that, repulsion and anger occupy the mind. I fail to see how a department can so foolishly become the vassal of a convicted monopoly abuser, let alone take pride in this partnership with Microsoft which may be reciprocal as far as the BBC and Microsoft are concerned. What about the taxpayer? The BBC is an agent for the customer, but it has in turn become an agent for Microsoft. Transitively, taxpayers now have Microsoft as their agent. This is outrageous and I fear that if the BBC can fall victim to this scam, there is little hope for other (private) media companies. I truly hope that the European Commission, which looks closely at this case, will have all the necessary information on the subject.

  5. Nick Reynolds (editor, BBC Internet Blog) said,

    January 6, 2008 at 4:53 pm

    Gravatar

    Regarding Silverlight here is a quote from the Groklaw interview from Ashley Highfield I linked to:

    “…I think most people might have been expecting us to go forward with the Microsoft Silverlight solution, and in fact our recent announcement of using the Adobe suite of products for streaming, I hope, begins to show people that we absolutely haven’t recruited people to sort of strengthen a in-built bias to use Microsoft tools, because that is just not the case.”

    I would be interested to know where this figure of £100 million comes from? Do you have any links or sources?

  6. Lukas said,

    January 6, 2008 at 8:36 pm

    Gravatar

    From what I’ve seen, whenever these people (where Roy is the ringleader and Mark Kent, TaQ and Slated are his posse afaict) are asked for proof to back up their allegations, they respond with “I saw it somewhere, I swear!” or they link to another site with similar unsupported claims as if to say “we aren’t the only ones who are making this claim, so it /must/ be true!”

    For example, I’ve asked several times for proof of Roy’s claim that Silverlight has OS-specific features and he has yet to be able to back it up with any sort of evidence other than “I saw it somewhere, I swear!”

    I’ve tried googling for any info (accurate or not) that claims this and I have yet to find any.

    There are probably plenty of other examples of this type of treachery on this site, but I’m not qualified nor interested in researching/debating all of Roy’s claims – the only reason I’ve even bothered to respond to Roy’s false Silverlight/Moonlight claims are because I was tasked with researching it a bit for my company and so have discovered that Roy’s claims are clueless at best or outright lies meant for slander at worst.

    The first time I asked Roy to back up his claims, I thought “maybe I missed something” but seeing as how he’s never actually able to back up his claims with actual proof, I’ve come to think that there’s a good chance that Roy is making these false claims on purpose in order to discredit Mono/Moonlight and that has made me start to question Roy’s objectivity with regards to everything else posted on this site.

    Just my 2 cents.

  7. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 6, 2008 at 8:48 pm

    Gravatar

    I can’t speak for other people (and there is no posse), but here is some information about the figures.

    The BBC have developed the “iPlayer” at a cost to the BBC license fee payer of £130 Million and rising.

    Here is more.

    We have 1500 fliers to distribute, that focus on the key issue with the iPlayer, and why $130 Million and 4 years of development don’t get you much when you choose Microsoft DRM.

    About Silverlight, I don’t know what the poster is referring to (there is no ‘skin’), but the Guardian said that the BBC was assessing Silverlight for its Web site about 6 months ago. Here, I’ve just found the link.

    The BBC has already experimented with Silverlight and says it is looking for an “embedded media solution”.

    The Register says more.

    The twin elephants in the meeting room will be Microsoft’s Silverlight and PlayReady.

    If Mr. Reylonds wants to challenge this information, he ought to take this dispute over to the sources, not this Web site.

  8. 55v435v said,

    January 7, 2008 at 5:11 am

    Gravatar

    Roy’s answer is the best example ot the tactics Lukas described in his post: evade direct questions, link to some unrelated website, making similarly unproven claims in the same spirit.

    Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a known (eet), pseudonymous, nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

  9. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 7, 2008 at 5:52 am

    Gravatar

    didn’t escape the question and it’s clear that many features will only be available for Windows (it’s just like .NET versus Mono). Only days ago:

    ..but the linux version is not released yet (and will support only SL 1.1 2.0),..

    Golly! Linux is already ‘behind’. Reject Silverlight while you can, for the same reasons OOXML is being rejected. If you let Microsoft take the lead, it will control who is ahead and whose access is declined. Just take a lesson from ActiveX controls and IE-only Web sites.

    I still insist that I read somewhere (which was a reliable source) that Silverlight will work better in Windows/Vista. Whether it was a question of compatibility of performance is a separate matter.

  10. 454342 said,

    January 7, 2008 at 8:18 am

    Gravatar

    ..and the same FUD from Roy again. (And also trying to stop me from posting again by blocking my IP.)

    Quote in CONTEXT: “Silverlight DO works on Linux and Firefox… but the linux version is not released yet (and will support only SL 1.1 2.0)”

    All that isn’t supported in Silverlight (yet) is WPF – and this was not because of M$ but because of priorization. This hasn’t exactly been news nor a secret, either…

    “…I still insist that I read somewhere (which was a reliable source) that Silverlight will work better in Windows/Vista.”
    Again “I read somewhere…” Is this the kind of quotes that you would get away with in any other sector of life? No, you wouldn’t even get away with it in a tabloid. What makes you think you can get away with it when trying to discredit Silverlight?

    Roy, you troll. And that you claim to be ‘enthusiastic about Linux’ doesn’t make it any better.

    And that you block my IP anytime I post shows you fear of the truth. Your attempts at censorship force me to use proxies and arbitrary user-names each time I post – and it makes you look weak and afraid.

    Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a known (eet), pseudonymous, nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

  11. 454342 said,

    January 7, 2008 at 8:21 am

    Gravatar

    But go ahead adding silly comments below my posts; it is you who looks more ridiculous each time you do that. ^_^

    Roy, the Linux community is ashamed of you. You are the cousin we hide in the attic.

    Note: comment has been flagged for arriving from a known (eet), pseudonymous, nymshifting, abusive Internet troll that posts from open proxies and relays around the world.

  12. Jeremy said,

    January 9, 2008 at 12:21 pm

    Gravatar

    I encountered my first Silverlight site today. It was a Microsoft page of course (I was at work and was looking for some information that was M$ related). It required me to download and install Silverlight before the I could see any page at all. My response was, “I don’t think so”, and I closed the tab. I will never use Silverlight. We’ve all been down that road, we know where it leads.

  13. Roy Schestowitz said,

    January 9, 2008 at 12:34 pm

    Gravatar

    “We’re disheartened because Microsoft helped W3C develop the very standards that they’ve failed to implement in their browser. We’re also dismayed to see Microsoft continue adding proprietary extensions to these standards when support for the essentials remains unfinished.”

    –George Olsen, Web Standards Project

  14. Nick Reynolds (editor, BBC Internet Blog) said,

    January 12, 2008 at 5:09 am

    Gravatar

    The BBC’s estimate of the costs of the iPlayer (as revealed to the Select Committee last week) is £20 million.

  15. Mark Kent said,

    January 17, 2008 at 2:39 am

    Gravatar

    The BBC’s estimate of the cost, from the Director General was:
    More than 20 Million Pounds, but guess what, he couldn’t say how much more! He new why he was going, he’s the Director General, and yet is unable to say whether the cost is 1,000 Million pounds, 500 Million pounds, 200 million pounds, or the figure which has been around for some time, 100 million pounds. All he could say was that it was *more* than 20 million pounds. We *know* it was more than 20 million, and apparently, so does the DG. The spin on this will never end.
    By the way, why are US-based trolls posting on this issue? They pay no licence fee to the BBC, so it’s not their money which is being so catastrophically wasted on a skin for proprietary Microsoft technology, which will never work on anything other than Windows, and will certainly never work on mobile devices effectively. Anyone who says “that’s my 2 cents” is rather giving away their allegience, to a foreign company, which has been in receipt of approximately 100 Million pounds worth of licence-fee cash, I would say.

  16. Slated said,

    January 30, 2008 at 11:16 am

    Gravatar

    @ Nick Reynolds

    Maybe if the BBC’s Chief Financial Officer, Zarin Patel, could come up with something less vague than; “I don’t have the figures to hand, but I believe it was something in the region of twenty million all told, over the last two or three years.” [1], then we could end all the speculation.

    The BBC is publicly accountable to its license fee payers, so how about some public accountability for a change, in the form a published statement of account specifically detailing what that money was spent on, and precisely who was paid.

    In particular, I’d be interested to know exactly how much Microsoft received from the BBC for their encumbered; non-interoperable solution, and any other payments that were made to them in the course of this fiasco.

What Else is New


  1. Links 3/7/2015: KDE Applications 15.04.3, Ubuntu-Flavored Compute Stick

    Links for the day



  2. Patent Lawyers and Their Firms, Still Desperate to Protect the Status Quo, Manipulate the Media

    Patent lawyers are besieged by gradual tightening of patent scope and recklessly fight back (e.g. by saturating the media) to secure their revenue sources, derived from (and at the expense of) actual scientists and true market producers



  3. Amid Controversy, Political Scrutiny and Increased Media Pressure Željko Topić and Benoît Battistelli Allegedly Cancel Today's Trip to Zagreb (Croatia) Where Topić Faces Many Criminal Charges

    The Croatian press comments on the recent declaration from the Council of Europe and Topić's not-so-sterling status in his home country, where he is wanted for alleged crimes



  4. Microsoft Gradually Embraces, Extends, Extinguishes Linux Foundation as a Foundation of GNU/Linux

    By liaising with (or hijacking) existing members of the Linux Foundation, as well as by paying the Linux Foundation, Microsoft turns the Linux Foundation into somewhat of a Windows advocacy group



  5. Microsoft India Still Lobbies and Lies About Free Software in Order to Knock Down Policy That Favours Free Software

    Microsoft continues to bully Indian politicians who merely 'dare' to prefer software that India can modify, maintain, extend, audit, etc.



  6. Patent Lawyers and Corporate Media Nervous About New Patents Barrier/Reality (Less Patents on Software and Business Methods)

    The rich and the powerful, as well as their lawyers (whose job is to protect their money and power by means of government-enforced monopoly), carry on whining after the Alice case, in which many abstract patents were essentially ruled -- by extension -- invalid



  7. Translation of Pierre-Yves Le Borgn' Speech Against EPO Management and New Parliamentarian Interventions

    More political fire targeting the EPO's management, adding up to over 100 parliamentarians by now



  8. Links 2/7/2015: KDE Plasma 5.3.2, antiX 15

    Links for the day



  9. Links 1/7/2015: OpenDaylight Lithium, OpenMandriva Lx 2014.2

    Links for the day



  10. Munich Press, Münchner Merkur, Slams the Munich-based EPO

    Pressure on Benoît Battistelli to leave (or be fired) grows as the cronies whom he filled his office with have become a huge public embarrassment to the decades-old European Patent Office



  11. The Shameless Campaign to Paint/Portray Free Software as Inherently Insecure, Using Brands, Logos, and Excessive, Selective Press Coverage

    Some more FUD from firms such as Sonatype, which hope to make money by making people scared of Free/libre software



  12. National Insecurity and Blackmail, Courtesy of Microsoft

    British members of parliament (MPs) outsourced their communication to the number one PRISM company and they are paying the price for it; The US Navy's systems continue to be unbelievably insecure (Windows XP), despite access to the world's biggest nuclear arsenal



  13. Microsoft Keeps Shrinking

    As the era of shrink-wrapped software comes to an end so does Microsoft, whose effort to become a 'cloud' company with online operations has been miserable at best



  14. They 'R' Coming: More Microsoft Money for the Linux Foundation

    The problem with having Microsoft in a Linux Foundation initiative, the R Consortium



  15. Speculations About the EPO's Possible Role in DDOS Attacks

    Readers' views on who might be behind the attacks on this site amid confirmation that it's on the 'targets' list of the EPO



  16. Links 30/6/2015: Linux Mint 17.2, OpenMandriva

    Links for the day



  17. Techrights Confirmed as a Target of EPO Surveillance, With Help From Control Risks Group (CRG)

    Unveiling the cloak of secrecy from long-term surveillance by the European Patent Office (EPO) and a London-based mercenary it hired, bypassing the law



  18. Google's Fight to Keep APIs Free is Lost, Let's Hope Google Continues Fighting

    SCOTUS refuses to rule that APIs cannot be considered copyright-'protected', despite common sense and despite Java (which the case is about) being Free/libre software



  19. Patent Trolls in the Post-Alice World

    A round-up of news about patent trolls in the United States, some of whom are are doing well and some of them not as well



  20. DDOS Attacks Against Techrights

    Information about some of the most recent DDOS attacks against this Web site and the steps to be taken next



  21. The Patent System Not What it Used to be, Large Corporations and Patent Lawyers the Principal Beneficiaries

    A look at some recent patent stories and what can be deduced from them, based on statistics and trends



  22. After Intervention by the Council of Europe Comes a Detailed Summary of the Situation in the European Patent Office (EPO)





  23. IRC Proceedings: May 31st - June 27th, 2015

    Many IRC logs



  24. Links 28/6/2015: Manjaro Linux Cinnamon 0.8.13, VectorLinux 7.1

    Links for the day



  25. Williamson v. Citrix Online (at CAFC) Reinforces Alice v. CLS Bank (at SCOTUS) in Crushing Software Patents

    More patent news from the United States, again serving to indicate that software patents over there are getting weak (harder to defend in court or acquire from the patent office)



  26. Proskauer Rose LLP is Cherry-Picking Cases to Make Software Patents Seem Eligible Despite Alice v. CLS Bank

    Naming and shaming those who are trying to reshape the consensus despite a rather consistent pattern of software patents being rejected



  27. IAM Biased: How IAM 'Magazine' Glorifies Patent Stockpiling

    A look at the bias of one of the most overzealous sites for and by patent lawyers



  28. PATENT Act No Longer in the News... and That's Just Fine

    Putting the PATENT Act aside for the time being, for it has little or no impact on the really problematic patents



  29. The Latest Lies From Microsoft's PR Apparatus/Public Face, Mr. Nadella

    Having spread the outrageous lie that “Microsoft loves Linux” (whilst obviously attacking it in many ways), Microsoft's CEO (essentially Bill Gates' right-hand man) says Microsoft is “one of the biggest contributors to Linux kernel” (because of proprietary software it tries to contaminate it with while violating the terms of the GPL)



  30. Microsoft Jack (Schofield) Promotes Microsoft's Proprietary Lock-in and Calls People Who Recommend Free/Libre Software 'Trolls'

    Jack Schofield, writing for a Bill Gates-funded paper despite claiming to have retired, promotes Microsoft Office and insults all those readers who do not agree with him


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts