Why is the IT press so quiet?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

If Y2K is a potential crash and burn, where is the IT press? I read all the usual free trade rags like PC Week. On the whole, I have not heard the extreme doom and gloom coming out of the IT press. Even the supermarket mags like PC Magazine are staying on task with fixing the glitches. Except for a couple of fringe guys in programming, it's mostly business as usual. We keep the network up and management off our collective backs. So, if the "code is broken" guys, where is the IT press? Oh, and every time I read a drop dead date, we keep on living? What's up?

-- sysop (sysop@it.com), April 05, 1999


We as a culture keep on living only because the illusion has only a while longer to go. I seem to recall a Cory Hamasaki remark that we should think of ourselves as dead already. This is a bit of a Buddhist paradox that actually lets you face up to the wall coming at us full speed. The IT mgr.s may be brain dead or scared to speak out but those of us GI's who think do not let alleged drop dead dates affect us too much in he big picture.

-- churchorganist (musicswede@webtv.net), April 05, 1999.

The only "drop dead" date I care about is 2000-01-01. The number of programs that do look ahead processing is tiny compared with the big picture. As for what the trade press is saying, I thought we would be seeing more on Y2K. I figured Computerworld would have a Y2K section by now, with good news or bad. There have been a few stories over the past year, about a 50/50 mix. It's been pretty quiet since the Senate report though, same with the regular press. I think we will be seeing more as the year counts down. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), April 05, 1999.

PS - nice handle sysop (grin).

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), April 05, 1999.

The trade rag I read (EE Times) has also been very quiet. A few articles now and then, but y2k is definitely not on the radar. It shows up in focused articles ("geeks say devices are compliant"), but never flavors any stories about anything else. And the business section projects smooth rising sales curves for everyone for the next 5 years or so.

I keep expecting this to change, but it hasn't so far. I can only conclude that there's some real tunnel vision going on here, and too many will be really blindsided. But of course I *hope* that the problem is ignored because it's really beneath notice. (joke).

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 05, 1999.

There may be a clue or two in an earlier thread -- Y2K as seen from the IT trenches -- through a periscope.

I wrote there, "Maybe this is typical in people who have only known a rigid state-controlled economy." Now I'm thinking maybe this is a more widespread condition in the IT community, whatever thir background, namely. an inability to grasp the effects of interconnectivity.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), April 05, 1999.

The trade rags are not going to bite the hand that feeds them. Look at their advertisers. Microsoft, Intel, etc. will take their money elsewhere if the coverage gets too close to the truth. Also, the rags do not want to contribute to a high-tech downturn.

-- Incredulous (ytt000@aol.com), April 06, 1999.

Could be "business sense" - don't irritate the potential (and the present) advertisers; I'm more inclined to believe in the tunnel vision/don't-want-to-predict-it/dpn't-want-admit-its-possible theory.

For example - it's very evident that the stock market will be "bouncing" up and down through the period Nov-Feb next year - but the financial press "doesn't want" to show anything but the same-old/same-old up graphs.

Why? Can't tell - but keep a copy of the magazines now - and look at the graphs and headlines now, compared to the ones next year this time - after 1st quarter 2000 rolls around. 10-25% drop? Probable. 25-37% drop? Possible, but unlikely. Rise, or recovery back to pre-2000 levels? Not until late March-April, if then. Maybe not until mid-late summer.

Note - referring to the original question - that the government IT press is very, very busy covering year 2000 remediation - they must not be done yet, heh?

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (Cook.R@csaatl.com), April 06, 1999.

I think it is very obvious that the goverment is not interested in helping us, or for that fact teaching us what may be the repecussions from Y2k.

And this does apply do the stock market.

If I had info, would I give it out ?

-- (Jenouk@hotmail.com), April 06, 1999.

The April 6, 1999 edition of "PC Magazine" has a section on personal preparedness, including the Red Cross Guidelines. Interesting, considering Mitch Ratcliffe's views on the subject, and the fact that the magazine is a ZDnet publication.



-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), April 06, 1999.

Hey, did any of you read the latest Wired? It had 3 articles on y2k. They presented y2k as a real problem, instead of blowing it off. I have this issue, and I suggest you all look at it.

-- Crono (Crono@timesend.com), April 06, 1999.

Incredulous is correct. These mags are advertising vehicles. They will not print anything which undermines the industry who pays them to exist. It is a religion, "We can do it..rah, rah, rah!"

Also consider the mania we have in stocks, which extends to a general mania in the public discourse. We are ON TOP OF THE WORLD. Nothing can go wrong. Everything is coming up roses. I see nothing but blue skies. Ad naseum.

The flow of public discussion is to the extreme of positivity and so no one has 1% of their headspace allocated for news or views which are contrary to this view..including Y2K.

But under the covers, where the troups are laboring, the smart ones know the score and there is forboding.

Just remember this: the smaller the time for people to readjust their entire perspective and behavior the worse the panic and chaos. The later it gets before people wake up the worse the rebound into terror. Each day, each week, each month that goes by without awakening means that the resultant explosion will only be that much more severe.

-- David (C.D@I.N), April 06, 1999.

yes its all a bit strange up till about Jan/Feb the IT press was generally full of quie dire predictions, suddenly its all changed, about the same time the "gurus" were nobbled must be influence from the Government

take it out the press early in 1999, leave people in the dark, accuse people of scaremongering, give out generally happy face predictions about government agencies, joe public will probably not be panicked (at least in the UK) anyway, but just make sure those pesky programmers do not cause trouble

its now SMEs that are the target (ie they're being accused of being the problem), of course govt, large companies have got it all under control

-- dick of the dale (rdale@coynet.com), April 06, 1999.

There are Y2K articles all over the place in the IT industry press. You don't seem to be looking to hard. Oh, I get it, you're looking for stuff about heading for the hills. Also, the Red Cross guidelines are not inconsistent with Mitch Ratcliffe's views on Y2K.

-- Doomslayer (1@2.3), April 06, 1999.

The UK IT press, I mean, yes there are a few but its defintely quietened down

-- dick of the dale (rdale@coynet.com), April 06, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ