09.03.08
Microsoft’s Grip on the BBC is Tightened
Former Microsoft executives inherit the Beeb
Whereas Microsoft crumbles at its executive ranks, it appears to find its influence penetrating other innocent companies, some of which are direct competitors of Microsoft. In addition, bias in the media can transcend the borders of the technical industry amid managerial changes, so this can affect also commerce-independent channels, such as the BBC.
Issues with the BBC were expressed before (to catch up with an assortment of criticisms, see [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15]). Problems almost immediately followed a technical collaboration that had been established with Microsoft rather than with trusted UK-based companies, which are not convicted monopoly abusers.
Bias in the media comes in different forms. Editorial control, which is also supervised by the management, can affect article headlines and convey hidden messages. It is therefore interesting (yet worrisome) that Microsoft has just ‘lost ‘a vice president. Although it reflects badly on the future of the company, it turns out that this man will likely land in a position of influence where he can serve Microsoft better. He is reportedly headed towards BBC Worldwide, which is still perceived as trustworthy media.
Chris Dobson, Microsoft’s VP for its UK Online Service Group, is leaving the company. Dobson is believed to be joining BBC Worldwide in a senior role. He joined Microsoft in 2001 following positions at Zenith and MTV Networks.
He would be not the first executive from Microsoft who occupies a position of great responsibility there. Also inside the BBC, Erik Huggers, who arrived from Microsoft, continues to use iPlayer against GNU/Linux. Despite the fact that everyone pays tax, the BBC underplays the role of the operating system and has so far refused to support it. In addition, it threw FUD at it, suggesting that only 600 people in the UK are GNU/Linux users. How familiar a routine [1, 2].
“The language and attitude is very clear to see and for the BBC to publish such articles would simply be irresponsible.”Let us assume — but not hope — that Microsoft employees at the highest of levels are running the BBC and managing public money (tax money). What might be the impact? Technical facilities (e.g. iPlayer framework) is just one small ingredient of this equation; the other is media coverage. Might the BBC refuse to say anything positive about GNU/Linux, or altogether ignore its need/right for coverage? It is always hard to measure such things. One must consider incidents, keep track of them, and maybe count them.
The BBC’s inter-personal connections and partnership with Microsoft may already have a subtle effect. For example, just earlier, the BBC published this GNU/Linux-bashing article. It published it unchallenged. It contains ‘weasel words’ like “Hippy ideals” and it’s referring to the software just as “Linux” and explaining “open source”, not Free software. The latter mistake is not so uncommon, so it’s worth ignoring for now.
Looking at the myths that are spread and reinforced throughout the article, one finds “It’s not the machine itself that’s driving me to violence, but the operating system that controls its programs and hardware: Linux.” Another piece of FUD about GNU/Linux in 2008: “As someone used solely to double-clicking on pretty pictures to do most anything on a computer this is pretty hairy stuff.” There’s also the “no support” FUD at the end: “Bang a couple of lines of code into the terminal window to tell the machine to install what we’ve downloaded. Bingo, we’re cooking on gas,” it says. The language and attitude is very clear to see and for the BBC to publish such articles would simply be irresponsible.
The bottom line is: do not consider the BBC a credible source. This is far from the first such example. █
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.
Needs Sunlight said,
September 3, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Where are they now?
MS execs have been leaving, but it might be found that the companies they subsequently infest catch the Microsoft illness shortly after their arrival.
Just a guess.
At least while they were in MS, they were all in one place. Now many are at large and there is no word on whether they will continue to spread harm or if they can be rehabilitated into constructive members of society.
pcole said,
September 3, 2008 at 4:13 pm
So whose the cancer now, Monkey “Stevie” boy? MS seems to be the source of the disease; Ex-MS execs spreading themselves around infecting and corrupting everything around them similar to flesh-eating parasites. Ass for the BBC technical writer; if the bottom of the barrel is the best that “rag” can come up with, “journalism” is in dire straits. My 8 year old can write a better review on his own Linux experience.
Yfrwlf said,
September 3, 2008 at 7:34 pm
I would compare this to MSNBC in America, but since the BBC is tax-paid, it’s much more severe.
I just want to know how MS is getting away with acquiring and manipulating other industries, something I thought was against the law. Competition can’t function very well when the same organization controls the land, air, and sea.
Message to the UK, and everyone else for that matter: Push for laws in your government to require the examination of all software options as well as pushing for equal and standardized access.
Mike Brown said,
September 3, 2008 at 10:05 pm
The BBC article itself wasn’t as bad as the out of context headlines that are sprinkled within. E.g.,
“Gary Parkinson had a torrid time when he converted to Linux.”
Is that so? Well, here’s Gary’s first impressions of the default Linux install (Xandros) on his Eee:
“Xandros worked right out of the box. Like most distros it includes Open Office, an open source copycat of Microsoft Office. Word processing, spreadsheets and presentations are no problem. …. Xandros connected to the net through my home wireless network at the first time of asking. And surfing was fast and easy.”
Doesn’t sound too fucking torrid to me.
No, his problems actually start when he removes Xandros and attempts to install a completely different Linux distribution in its place because “there were a couple of things about Xandros which I didn’t like”. And he had problems. Well, it happens sometimes. But FFS, how many non-geeks are going to do that? Is is something you’d advise your Granny to do, and maybe then talk her through the process on the phone to boot? Thought not.
The truth is that Gazza would have very likely had similar problems had it tried to install Windows XP instead of Xandros; worse, in fact. And as for Vista…well, not even he’s that stupid, I suspect.
Mike Brown said,
September 3, 2008 at 10:35 pm
I’ve lodged a complaint on the BBC web site. Pretty much what I said above, but with the swearing removed.
Roy Schestowitz said,
September 4, 2008 at 2:48 am
Thanks, Mike. It just smelled to me like the typical FUD points (e.g. “no iTunes”) Microsoft occasionally slings using its ax men, e.g. Michael Gartenberg:
http://slated.org/linux_still_doesnt_make_it_on_desktop_is_pure_fud
http://boycottnovell.com/2008/09/03/sabotage-google-using-shills/