Letters printed in Time mag re: Millennium Madness

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

Sorry, not available online.

Top letter, in big, bold print:

"The doomsday prophets need to get a life! In a universe that is 15 billion years old, the entire era of human existence is a nano-blip."

[Penetrating analysis.]

"When 2000 arrives, our undoing won't be a massive computer problem but the public's senseless panic triggered by the radical sensationalism surrounding the issue today. Instead of fueling fear, the media should reassure people that the new millennium is not something to be dreaded. But it may be too late. Just imagine what lies in store economically if terrified individuals begin making drastic withdrawals from bank accounts and selling off stocks. We would be better off sitting tight, staying calm and letting the computer programmers do their job rather than getting ready for a Judgment Day that may not come."

[Another technologically-impaired drone.]

"Relax. God does not have a calendar."

[Brilliant. And the millennium doesn't start until 2001. Relevance?]

"What worries me most is the families you profiled in your millennium-bug cover. One has two rifles, a shotgun and a handgun. Another is buying rolls of toilet paper in Arkansas. While these people are shooting it out over the last piece of toilet tissue on New Year's Day, my family and I will be comfortably watching the Rose Bowl parade with all of our electric appliances working just fine."

[Written by someone from New Jersey. Enough said? Hey, it's a joke.]

"Y2K will be the nonevent of the millennium. The only thing less likely than a catastrophe is that the profiteers who make a fortune off the gullible will refund everyone's money after being hit by "survivor's guilt" in January 2000."

[Yet another brilliant observation. Um, what about the code, ma'am?]

"Oh, now I see. The "story" about Y2K isn't the billions of defective codes in mainframe computers or the 25 billion to 50 billion embedded chips. The blame doesn't go to shortsighted programmers or managers who procrastinated until it was too late to fix the problem or to a government that knew about the Y2K situation in 1995 but did little about it until 1998. The real issue with Y2K is American Christians who see serious potential problems and are making rational preparations. What an interesting spin you put on Y2K."

[It's our fault. TIME says so. Well said.]

"There may be some computer problems as the year 2000 dawns, but the notion that there will be cosmic events in the supernatural realm is absolutely ludicrous. Here we are approaching the 21st century, and our folk culture is still stuck in a medieval mind-set, with all its superstitions. Jan. 1, 2000, will be just one more day in the life of Planet Earth."

[Pray to the computer gods that you are right.]

"Chris Taylor mentioned in his article "The History and the Hype" that "no one in the computer industry wanted to rock the boat..." by confronting the Y2K problem. Well, Apple Computer did, and thanks to the makers of Macintosh, Mac users do not have to worry about the Y2K bug in the operating system. Just imagine manpower expenses for those who did not rock the boat--whole nations could be given a free computer for every citizen."

[Now, Mac users, about those 2-digit years in your data...]

"I did not read in TIME any sensible explanation of why ICBM's and power plants (among other computerized junk) should go crazy on Jan. 1, 2000. If your experts cannot explain the time-bomb scare story, then they bring support to the concept of supernatural powers impacting the whole of information technology. I am going Quaker!"

[Insert Quaker joke here. I believe this wins the most-moronic-letter award. Written by someone named "Christian" in Paris. That explains it. Hey, that's a joke.]

"How could the world collapse? Since Microsoft started to sell Windows, everybody has got used to collapsing systems. Every day a lot of computers break down, and it's not a big deal. In the year 2000 we'll have to face some new computer viruses sending frightening messages to us like HERE IS THE END OF THE WORLD, JUMP OUT THE WINDOW ASAP."

[Written by Gabor Nemeth of Szombathely, Hungary. Who is obviously a mainframe programmer with 30 years experience.]

"Your sane pieces on the Y2K epidemic were guilty of a surprising omission. You neglected to address a question burning in the minds of all your readers: Will TIME stop?"

[I subscribe to SI, which is owned by Time-Warner. When I renewed recently, I grilled the customer service rep about their Y2K status. She informed me, after putting me on hold, that "We are doing everything possible to insure continued service" blah blah. I asked her about what if the power is out? or the USPS is kaput? Etc. Dumbfounded. On hold again. Then: "You can cancel and get a refund at any time. That's always been our policy." I will cancel around November, and save the magazines as a potential heat source. So, for me, TIME will stop. Sort of.]

Last, but not least:

"Instead of ridiculing people who are concerned about this computer bug, which can affect big parts of society all over the world, you could have asked the Big Names about the progress their companies have made on the Y2K bug. Can they give us written assurance that their computer systems are ready for the year 2000? Or will it become a big mess?"

[That's it, folks. 9 DGI's. 2 GI's. I'm disappointed, but not surprised.]

-- Steve Hartsman (hartsman@ticon.net), February 02, 1999

Answers

Well, Steve, I guess it proves that the magazine's editors know their audience...though how much good that will do them all a year from now is another question entirely...

Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 02, 1999.


Naw, Arlin, it just means that Time's editors picked and chose the letters they wanted to run. Did they give a count on overall response to the article(s), pro and con? I would love to know if they were buried in spam for their pollyanna-ism.

-- Cash (cash@andcarry.com), February 02, 1999.

Goebbels would be oh so proud!

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), February 02, 1999.

This letter is interesting. It has been said - that which is not part of ourselves does not disturb us. Such a long letter, some effort there. Methinks he doth protest too much. Conclusion: he's worried.

If I hadn't already stocked up, I'd expect to be shooting it out with him over the last roll long about November...

-RCat

-- Runway Cat (Runway_Cat@hotmail.com), February 02, 1999.


Believe it or not, a lot of the letters in a rag like Slime are written "in house" by asst. editors and editorial assistants. Some of it's done to ensure timely responses to last weeks propaganda, but of course they make up letters as freely as they make up quotes and 'facts' in their articles. Henry Luce was lucky: he hasn't been able to read the rag for years.

-- Spidey (senses@tingling.com), February 03, 1999.


Steve - I am still feeling great guilt for supporting the original Time issue by slapping down a fraction of my life savings - thanks for sparing me the need to pay for the follow-up issue. I'm confused on one point though, don't people from Arkansas use T.P.???

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), February 03, 1999.

Spidey's senses need another dose of mutagen.

Time does not make up letters. A cover story usually generates between 200-1000 responses. In Time's internal newsletter, the wackiest ones are printed along with a count of pro- and con-. Next time I stop by the bureau to check my mailbox, I will pick it up.

-- Declan McCullagh (declan@well.com), February 03, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ