I've just finished the first 35 pages of the Senate report released today and had to take a quick break. I also saw most of the press conference on CSPAN2 as well as several mainstream media snippets on ABC, CNN, etc.

All I can say is this report is damning in the extreme. I see almost no connect between the actual contents of the report and what was reported in the media and said during the press conference. It's like two totally different worlds. It's pretty clear that the entire press event was carefully crafted to ignore the actual contents of the report. This is spin like I haven't seen since the Viet Nam war.

There is little reason for optimism about Y2K tonight and much more room for pessimism. Prepare "like for a winter storm"? Who's kidding who here? I've lived through a LOT of winter storms here in Iowa but never had one anything close to this potentially serious.

I urge everyone to go get this report and read it. Yes, it will take a bit of time and trouble to download and print. You owe it to yourself to read what is actually there, not what the media told you was there and certainly not what the Bennett/Dodd/Smith dog and pony show emphasized for the camera. Don't let me or antyone else tell you what's in there. Just go get it. Read it. You don't even need to read 'between the lines'. It's all there in simple English. Then consider the implications if only one quarter of the potential disruptions are realized.

I gotta go read the rest of it. Maybe at the end, everything turns out OK and we live happily ever after...Maybe at the end, Bennett adds a tag line "April Fools!" Maybe... hackers broke into the site and replaced the REAL report with this obvious scare tatic. Maybe I just fell asleep at page 35 and this was all a dream...

-Arnie

Got sleep? Care to barter? Will trade soybeans for high-quality shuteye.

-- Arnie Rimmer (Arnie_Rimmer@usa.net), March 03, 1999

Answers

Hi Arnie. I've only checked out the headlines of the actual report today. Yes, heard alot of the bump-in-the-road stuff also. I guess I will do some in-depth checking tomorrow. Thanks <:)=

PS - I won't mind being a Jan. fool if we get over this.

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 03, 1999.

What's the link?

-- Alison Tieman (fearzone@home.com), March 03, 1999.

Is there another link to the document besides the CNN site? I tried to download the utilities section three times and each time it was corrupted.

-- Alison Tieman (fearzone@home.com), March 03, 1999.

2/24/99 Senate report http:// www.senate.gov/~y2k/reportcontents.html

Is the utilities section based on old data (i.e. the Oct. 1998 NERC report)? ... I heard a comment to this effect on another forum.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), March 03, 1999.

Arnie, I agree with you totally. I read the utilities, transportation, and telecommunications sections and was stunned with what was reported. We are in far worse shape than I had hoped. The spin that our government is putting on this is also rather discouraging. I am glad I am prepared up here in the sierras in calif. But I am concerned that most folks will never read the report, just us "internet survival types". Unfortunately I think Ed is correct, a very dark depression is coming. regards papa bear

-- Papa Bear (it.guy@usa.net), March 03, 1999.

Did anyone else notice that the "General Government" section of the report was blank?

-- Flagirl (Filterlady@aol.com), March 03, 1999.

But on MacNeil-Lehrer last night Bennet and Dodd were so...reassuring.

-- Spidey (in@jam.com), March 03, 1999.

Lest we forget this is an INTERIM report per Senators Bennett and Dodd.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), March 03, 1999.

Arnie you're absolutely right. I printed the entire report yesterday too, over 100 pages. The Executive Summary itself is plainly scary and nowhere near a bump in the road. My husband watched the press conference on Realtime from the web at lunch, but last night I couldn't get him to read even the Executive Summary. He got terribly annoyed at me with my "paranoid attitude".

Around December, when Bennett said that it would be walking a difficult line between making the public aware and causing a panic, we discussed the coming gov. spin and I thought I was ready for it. Now I'm questioning my sanity again.

It is scary and distressing for me to experience first hand how powerful the news media is on brainwashing the public. Here I have the printed report, which I find well done and corelates with my own research findings, but hubby will not look at it because he's already heard it from the horse's mouth.

Hubby is computer and techno-phobic. He has no idea how long it takes to debug a program. He's been switching computer consultants at work because they were "idiots" who didn't know what they were doing, who took too long to design and install custom programs for his office, and charged too much. I've tried to explain to him how time consuming it is, and by switching consultants he was making the problem worse, to no avail.

He's got in his mind that 10 months is plenty of time to fix this Y2K bug everywhere. I'm sure that's how most of the public thinks.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 03, 1999.

Flagirl, the General Gov. section has 21 pages. I haven't read it yet but it's not blank. Try downloading it again.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 03, 1999.

Oh wow, here I thought I had downloaded the whole report after "General Government" section yesterday, but just went back at the site and see 5 more sections plus apendixes.

-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 03, 1999.

In the USA Today article today, Bennett is quoted as saying "We do not at the moment expect that this will be the end of the world as we know it."

Interesting.

-- a (a@a.a), March 03, 1999.

Well......... ........ that's a severe kick in the . . . ah. . teeth. The difference between the soundbites and the exec summary are striking to be mild. One might begin to ask about culpability in case things go as the report sees, vs the way things were represented in the shows.

deliberate misleading of the public could get people in hot water.

Can read?

Gotta shyster?

Chuck, whose eyes are gonna hurt by this time tomorrow from reading this piece of TP that SHOULD have gotten front page treatment.

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), March 03, 1999.

Let's look at Bennett's statement, that the committee doesn't believe it will be the end of the world as we know it. Does he mean the end of the world as THEY know it? Yup, it depends on your definition of the phrase, doesn't it? I have no reason to believe that any politician will be out of a job, that they won't get paid, that they will go hungry, that they won't have access to gas--fill in all the blanks! So I guess Bennett wasn't lying, was he?

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), March 03, 1999.

Chris,

I know what you mean about the power of the media. It creates a very strong desire to believe. It easily makes me feel crazy.

IMHO we all would have been better off, to have ignored ANY media coverage, and only read the report. Every person here is intelligent enough to read the actual report without a talking head to tell us what it means.

I keep using the term info-war to describe what is happening. It is a war for the mind of every American. (That doesn't sound too crazy, does it?!!) Not that it is all that organized, or a conspiracy, just that there are many people, with many different motivations to slant the data in their particular direction.

Put on your khaki helmet of Truth, and let us protect our minds. This is war, let us not read the propaganda the enemy drops into our ranks, let us read the data that shapes the strategy of the Commanding Generals.

If we are free to come and go as we please, and yet not free to form our own opinions based upon the facts at hand, are we truly free at all??????

-- Deborah (info@wars.com), March 03, 1999.

Sadly, I think many can't handle the truth, don't want to take the time to find it, and sort everything out.

-- Faze the Nation (dazed@confuzed.com), March 03, 1999.

IMO, and I'm only speaking about Bennett, who is a pollyanna but a worried pollyanna, he (and the report/subsequent coverage) are more or less consciously ricoheting between trying to alarm versus trying NOT to panic.

Bennett (to himself): "Gee, people think I'm downplaying this. Better alarm them now."

Bennett (to himself, later): "OK, I smell some panic, better downplay a bit."

Won't work, of course, it only confuses and paralyzes the public, but I think it explains quite a bit about what is happening.

Also, print is indeed a "hotter" (and, BTW, more accurate) media AS MEDIA than TV. People say things in print they wouldn't ordinarily say to a person in front of a camera, which is odd since print endures and TV is evanescent ... but them's the facts.....

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), March 03, 1999.

Faze:

In essence, you're saying that most people don't want to think? Let someone else sweat the details? Sorta like: "Have someone else compile the info and gimme a brief synopsis please?"

You may be right to a point. There are many computer programs/systems that "do the thinking for you"...and I'm sure the government wouldn't mind doing the thinking for us, either. From what I've gleaned so far, those really smart people in D.C. are telling us, "Do as we say, not as we do." ;-)

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), March 03, 1999.

"Do as we say, not as we do." So what exactly they up to? Living in their own world, living by their own rules. If I did what those politicos were doin', I'd be in jail. And I don't take what they say at face value either.

-- spirit (spirit@iserv.net), March 03, 1999.

Arnie, I just watched Drew Parkhill on the 700 Club and he said the same thing. There is a big difference in what is actually in the report. He also recommended reading the report itself.

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), March 03, 1999.

Yet buried in the spin (in today's L.A. Times) is the assessment that in the U.S. there is "only" a 15% chance of a major breakdown. ONLY?

We get anesthetized by numbers like 15% because when the weatherman says there's a 15% chance of rain (especially here in L.A.) it means forget rain, go to the beach.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), March 03, 1999.

When I heard yesterday's news about the report, I actually sighed with relief. Good, I thought, it really isn't going to be that bad.

You see, I've been searching for months (to no avail) that this won't be as bad as I think it will. I don't want my business to go down the drain. I like the life I lead. I'm happy.

So, for one brief day, I let myself believe.

But something inside me knows better and I shall be reading the report soon...from what was said above, it's even worse than I thought (I'm a 5 on the scale). I don't believe in 6's, 7's, 8's or 9's -- once past the 5.9 point, then it's a 10.

Bummer...

-- Sub-Mit (lurking@ofcourse.com), March 03, 1999.

I've been following this for awhile and I had hoped that what I've been researching was overdone. I've been telling ppl about this for awhile--how serious this is etc.

Everyone likes to be right---Now that I know for an absolute fact that I am--I don't like it!! I wanted to be wrong!!

The report is VERY upsetting!! I've got more to read but need to wait til I calm down.

If anyone out there has a doubt about how serious this is--Start reading!!

-- maji (abc@prepared.com), March 03, 1999.

Today's Louisville Courier-Journal headlined the story with

Senate panel sees Y2K chaos abroad, U.S. generally set for computer concerns of 2000

After the "reassuring" article there was a local story, headlined Few computer problems expected in Louisville. The director of the county Emergency Management Agency said "Calm down." The "wild scenarios" regarding shortages and power outages are the stuf of active imaginations. "I think that New Year's Day will come and go and we will all say, 'What was that all about?'"

There goes any chance I had of persuading others that the problem is real.

-- Pearlie Sweetcake (storestuff@home.now), March 03, 1999.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, Senator Bennett was a very successful PR professional before getting into politics. He knows how to communicate, as well or better than many of his colleagues.

If you want to help folks understand something complex and maybe even a bit frightening, you have to take it slow and steady. Keep the message simple, start with the core ideas, and then add items as the communications plan proceeds.

The majority of people aren't currently preparing for anything serious. On national TV (a "hot" medium, to use Buckminster Fuller's term), the Senators told everyone that this Y2K thing won't necessarily be a disaster, but that preparing in some fashion is actually OK. Anything more than than right now would set off a counter-productive reaction. In print, on the other hand, they provided all the Early Adopters and analytical types with a ton of data that shows that the problem is actually very serious indeed. Something for every level of mindset.

We should expect the "TV message" to become darker and more detailed over the next few months, turning up the heat, so to speak, as people get used to the idea that Y2K is serous. Takes time, but gets people ready without setting off reactions that mess up the actual remediation, mitigation, and preparation work.

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.com), March 04, 1999.

Pearlie,

I saw that article in the Courier-Journal too (page A4). Show 'em this article from the Courier-Journal, especially the first few paragraphs and the last few paragraphs.

http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/1999/9901/19/990119comp.html

Small Kentucky cities say they'll be ready for 2000

Computers run sewage plants and 911 systems

By JOSEPH GERTH, The Courier-Journal

Anchorage City Hall might look like a civil-defense shelter next Jan. 1. Anchorage, a small city in eastern Jefferson County, is preparing for the millennium bug to hit -- as are many small communities around the state. The city administrator, J. Fred Miller IV, said officials are taking it seriously.

They'll have fuel stored for police cars, backup generators to power government offices, additional cash on hand and maybe fresh water stored.

The city even has an AM radio transmitter to communicate with residents in an emergency -- all in case computers shut down, leaving cities unable to provide basic services.

[snip]

Still, some warn the problem could extend beyond computers that process records at city hall.

It could affect communication systems, sewage- and water-treatment plants that use computer chips, and practically anything else controlled by a computer. It could even disable some heating and air- conditioning units that are computer-controlled. So agencies that normally deal with disasters such as floods and tornadoes -- including the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the American Red Cross -- are dispensing information about Y2K.

The Red Cross recommends that people stock up on supplies such as food and fresh water, fill cars with gasoline and have extra cash on hand just before the arrival of 2000.

[snip]

But no one knows exactly how well local governments in Kentucky are prepared. The League of Cities, which has sponsored one workshop on Y2K and has two others planned, has surveyed member cities but has received only about 55 responses. The results have not been tabulated yet.

A national disaster official recently warned small governments to get busy getting ready for 2000 -- if they aren't already.

"Generally states and the larger local governments are aware of and making some progress toward resolving Y2K issues. However, many smaller local governments, as well as some state and territorial governments, seem not to be aware of the problem," FEMA's deputy director, Mike Walker, said in a recent news release. "Clearly the most serious potential for problems is at the local level, and this is what we are concerned about."

[snip]

But some fear that governments are not taking the problem seriously enough.

When a national group of city administrators held a teleconference based in Washington last fall to discuss the issue, only three or four people showed up at the University of Louisville's Shelby Campus to take part in the discussion.

"It was a well-put-together program, but nobody came," said James Graham, director of U of L's Telecommunication Research Center. "Small metropolitan communities are the ones that really need this sort of thing, but I feel like there is a lack of understanding." It's also a problem in the private sector, Graham said. "We've been doing outreach programs for the past year that are dismally attended," he said.

Concerned that local governments are moving too slowly, the center, which usually works with business and industry, has recently reached out to governments in hopes of providing technical assistance.

Aldona Valicenti, the state's chief information officer and the head of Kentucky's Year 2000 program, said it may be too late for many governments to make sure all their computer equipment can deal with Y2K.

Instead, she said, governments need to determine what services are most critical and focus on them. Less important problems can be solved later.

Valicenti said people in government appear to be realizing they must get to work quickly on the problem.

"I can only judge from the level of interest, and the level of interest has increased tremendously in the past few months," she said. "But if you're just waking up in January 1999 and saying, 'I have a problem,' I think you're behind and may have some real problems."

[end of article]

I'll admit, though, this article is persuasive only when it's edited. The full story continuously jumps from one side to the other on Y2K. It reminds me a lot of Bennett and Dodd's press conference the day of the Senate report release.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 04, 1999.

Pearlie,

I just became a tad bit more concerned. The story on page A4 you referred to says...

[snip]

An official with Louisville Gas & Electric Co., which services thousands of homes and businesses in the region, said the utility has been working on Y2K since 1996 and is confident it will be able to keep the juice flowing.

"We have not found anything that tells us today that we are going to have significant problems on Jan. 1," said Grant Ringel, LG&E communications director."

[snip]

But, in this article, notice when LG&E says it will be ready:

http://www.courier-journal.com/localnews/1999/9901/19/990119comp.html

[snip]

LG&E and Kentucky Utilities, which together serve 800,000 Kentucky customers, think all of their critical systems will be ready by the third quarter of 1999. LG&E has posted a notice on its World Wide Web page to reassure its customers.

"While the Company can make no guarantees about what may occur on January 1, 2000, or beyond, senior management believes that the Y2K team is positioning the Company's business operations for a smooth transition into the next century," it says.

[snip]

A start in 1996 and a finish in the 3rd quarter of 1999? That's cutting it really close. I've heard a rumor that LG&E didn't get into high gear on Y2K until the spring or summer of 1998.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 04, 1999.

Arnie:

I just got past the "first" 80 pages. Very bad news all around. I am sorry to say that the 8-10 scenario looks more plausible all the time.

Guess I'll finish the darn thing tomorrow. It's more fun to hang out here........

-- Jon Williamson (pssomerville@sprintmail.com), March 06, 1999.