John Koskinen to speak at "Y2K: The Press and Preventing Panic"greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
Heads up! This takes place in one hour. I just found it...http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/0308-110.htm
Panel to Discuss 'Y2K: The Press and Preventing Panic'
U.S. Newswire
8 Mar 10:50
Media Studies Center Presents 'Y2K: The Press and Preventing Panic' March 10
To: National and Assignment Desks, Technology and Media reporters
Contact: Sheila Owens, 212-317-6517 or Jeffrey Pattit, 212-317-6531, both of Media Studies Center
Web site: www.freedomforum.org
News Advisory:
Every day it seems that one news organization after another tells an alarmist story of the potential for worldwide disaster as we move into the new millennium. Join the Media Studies Center for a working session with an eminent group of journalists to discuss the kind of news reporting on Y2K, that encourages thoughtful public reaction.
------
WHEN: Wednesday, March 10
WHERE: Newseum/NY, 580 Madison Ave. (between 56th and 57th streets), New York, N.Y.
Opening Remarks:
-- Edward W. Kelley Jr., member, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve
-- John A. Koskinen, chair, President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, The White House
Panel:
-- Barnaby J. Feder, The New York Times
-- Jeff C. Gralnick, CNN Financial News
-- Jonathan Krim, San Jose Mercury News
-- James W. Walker, ABC News
-- Jonathan Wolman, The Associated Press
Time:
Breakfast -- 8 a.m.
Opening Remarks -- 8:30 a.m.
Discussion -- 9-10 a.m.
Webcast: Live webcast on "free! Radio," The Freedom Forum's audio webcasting service at www.freedomforum.org
Broadcast media: This program will be videotaped for broadcast use
------
The Media Studies Center is an operating program of The Freedom Forum, a nonpartisan international foundation dedicated to free press, free speech and free spirit for all people. The Media Studies Center is devoted to improving understanding of media issues by the press and the public. Programs bring journalists, scholars, media industry executives and the public together to examine the media's effects on society.
[snip]
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999
You can hear this with RealPlayer at the following link:http://www.freedomforum.org/freeradio/schedule/mar99.asp
Scroll down the page to Wednesday, March 10. Clicking on the microphone will let you hear it if you have RealPlayer.
Here's another discription of today's events from the above link:
[snip]
Wednesday, March 10
8:25-10:15 a.m. "Y2K: The Press and Preventing Panic." Are news organizations propagating too many alarmist stories about the potentially disasterous consequences of the Y2K computer bug? Join John A. Koskinen, chair of President Clinton's Council on Year 2000 Conversion and Edward W. Kelly Jr. of the Federal Reserve as they set the stage for a discussion on whether news reporting on Y2K ought to encourage more thoughtful public reaction about the problem.
Panelists:
Barnaby J. Feder, business and financial reporter, The New York Times
Jeff C. Gralnick, executive vice president, CNN Financial News (CNNfn)
Jonathan Krim, assistant managing editor, San Jose Mercury News
James W. Walker, correspondent, ABC "World News Tonight"
Jonathan Wolman, managing editor, Associated Press
Moderator: Kerry Brock, Media Studies Center
Live from Newseum/NY
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
Or just go directly to this link to hear it live. Only a half hour now until it starts.http://webevents.broadcast.com/freedomforum/freeradio.ram
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
Five minutes now till broadcast.
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
Kevin- can you or someone give a synopsis please, afterwards? Can't go there.....says file can't be found or some such stoopid thing :)Thanks. Blessings...Mercy
-- Mercy (prepare@now.com), March 10, 1999.
Great job Kevin thanks!! I just got online and saw your post....it's starting right now!Thanks
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
A better title for this circus would be "How To Manage The News" or "How To Better Control What People Can Learn About Y2K" or "How To Keep The Masses Unaware Of The Real Nature Of The Y2K Threat". I used to think John Koskinen was providing a useful service regarding public awareness of Y2K (same for Peter de Jager); I now think that by downplaying the severity of Y2K, he will be responsible for horrendous unnecessary suffering in 2000. For his sake, he'd better have a good disguise then.
-- cody varian (cody@y2ksurvive.com), March 10, 1999.
Listening to koskinen right now. Talking about the wide range of opinion, let's not lull people into a false sense of security, microwaves, elevators, planes aren't going to fall from the sky, but there are a lot of things that aren't going to stop. Balancing the whole spectrum. People's eyes glaze over when You mention IT. Concerned about telecom, power, banking. should be OK, but there are large numbers of small orgs. Healthcare, medical devices, devices should be OK, but huge #'s of small orgs. Cars OK, FAA, small airports, Self fulfilling prophesy. "if people take logical action, fill up your gas tank, shouldn't have to move to New Mexico.Growing level of comfort with the problem, raising concern.
"What about MY bank, telecom..."
Shift in focus...
Here comes Kelley...
-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), March 10, 1999.
You guys are good!Sounds like the same old story:
"... planes will not fall from the sky" ............Really! I'm so surprised.
" .... you don't have to move to New Mexico ............" ........ Thank God for Ed Yourdon, Yardeni, North, Hyatt, the rest.
"attitude affects outcome" ............. tell it to the computer.
Banks on now ........ Those *** holes are really starting to **** me off: Its MY money, you jerks.
Later ............ and thanks again!
-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), March 10, 1999.
Kelly says all firms are doing tremendous and they will be ready by June...there might be some glitches but the firms will be able to handle them, there will be no collapse.."can I guarantee that the financialsystem will not crash? No, I can't do that,but it is an educated confidence." goes on and on about small glitches will not be a problem and banks are ready to handle them."I don't think anyone should be a Polyanna about Y2K, but we don't expect people to be Chicken Little either"
"there's much work to be done in local communities and we hope the media will help and use common sense"
"advise people to prepare...they should prepare...suggest and highlight sensible actions from businesses...promote community leadership....make people acountable for acurate reporting...please make sure to put the problem in context our success relies on factual reporting..."
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
Kelley...What are the critical elements in confidence in the banking system
What are we confident about and what are we concerned about
What do we hope the media will do in the coming months
Customers need to be assured of access to cash, records are secure, deposit insurance is in place.
The FED does not see a vast need in extra cash, but the FED sees it as their responsibility to make sure that there is enough cash, and they need to make sure it gets to the right place at the right time...
FED doing their 2nd focused survey. Key areas will get continued scrutiny. Overwhelming # of institutions are doing fine, End of June is target. Contingency planning, testing. FDIC is totally prepared.
Nothing new here...He's just trying to get these media folks on his side...
Interdependencies...quite possible not everything that needs to be fixed...may not be enough time...internationally, not enough info...contingcy planning crucial across all sectors of our economy...citizenry my become so worried...no ironclad guarantee..."there's no guarantee that everything will work later this morning...
What might the media consider...rapidly involving issue...media needs to keep on top of it...nobody should be a pollyanna, but based on the overwhelming evidence, nobody should be a chicken little, not let so- called experts make assertions...seek legitimate info...advise calm preparations...highlight sensible action by small biz...community leaderships...hold people accountable for accurate info...report on glitchs, but place in appropriate context...y2k gives reporters an opportunity to do what they do best...
here comes the question section...
-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), March 10, 1999.
pshannon and Chris-Keep it coming....thanks for the play by play....
Blessings...Mercy
-- Mercy (prepare@now.com), March 10, 1999.
oooh! they're talking about the schitsophrenic "conflicting reporting" by the media now...
-- chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
I'll let pshannon do it...I can't type and listen at the same time...not a good typer :-(
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
They're talking about what the roll of the media should be...they should concentrate on the local level, who's doing what, what the progress is, what lessons learned to transpose to other communities etc...CNN says they've concentrated on national level, doing 2 y2k a week now, going on 5 a week in april there is so much to cover now...Dang this is soooo frustrating all too late! that's what we said they should have been doing and talking about LAST YEAR!!
-- chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
"we need the press to do more investigative reporting...we don't want the press to put the spin and emphasise on the negative aspects...""I'd like to see more investigative reporting on Washington D.C."..."you're not going to see this from John and Ed...the official...no disrespect to John K...we need more investigative reporting to see what's really going on in D.C."
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
I wonder how many people will die in 2000 due to lack of being y2k prepared because of John Koskinen and the media?
-- cody varian (cody@y2ksurvive.com), March 10, 1999.
shhhh...cody..don't talk like that, you sound like an extremist wacko from the internet (so they say)
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
This is an actually very good conference, lots of good questions and comments from the press
-- Chris (catst@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
Now theres no problem ..... except panic. Its only us --- the stupid no-nothing citizens --- that are the problem, apparently.Prevent Panic
Prevent Panic!
PREVENT PANIC! HELP STOP THOSE RADICAL NO-NOTHING GEEKS -%$#@&*&#$)(@&$(# prevent panic AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), March 10, 1999.
It would be my fervent hope (from the land of the audio challenged) that someone--with one of those new fangled automatic dictation software thingies (i.e., Dragonspeak naturally, etc.) would do a transcript and post it somewhere. That would be terrific, but so is the above.I really like what I read about "more investigative reporting at the local level." Unfortunately editors rarely make the time for someone to cover a beat like this exclusively. Too many car jackings and shootings to follow. Of course,...letters to the editor of your local paper, quoting folks from the above conference. . .wouldn't hurt. (Unless the reporter assigned was a dunce. That could happen too.)
-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), March 10, 1999.
It's really hard to transcribe here what they say at the conference...many people talking fast, jumping subjects a lot.CNN said they're committed to give air time on Y2K for awareness, moving up to 5 times a week starting in April, and that even though there's a lot of competing subjects/people who demand time, they're committed to it and will do it. Hopefully they'll be a leader and example to local news reporters.
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
I love the part of "our job is not to recommend, but simply to report"...Other tidbits/snippets/quotes:
The lady from the Women's Economic Roundtable asks, "Why can't we just turn back the clock?"
"The public is getting more information now, and is feeling confident..."
"People may buy alot of food that they don't need..."
"There is a cost to over-preparing..."
more to come...
-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), March 10, 1999.
K: "There are risks, and we need to find out more about them...."Statement to K:"What we need from Washington is a common reporting language that we can measure you against...we're drowning in a sea of conflicting information."
K Answers: "We will have the first comprensive report...in April..."more to come...
-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), March 10, 1999.
Many people from the audience (organization leaders and reporters) are asking head-on questions and head-on comments ...this conference overall is excellent...they're discussing the real concerns we've had here on this board...if most reporters latched on the "investigative reporting is needed" emphasise, I expect things to change and heat up soon.Wrapping up now, conference over.
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
K: "I think it is important for the hard questions to be asked so we can answer them"...Darn. The pace was too fast to keep up with the typing. The forum is now over :-(
-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), March 10, 1999.
yeah I know Tim..frustrating...my report, yours and pshannon isn't really a fair rendering of the whole conference. Many important problems in the media reporting were discussed, and overall this conference was very encouraging to me, Koskinen's usual spin notwistanding. That too was even addressed, as someone mentioned that he was overly optimistic in his press conferences.I wonder if this conference will still be available taped on real audio, it's a must listen to.
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
Got here late so my reporting will not identify speakers unless they name themselves:-people should have batteries and enough water at turn of century (doesn't say how much is 'enough')
-more information means more confidence
-Matthew Holm of Country Living: are we creating panic or helping the economy? Gives example of people buying a bag of beans every week. Answer- speaker makes fun of him (millions of people buying beans-crowd laughs) and says that that method will only create a shortage now.
Speaker: (Koskinen?) says: talked with pharmaceutical companies-what are risks? (he never did answer his own question- but said "we need to dowhat needs to be done as best we can determine.") (Huh?!)
(Comic highlight) I know you can buy a generator cause I just bought one. (crowd cracks up.)
Dennis Grabow-quotes statistic "National Association of Counties say 1/2 of utilites still not working on y2k prep."
listening now to the panelists summaries:
suggestions: we need from Washington...a common reporting language, document...that we can measure you against. A month by month, quarterly by quarterly that says ...here is where the mission critical systems are.
A: (By Koskinen?) on April 15 we will give you one. Every quarter.
comments: I worry about excessive coverage. It doesn't bother me that the press covers it...concerns raised here will be addressed by journalism and more jounalism
I will leave here very encouraged. I'm looking forward to hearing the reporting from here. Everyone will have to stay on top day by day.
Someone: (that's) the usual overly optismistic y2k czar! laughter.
Koskinen: We need to have questions asked so we can answer them. Great supporter of Gao's work even though I disagree with them.Difficult questions should be asked. Who defines mission critical systems? Answers will give people confidence.
Sorry it's so garbled. Hope I caught something of interest.
Linda
-- newbiebutnodummy (Linda@home.com), March 10, 1999.
According to this link...http://www.freedomforum.org/freeradio/schedule/mar99.asp
[snip]
Archived programs are usually available for "on demand" listening 12- 24 hours after times listed below.
[snip]
I did get the whole thing on cassette just in case. I also took pretty good notes from the beginning.
I'm going to go drink some coffee and come back with comments from the notes I took.
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
There were surprisingly some excellent, hard-hitting questions asked. Yardeni and Porlier were present and querying. However, the best questioners seemed to be cut off by the moderator, citing time constraints, while conversely some of the bland replies were allowed to ramble.The questions themselves were more informative than the responses, as background facts were given by the questioners, (before they were cut off).
If a transcript becomes available, it would be worth the time to read, if only for the (seemingly) slight ratcheting up of warning advisory by Koskinen.
For example, I heard someone say "O.K. so now it's five days to plan for rather than three."
(I came in late on the broadcast. Can someone confirm this was advised therein?)
-- mabel (mabel_louise@yahoo.com), March 10, 1999.
Kevin, God Bless ya in advance! You are not only handier than pockets in a shirt, and drawers in a desk, but also a drain in a bathtub!I really need to head on to other work. If time permits, would you directly email me your notes! Thanks! :)
-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), March 10, 1999.
Remember, children, Big Brother is Watching you. Now let us recite our glorious Party's slogans!WAR IS PEACE! IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH! FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!
-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), March 10, 1999.
From my notes, typed as the questions came accross - the following is a summary of Q&A. Note that some of it is paraphrased, as I was typing as quickly as possible to capture the thoughts of the speakers. If there's a particularly pithy quote, it's not paraphrased, and I think you can probably tell the difference. Here ya go:Newark Star Ledger Editor: this conference is about the challenge to print, radio, and TV to report this story, and that's what we need to concentrate on...need to keep traditional role...stick to that story...suspect that story will be 27 days a week...with Monica, public said "too much"...
Ans: not very sophisticated in reporting this story...major editor sent directive to reporter can find person responsible for y2k and interview...need a more sophisticated approach...
Comment: Good example is S&L; media failed because not knowledgeable...not a sexy story
Q: how will I as a journalist be affected; do I have to worry about my systems failing, NYT service, AP service...
A: Yes, Yes, Yes - have to worry about it all
A: ABC is in the middle of a remediation program; no one off for New Years
NYT: paper still gets out despite technology glitches; from a purely selfish perpective: I'm stuck with this beat, and at the end of year, there's no story and I'm stuck with it
Q for K&K: Is the greatest risk a "bank run"? Panic?
Kosk: Risk is overreaction by the public; perception vs reality; goal is to look at the facts and give information; if we don't pull it off, could have overreaction
Q (for Kelly): How much cash will be avail? Policy implications?
Kelly: No speculation on second Q; printing a substantially larger amount of cash, we have a responsibility to meet demand; we are making no recommendations on *what* to do; lots of fallback positions, we will be ready to go with multiple layers of contingency planning, we will be able to handle system wide liquidity problems
Q: has anyone asked Clinton to address in major address?
Kosk: I asked him to last July
Q: Should the president speak on this today?
Kosk: we are working with them to define appropriate times and opportunities
Q: Gore hasn't been heard from
Kosk: VP has held several meetings with senior advisors
Kelly: Will hear more from Greenspan
NBC Q: 1) panic - other dates, how to report 2) if deadlines not met, how do you suggest we cover that?
Kosk: We will be happy if journalists cover very carefully - if there are problems, how do we (as government and industry) adjust? (MY NOTE: HE DID NOT ANSWER "if deadlines not met" question)
Kelly: might want to ask companies on 3/31 fiscal year how they handled transition.
Comment: other dates don't have the major threat...minor league analogy
Q: only 8% of problems occur on 1/1/2000 (gartner group)...there's a danger with using 1/1/2000 as shorthand "big bang"
A: Another date to watch is 12/31/1999; watching NZ as global transition occurs
Q: for Kosk: to what extent would it be irresponsible for media to publicize need for personal preps in December?
A Kosk: What appears to be reasonable? Giving advice to 250 million people, if everyone shows up at gas pumps all at once? Have to give advice that's operationally prudent.
A: If everyone has to print out financial statements last week of year, will be a problem
Comment: Cost of Y2k is not a "tax"; transfer of wealth...for the first time, companies are getting a handle on what's happening technology wise in their firms...companies are going to find that inhouse IT doesn't make sense...contract to keep up with technology
Comment: Longer term issues to cover
Comment: People respond to a crisis, but might go back to old ways
Q: Why can't we just turn the clocks back?
A: In some cases that's possible, doesn't work with fixed dates / birthdates; blah blah (discussion of encapsulation)
Q (insurance rep): faced crisis in the past, people come together; is journalism creating panic??
A: At a period of confusion; need some clarity among the confusion; poll: public feeling more comfortable;; this is a developing situation with a lot of time remaining; this is a period of alert and that's what we're writing about
A: Some people economically can't wait until the last minute to prepare, there's a story now, how comfortable is each person now
Q: are we creating panic if we start telling people to prepare now? Or are we stimulating economy?
A Kosk: A clearly, better to accumulate slowly, if everyone goes out and buys beans today, there won't be enough beans to go around; if we're going to make judgement on prescription drugs and everyone stockpiles now, it's a problem early rather than a problem late
A: If you build up 3 month supply, will end up wasting it; economic burden, there is a cost to over preparing
(Someone bought a generator)
ConEd: Contingency plan is not a mixed message - valid, prudent, business. Yes, there's an unlikely chance that things can go wrong. Can contingency planning be put in perspective??
A: No shortage of journalism coverage on contingency plans
Comment: Can report in a scary way or responsible way
Comment: preps, how so many infrastructure industries (sewer, water) not ready; 1/2 counties still not ready, what does this mean for hospitals; local services, need legitimate national debate
A Kelly: I'm about to be viewed as a pessimist; problems at local level are real problems and risk; need to know more about them
Summaries:
Would like to focus on impact; challenge is to get beyond immediate point.
Not our job to recommend or suggest; however, what we need from Washington is not "official" report; we need a common reporting language and document; a common understandable report card that we can measure you against. Drowning in a sea of conflicting information.
Kos: Every quarter will be reporting; April 15 report next
Complicated story, fascinating; need to be sophisticated in approach and committed to investigative reporting
Risk of excessive coverage and excessive worry
Rapidly changing and evolving story
Kosk: this meeting reflection of media interest; major step forward in media coverage; supporter of GAO work for getting to the "facts"
-- Jelly Bean (jelly@belly.com), March 10, 1999.
Alright Kevin! You Da Man as always! :-)Linda, you had that right, Koskinen never answered questions straight and beat around the bush just like the gov official that he is.
Mabel, "The questions themselves were more informative than the responses, as background facts were given by the questioners, (before they were cut off)."
That's why I say that the conference was a success! I clearly had the impression that the audience saw through Koskinen just like we do and went right to the heart of the crucial matters that we've been discussing here for months. If I had to pick one subject discussed at this conference as being the most important, it's the emphasis on investigative reporting and especially at the local level.
I see that the tape of the broadcast will be available in 12-24 hours, if you don't have Real Audio installed, you should do it now so you can hear the whole thing. I'll make sure hubby listens to it.
-- Chris (catsy@ponc.com), March 10, 1999.
Thanks to all for the great reporting! Koskinen's comment regarding the GAO was classic. Do we believe him or a more independent source like the GAO?Gee, the GAO seems to be much more truthful and forthcoming than Koskinen. I'll go with the GAO, Mr. Talkingbutnevermovinghead, but thanks for your input.
Sounds like April will begin an interesting time.
Mike ==============================================================
-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), March 10, 1999.
"Q: for Kosk: to what extent would it be irresponsible for media to publicize need for personal preps in December?A Kosk: What appears to be reasonable? Giving advice to 250 million people, if everyone shows up at gas pumps all at once? Have to give advice that's operationally prudent.
A: If everyone has to print out financial statements last week of year, will be a problem "
Notice here guys that this is PROOF that we are NOT wackos extremists! Fergawdsake, we're not going to be part of the problem in december, punching poeple over the head in grocery isles and gas pumps! WE HERE ARE NOT IN A PANIC, we have been rationally discussing and tracking the implications of Y2K for months and years and preparing CALMLY all these months.
Now someone has to point this out to Koskinen and have him apologize for his demonization of internet Y2Kers.
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 10, 1999.
Kevin and crew,Thanks everyone, for the blow-by-blow reporting. Great job!
As another one of the audio challenged, your reporting is much appreciated and solid gold!
BTW, an e-mail came through this a.m. on one of the listservs ...
... some of our participants are not in agreement with the current [preparation] position. Generally these groups do not feel comfortable with recommending more preparedness than FEMA. We are trying to point out that FEMA recommends (for "short-term" disaster preparedness) a two week level of supplies. We have been pointing this out to others and have made it a central point in our recommendations.
Despite this, John Koskinen has responded to us saying that he could not advocate 14 days. He did however say "But I think it would certainly help the public to have your group -- with its wide ranging membership -- with a recommendation like this."...
For a not so subtle ... Hint ... check out:
http://www.coalition2000.org/< /a>I would surmise that Koskinen may have a higher muzzle placed on him.
Diane
(Gotta go check the latest GAO reports ... the one on the IRS has just been made available according to this mornings GAO daybook e announcement.)
-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), March 10, 1999.
One of the very first things John Koskinen did was to take aim at the Senate Y2K report. Koskinen said all reports on Y2K are already out of date. He also made a comment about people not needing to move to New Mexico...One of Edward W. Kelley's first comments was that since the problem is now being aggressively challenged, the biggest concern now is public reaction. A few minutes later he said that banks and the financial system will be ready by the end of June.
Kelley also that we don't have enough information about the international situation. He said that won't affect the U.S., though. Kelley described the Y2K situation as rapidly evolving and that facts have a short-half life. He said that enormous amounts of work are being done on Y2K. Kelley also made a comment about "so-called experts."
Then the reporters started asking questions. One complained that the Senate Y2K committee said one thing one day about preparing, and then said the opposite about preparing another day. The reporter said there needed to be a "clarity of position" from the government.
A reporter mentioned the PDF file he saw on a Web site from the NERC, the one about not making the electric industry drill on April 9 too complex so that there would be a good story for the press. John Koskinen came up with a so-so explanation about why this wasn't as sinister as it sounded.
Koskinen said the L.A. Times did a series of stories a year or a year and a half ago saying there was no Y2K problem. (He was trying to make the point again that the Y2K story shouldn't be under- or over- played. He said something about "survivalists." He also told the reporters that he used to be quite concerned about how Y2K was going to turn out, but isn't now.
A reporter from ABC asked a question again about conflicting statements from the government. The reporter's point was that saying things won't be that bad don't mix with statements that businesses should make contingency plans.
Edward W. Kelley Jr. did say that because of system interconnectedness, it's not possible to know just how things will turn out. He did say reassuringly that we know where the active work is being done.
Dr. Edward Yardeni said that 79% of the government's mission-critical systems were compliant at mid-February. He asked journalists to do investigative reporting on Y2K, such as looking into how the number of mission-critical systems by the government has shrunk by 25% in the last year and a half.
Dr. Yardeni asked that reporters look into what systems are being changed from mission-critical to non-mission-critical, and who makes these decisions. He also suggested stories on cities such as Washington D.C., who are way behind in their remediation. Yardeni said that journalists should talk to IT guys who are doing Y2K work to see how they feel about Y2K progress. Someone, Koskinen I believe, pointed out that Ed Yardeni is known for being a pessimist on Y2K.
Another reporter brought the point up again about mixed messages when trying to cover the Y2K story. For example, that the public supposedly doesn't need to set extra cash aside, but that contingency plans are being made to deal with potential financial system problems. The reporter also complained that everyone involved with Y2K has a vested interest in it, on both sides of the issue, and that there are no objective sources of information.
Another point made by a journalist is how labels and phrases are conveniently tossed around to demonize people with a different view from one's own, such as "planes falling from the sky," "Chicken Little" and "Pollyanna." The same journalist also said that he's tired of hearing the "snowstorm" analogy used to describe how people should prepare.
Also brought up was the chemical industry, and how we just don't know what's happening with it. No information on a very important subject.
A reporter said that there's too much concern about people on the Internet and extremists, because what they say rarely makes it into the mainstream. He seemed (at least to me) to be saying that the danger from people talking about Y2K on the Internet is minimal.
Kelley said that SWIFT is making excellent progress. Someone mentioned an anecdote about a clueless editor who told a reporter to go find and do a story on the programmer responsible for the Y2K problem.
A journalist asked how Y2K would personally affect his work. He asked how Y2K might affect various computers he used, and John Koskinen gave him to understnad that all of them need to be checked.
Someone from Reuters asked about panic and banks. Also wanted to know what the Fed is doing specifically. Kelley said that the Fed is printing additional cash, but has other fallbacks it can turn to if necessary.
A journalist asked John Koskinen and Kelley if they had ever asked the President to speak on Y2K. Koskinen said Clinton talked about it in in a July (1998) press conference, and again in the State Of The Union address. Then someone asked about Al Gore. Koskinen said Gore gave a speech about it in July (1998).
Somebody from NBC asked about panic and certain dates such as the GPS roll-over in August and 9/9/99. They wanted to know how they should cover these events. Koskinen said he encourages the press to cover these kinds of dates, and mentioned how January 1, 1999 went so smoothly. He said contingencies plans were used in some states to deal with non-compliant unemployment insurance systems, and that 10 states are still working to remediate these systems.
A journalist asked if too much emphasis was being placed on January 1, 2000...that many problems might not show up until January 3, or January 31 or until the leap year problem in late February.
One woman asked why we just can't turn the clocks back. I think she sort of knew the answer, but wanted an official explanation. Koskinen said 1972 works with a few things like street lights, but doesn't when you're doing calculations on things such as birth dates.
One reporter brought up a point many of us on this forum make...if people are going to get worried and stock up on food, shouldn't they be encouraged to start now instead of everyone suddenly doing it at the end of the year? Koskinen's answer was that if 100 million Americans started doing that now instead of December, then we'd have a problem with panic now instead of in December.
One journalist said he had just bought a generator.
Another journalist said too much news was going to elevators, and not enough to what will really affect people, such as their local water companies.
During a recap near the end, it was mentioned again that a "commonality" of messsage was needed from the government and not the conflicting accounts that keep coming from different agencies. John Koskinen said that his council would be releasing an in-depth quarterly report on Y2K on April 15.
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
Thanks Kevin, and everyone else! Interesting timing on the upcoming quarterly report. The very same day procrastinators (including some reporters) will have only one thing on their minds: getting that tax return in by midnight. Wonder how many people will be paying attention that day? This reminds me of the public relations people who subscribe to the theory that if you have to issue a negative press release about your company, make sure you do it on a Friday afternoon--as late as possible--certainly not Monday morning! Less media coverage that way, because the best reporters/editors have usually earned weekends off.
-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), March 10, 1999.
My over-all impression...The biggest point John Koskinen and Mr. Kelley tried to make is that anything you hear about Y2K is out of date and that the situation is rapidly changing.
The biggest point of the journalists was that the government continuously contradicts itself when giving out Y2K information.
The journalists at this conference are a lot more aware of Y2K than I thought they would be. I think the days of Y2K coverage simply being a rehash of press releases and info self-reported by government, businesses and utilities are numbered...
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
FYI to all: I posted this thread to the CBN site. Just so you know your posts will be seen outside this forum- FYI (if anyone cares). A little truth in posting, here :)On another point: Kevin, if Koskinen said that the Senate report was out of date, and all other reports are more or less useless because the facts are changing so fast (cuz the code is getting fixed so quick, I guess), then why is *he* going to keep issuing reports? Hmmmmm?
-- Drew Parkhill/CBN News (y2k@cbn.org), March 10, 1999.
Kevin,THANK YOU!!!! Again.
Drew,
I wonder if Koskinen would say the recent DoD and CIA reports to the both the House and Senate are "out-of-date" as well. (Remember, his primary job now is to contingency plan).
How about his Executive Director's recent international conference remarks? ...
TRANSCRIPT: White House's Janet Abrams Worldnet On Y2K Issue (USIA Mar 9, 1999)
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000aZnAnd ...
Hamre testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee ...
February 24, 1999 - READINESS and MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SUBCOMMITTEE - To review the National Security ramifications of the Year 2000 computer problem.
http://www.senate.gov/~armed_services/hearings/1999/ c990202.htmUNITED STATES SENATE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
Wednesday, February 24, 1999 -- 9:30 a.m.
OPEN
Honorable John J. Hamre
Deputy Secretary of Defense
(PDF Format -- 22 pages)
http://www.senate.gov/~armed_services/statemnt/1999/ 990224jh.pdfNose around. The government is.
Diane
(P.S. Methinks Koskinen speaks with "forked tongue" ... again.)
-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), March 10, 1999.
Kevin,Thank you for the brilliant summation.
I should just like to add that one reporter stressed that it wasn't up to journalists to make recommendations to the public. It was their job to report the facts and that it was up to the officials to decide upon and make recommendations to the public.
I think what I picked up on is that there is a deep feeling of dread of what this thing may actually unleash upon us and no-one really wants to take the responsibility of facing the reality of it and presenting it likewise to the public. Also, I think the reality is very clear to all. It's quite simply not feasible to have 250+ Americans be aware of the severity of the problem and prepare for it. We already face the problem of the "just-in-time" systems that we have created. If you make the public aware to the extent that people appeared to be at this conference you are going to have people wanting to stockpile food, etc. for far longer than a week or two. And it is obvious that it is just not feasible for the system to handle that even if they were to do it gradually from now until the end of the year. It seems obvious to me that these people are aware of that. Also, if America warns it's public it opens up that same warning to the rest of the world. Can you imagine the ramifications of that.
I think that it is clear that the same "just in time" problems that we may have to face next year we are already having to face now because they already don't allow us the freedom to deal with this issue objectively and allow people to prepare to whatever degree they feel necessary.
It is the "just in time" set-up that we have created that has us well and truly screwed.
-- Carol (usa-uk@email.msn.com), March 10, 1999.
I won't rehash my usual tirades about Ko-skin-em (my doctor has warned me, ya see) but reading this thread's references to Yardeni's questions suggests to me that he is dismissive of Koskinen. Given the context, where everyone is expected to play their roles (much like a good Jane Austen novel), Yardeni was being extraordinarily confrontive. He was as much as saying, "don't believe this man." This is confirmed by Koskinen's dissing of Yardeni as a known pessimist (oh the horror of it!)Sheesh. When you have to sink to the level of reading tea leaves ...
Bottom line, don't matter what anyone says, the deadlines aren't being met, the mission-critical systems are being defined/dumbed down and the code is, taking it globally, still broken.
Either Ko-skin-em really believes the problem is fixed, in which case he's a fool. Or, he is lying, in which case he is a knave. Take your pick, there is no middle ground.
Flat-out prediction: these words are going to come back to haunt all the players this time next year. Give Clinton/Gore this much perverse credit: they're smart enough to realize they are already losers on this subject and can add nothing to the conversation. Gore's presidential bid will be sunk by Y2K without a doubt. "It's Y2K, stupid."
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), March 10, 1999.
"Drowning in a sea of conflicting information."Join the club.
Thank you all for this informative thread.
So, does anyone want to start a pool for the first investigative journalist who goes rural? I pick the one who just bought a generator.
Wanna bet beans?
-- Deborah (info@wars.com), March 10, 1999.
Pardon me for posting this link again...but I think it's relevant today. Even if the U.S. has taken care of most of its Y2K work, and even if the utilities turn out to be a minor problem in the U.S......how could the situation described in this article about the Senate's recent Y2K report not have a major economic impact here?
http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/news/breaking/merc/docs/027317.htm
[snip]
The committee said the most serious computer problems were likely to strike other countries next Jan. 1, because many of them started preparing too late or not at all.
The report singled out Japan, Mexico, China, Germany and Taiwan for falling nine months to two years behind schedule in preparing for the year 2000 bug. The committee also said that major oil producers Venezuela and Saudi Arabia were 12 to 18 months behind schedule.
``Disruption of flights and global trade between some areas and countries may occur,'' the committee said.
[snip]
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
Lest we forget, and I thank an "e" friend for the reminder,Last fall Koskinen was "on-the-record" as saying ...
"In a crisis and emergency situation, the free market may not be the best way to distribute resources. ... If there's a point in time where we have to take resources and make a judgment on an emergency basis, we will be prepared to do that."
Perhaps, Kevin, you have that link?
Diane
-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), March 10, 1999.
Oh also, Kevin,We discussed this on another thread, but it may be worth listening to tomorrow. -- Diane
Sent in an "e" ...
The Washington National Cathedral will host a free briefing, Meeting our Y2K Challenges Together, on March 11. The event begins a 9 AM (ECT) and will begin with a Q&A session with John Koskinen, chair of the President's Council on Year 2000 Conversion.
At 10:15 Margaret Wheatley, organizational consultant, will be featured. I will be representing Coalition 2000 on a panel following Meg that will discuss "What Might We Face?".
The morning session will be webcast live from
http:// www.cathedral.org/cathedral/events/y2k.htmlThis webpage also offers information on the program. In order to participate, you must have the RealAudio player, available by free download.
Regards, Steve Davis
http://www.coalition2000.org/< /a>
-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), March 10, 1999.
Diane,Here's the link to John Koskinen's quote about distributing resources:
http://www.wired.com/news/news/business/story/16618.html?wnpg=2
[snip]
Koskinen said the government would be moving from contingency planning to a crisis-management phase.
Responding to a question about electrical-power failures, Koskinen said, "In a crisis and emergency situation, the free market may not be the best way to distribute resources.... If there's a point in time where we have to take resources and make a judgement on an emergency basis, we will be prepared to do that."
[snip]
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
Almost forgot. Here's a link to another article that belongs on this thread:http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/politics/story/17527.html?wnpg =all
"Feds Plan Y2K Spin Control"
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
A news article about today's media conference:Wednesday March 10 3:27 PM ET
Caution Urged on Y2K Stories
By CHRIS ALLBRITTON AP Cyberspace Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - Journalists should shun the role of ``Chicken Little'' in reporting Year 2000 computer problems and avoid undermining Americans' confidence in the banking system, a senior regulator said Wednesday.
``If glitches occur or problems loom, report fully on them, of course, but make sure to place the problem in an appropriate context,'' Federal Reserve Board member Edward W. Kelley Jr. said during a panel discussion at the Freedom Forum Media Studies Center. ``Balance and perspective are key.''
Kelley said the Federal Reserve was conducting ``extensive advance planning'' to ensure that banks and savings institutions have cash on hand to meet any surge in demand late in the year from Americans nervous about losing access to their money if computers misread the year ``00'' as 1900 rather than 2000.
Moreover, federal regulators are conducting their second inspection of every one of the nation's 10,600 banks and S&Ls to ensure that customer records are secure, he said.
As journalists report the story over the next 10 months, ``no one should be `Pollyanna' about Y2K, but based on the huge amount of work being done to prepare, it is just not responsible to be a 'Chicken Little' either,'' he said. ``We do not expect the sky to fall.''
Journalist members of the panel explained the difficulties in covering the Year 2000 story. Different sources, for example, present sharply conflicting scenarios, ranging from the sky-is-falling outlook to more rosy visions.
``We have to curb a traditional impulse, which is to answer a question once and for all,'' said Jonathan Krim, assistant managing editor of the San Jose Mercury News. ``This is about whether or not people are going to do the work, spend the money and get the job done in time.''
The Y2K bug occurs because many computers programmed to recognize only the last two digits of a year won't work properly beginning Jan. 1, 2000, when machines will assume it is 1900. Some computers can be reprogrammed, but many devices have embedded microchips that must be replaced.
``Planes aren't going to fall from the sky, elevators aren't going to the basement and pacemakers aren't going to stop,'' said John A. Koskinen, chairman of the presidential Y2K committee, referring to several frightening - but unlikely - scenarios. ``But a lot of things are.''
While both Koskinen and Kelley painted a generally optimistic picture of how well the federal government and the Federal Reserve System were preparing for the date changeover, they acknowleged there would be inevitable problems.
Kelley said the nation's financial system would not ``freeze up or collapse.''
``But is that a guarantee?'' he said. ``No, I can't do that. An educated confidence? Yes.''
Other members of the panel, titled ``Y2K: The Press and Preventing Panic,'' were Barnaby J. Feder, a business and financial reporter for The New York Times; Jeff C. Gralnick, executive vice president of CNN Financial News; James W. Walker, an ABC News correspondent, and Jonathan Wolman, managing editor of The Associated Press.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
The government - unfortunately - has no credibility in this matter - and no history of credibility in other public statements. Worse, they are now compunding the problem by denying evidence and trends - trying to "manage the news" and "tell the reporters how to report it" rather than making sure the public gets the real information.One absolute key to their dishonest spin is how the Koskinen and the rest of the government (compounded by many in a willing national press corps) are greatly exaggerating the very few pieces of good news that do come out - they are consistenting summarizing it in the headlines very, very positively when the actual numbers and values in each report were actually negative - in some cases, very ominously negative.
For example, Koskinen issued a special press release emphasizing that the latest American Petroleum Institute report showed "the oil and gas industry will be ready". The actual numbers showed that only 75% of the industry was even into a repair effort - 25% didn't report at all, and no oil company, refinery, or chemical plant were through elementary testing phase. None, of course, reported complete. Some progress was made: in September, only 55% of the industry was in the repair phase. None have completed between September and today. Chevron, Texaco, Mobil, Shell, BP, Exxon - these are huge enterprises - that are not close to finishing yet. They are affected by mergers, by transportation problems, and by power problems. Chevron doesn't even expect to be finished with their "mission-critical" systems by January - the effect on the environment and gasoline supplies is ignored by Koskinen and his administration.
The Ag Dept issued glowing headlines that the food industry "would be completely ready" - based on a single survey of 500 companies - that only 3 responded to. Those three companies might be ready - they started in in 1995 and 1996. But the headlines didn't say what will happen to the other 497 companies. Many, we understand, have not started yet.
One more example - the FAA is claiming everything will be fine, but IBM says their basic computers - the machines themselves, not just the programs operating on the FAA's traffic control network - cannot be trusted past year 2000. IBM has repeatedly, and on the record, said these machines cannot be repaired. But the FAA appears to be blindly ignoring IBM's warnings, and is attempting to strip old machines from some spare units to try to keep others running as the assemblies overheat and die. FAA programs already have failed in Chicago, Denver, San Diego, and elsewhere.
Testing is also being greatly exaggerated by Koskinen and the government in general:
FAA Denver airplane test.
The FAA has announced plans for one test so far, for one airplane, at one airport - the newest (Denver) that already has the latest equipement availabe: they aren't even trying the more ancient radars, consoles, and computers IBM has predicted will fail. We will see how this is reported - but we expect that it will be triumphed as a complete and splendid success - and everyone should trust their lives to the FAA next January and February.
The April 9 grid "test".
There is scripted, pre-arranged telephone communication drill scheduled next month - April 9 - to check whether the operators manning the four national electric power grid control centers can communicate by phones. That's all - each has a script to try to call the others and verify that the telephones work between the power plants and the grid stations.
But this doesn't evaluate anything effective under conditions next year. It doesn't test controllers, remotes, and feedback. It doesn't test satellites, phones and relays as they will be then - with their computers and controllers set ahead. the test is scripted - deliberately by the NERC to "create a successful press release" - and they recommended tht the results (the press release) be written first. then each company should develope its test plan to meet the criteria of the press release. This is a systems test - it is a simple communications drill.
Such a small drill is important because it has never been done before, and I applaud the fact that they have even this small a start - but the fact that two operators know how to use the telephone - when the phone system is itself has not been tested yet under integrated "date-advanced" settings - is only a little step.
In Ontario, one transfer station at one location was set ahead - it operated successfully, as one would expect if the repairs were completed properly. This was hailed as a tremedous success - assuring that power would be available and reliable. True - for the people in that one little part of Ontario served by that one transformer station. Every transformer station needs an equal repair and test process - and none have been. Every control center needs a real emergency series tests made with the system dates set forward - not just a single "scripted" telephone call to verify that phones can ring today.
Everybody else might be hungry and thirsty, shivering in the dark - but those few blocks might have power, heat, and lights next January.
-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), March 10, 1999.
Here's a question and an answer I transcribed from this morning's media press conference I have on cassette.*********************************************************************
[Journalist introduces himself and asks a question]
Matthew Holme, Country Living Magazine. Are we actually creating panic if we tell people to start preparing now?
If they are going to stockpile food or something, if they buy an extra pound of beans every single week from now on, isn't that just helping the economy, rather than putting a great crush on things and taking things out of stock?
There is a supply now. There is no shortage. If people prepare gradually, then they're not going to have a problem.
[John Koskinen's answer]
Clearly, if people are going to accumulate anything, we'd do better if they start accumulating now and send that signal to the market.
But again, when you say everybody should get a pound of beans, you've got to understand if 200 million Americans all decide to go out and buy beans, I can guarantee there are not beans in the process to start accumulating it at that rate.
So the difficulty for all of this is trying to figure out what is the risk and what are the appropriate preparations to make sure that we can deal with them in advance.
I had a meeting with our pharmaceutical working group on Monday where we have the whole pharmaceutical industry -- the manufacturers, the wholesalers, retailers.
It's critical for us with them to work out what are the actual risks in that system, because it's a little like a seed.
If we're going to make judgements about inventories and productions of prescription drugs, those have to be made now, in advance.
So it's not as simple as saying, well, everybody should start early and there won't be a problem. Because for a lot of things if you have 255 million people, it doesn't make any difference.
A hundred million people start doing it early and it's a problem early, rather than a problem late.
The real question is, people need to do what needs to be done as best we can determine.
[end of John Koskinen's answer to Matthew Holme]
*********************************************************************
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 10, 1999.
I just realized something - He never said they SHOULD NOT start preparing - the reporter said pretty much what I've recommending = one can or two cans of soemthing per week per person, start now and continue through the whole year -What he said was "we can't tell people to start preparing" because the "market" can't handle it. And I thought this nation re-armed to fight WWII beginning from a depression-level economy to throwing out ships, planes, tanks, and trucks, troops, rifles, cannons, landing ships, and people (plus all their food, and food and fuel for most of the free world) - and did it all in less than 16 months.
Now, if we can't grow some extra beans and rice when faced with a whole spring and summer to plan, plant and harvest it ---- get enough plastic to let each person have bottled water at home for 6 days, get enough flashlight batteries and solar cells to recharge them to light the stairs and closets adequately, and get some laternate heat in each house -
Churchill broke Hitler's back - and later won the war - by promising nothing but "blood, sweat, toil, and tears" to the Engish after the Nazi's overpowered Europe. England was standing alone, reeling from the defeat at Dunkirk - its army was decimated, and they had few weapons.
Now, Clinton is saying he can't even promise "beans" in every pot least the people panic?
-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), March 10, 1999.
Another take on what happened today at the media conference:http://cnn.com/TECH/computing/9903/10/y2k.panic.reut/index.html
Public panic seen as top Y2K risk -U.S. experts
March 10, 1999
Web posted at: 6:24 p.m. EST (2324 GMT)
NEW YORK (Reuters) -- Two of Washington's top trouble-shooters for the year 2000 computer bug said on Wednesday they are now more concerned about the risk of a public panic than a collapse of the national infrastructure.
John Koskinen, chair of the President Clinton's Council on Year 2000 Conversion, and Federal Reserve Board Governor Edward Kelley said they were confident the country's power, transportation, communications and health care systems were not in danger.
Both experts said one of their top priorities is averting a "public overreaction" that could prompt a massive run on banks, gas stations and mutual funds ahead of the turn of the century.
"Actions that individually look logical like filling up your gas tank on December 31, taking $1000 out of the bank, buying twice as many prescription drugs as you usually do, taking 20-30 percent of your IRA money out of the market -- a couple hundred million Americans all do that at one time you've got yourself a major problem," Koskinen said.
The chief "real risks", in their assessment, are that foreign countries, local U.S. authorities and small businesses here are ill prepared for computer failures, they told a panel discussion on the press and Y2K sponsored by the Media Studies Center in New York.
"Our risk for the country is less likely to be a national infrastructure failure and it's more likely to be a failure either of will or information or reporting," Koskinen said.
[snip]
Kelley said the Fed did not foresee any reason for a surge in demand in cash around year-end but plans to have $50 billion of cash ready to meet any consumer withdrawals spurred by fear of bank computer failures. "Probably the most important single element that is going to tell the tale here in our being able to successfully navigate through this Y2K millennium bug challenge is going to be how the public reacts to it," the Fed policymaker said.
The public could become "so overly worried about what might happen that there could be created the very type of problem we are working so hard to prevent," he cautioned.
Koskinen said he does not foresee a widespread collapse of the country's power grids, financial system, telecommunications or transportation systems.
"It's important to understand that planes aren't going to fall from the sky. The elevators aren't going to the basement and the pacemakers aren't going to stop," he said.
He said he was confident the government's computers would also not pose major problems. But he was less sanguine about local authorities and small businesses who have, in some cases, devoted far fewer resources to testing and contingency plans.
"There is a huge problem in healthcare because there are a large number of institutions and organizations which are free standing, 100- bed local community hospitals that are hard to get information on," he said.
In Koskinen's view, the banking industry is the most well-prepared.
Kelley said he was confident banks will be prepared and there is little likelihood the financial system will seize up or crash.
"We can handle any (liquidity) need that might emerge and still not have it affect monetary policy," he said. Liquidity concerns related to Y2K problems would not stop the Fed from raising interest rates later this year, if needed to head off inflation, Kelley said in an interview with Reuters Television ahead of the panel discussion.
Though some foreign countries have been slow to address the issue, the Fed does not expect this to seriously affect worldwide financial activity which he said is dominated by a relatively small number of institutions, many of which are based in the U.S. and well prepared.
Copyright 1999 Reuters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 11, 1999.
And the Reuter's summary repeats exactly what Mr. K. wanted them to say .....to the letter.No qualms there from that reporter - "no sirre bob - I'll just go and use their handy-dandy copy they gave me right here on this sheet of paper - I'll ignore the other questions, the background comments - no investigation, no quotes frmother people - just repeat what he wants said ..."
Disgusting. The room knew they were being lied to. And they repeated the lies. Verbatim.
-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), March 11, 1999.
And yet another article on the March 10 media conference:http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cte613.htm
03/10/99- Updated 03:01 PM ET
Journalists cautioned on Y2K reporting
WASHINGTON (AP) - Journalists should shun the role of ''Chicken Little'' in reporting Year 2000 computer problems and avoid undermining Americans' confidence in the banking system, a senior regulator said Wednesday.
''If glitches occur or problems loom, report fully on them of course, but make sure to place the problem in an appropriate context,'' Federal Reserve Board member Edward W. Kelley Jr. said in a speech prepared for delivery at the Media Studies Center in New York. ''Balance and perspective are key.''
Kelley said the Federal Reserve was conducting ''extensive advance planning'' to ensure that banks and savings institutions have cash on hand to meet any surge in demand late in the year from Americans nervous about losing access to their money if computers misread the year ''00'' as 1900 rather than 2000.
Moreover, federal regulators are conducting their second inspection of every one of the nation's 10,600 banks and S&Ls to ensure that customer records are secure, he said.
''We are confident that the overwhelming majority of banks are carefully and thoroughly preparing themselves and that even if problems should arise, they can and will be readily handled, and that the financial system will not seize up or crash,'' he said.
Concern remains, however, about ''the possibility of our citizenry becoming so overly worried about what might happen that there could be the very type of problem we are working so hard to prevent.''
As journalists report the story over the next 10 months, ''no one should be 'Pollyanna' about Y2K, but based on the huge amount of work being done to prepare, it is just not responsible to be a 'Chicken Little' either,'' he said. ''We do not expect the sky to fall.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 11, 1999.
Kevin, that story, also made it to S.F. ...Regulator urges reporters to avoid
`Chicken Little' role in Y2K stories
CHRIS ALLBRITTON, AP Cyberspace Writer
Wednesday, March 10, 1999
Breaking News Sections
(03-10) 12:26 PST NEW YORK (AP) -- Journalists should shun the role of ``Chicken Little'' in reporting Year 2000 computer problems and avoid undermining Americans' confidence in the banking system, a senior regulator said Wednesday.
``If glitches occur or problems loom, report fully on them, of course, but make sure to place the problem in an appropriate context,'' Federal Reserve Board member Edward W. Kelley Jr. said during a panel discussion at the Freedom Forum Media Studies Center. ``Balance and perspective are key.'' ...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?file=/news/archive/1999/03/10/national1526EST0677.DTLHummn. ... make sure to place the problem in an appropriate context.
Hows this for context? (i.e. our national Y2K parachutes have flaws!).
This just struck me as funny!
Insert Y2K in your thoughts as you read it. Never know where those glitches will show up.
Glitches appear in Army's new reserve parachute system
(03-11) 00:59 EST FORT BRAGG, N.C. (AP) -- Some Army paratroopers have stopped using a new kind of backup parachute after it failed to open during tests on the ground...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?file=/news/archive/1999/03/11/national0059EST0419.DTLStill shaking my head.
Diane
-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), March 11, 1999.
A reminder that the taped conference is now available at fredom forum.comHere's what Kelly said in his closing statement that the article above skimmed on:
"If glitches occur or problems loom, report fully on them, of course, but make sure to place the problem in an appropriate context,"
"In closing, let me state a moment my thoughts about what the media might consider as this story is reported over the course of the next 10 months. First as John mentioned this is a rapidly evolving situation ,and I think it demands of those who cover it an ongoing comittement to staying closely on top of developments because facts here have a very short half life. A given condition of preparedness that might have been observed even as recently as several weeks ago is quite likely in a different condition today. I don't think everyone should be a Polyanna about Y2K, but based on the enormous amount of work that is done to prepare for it, I don't believe that is responsible to be a Chicken Little either, because we do not expect the sky to fall. .....You've got a nation of very attentive readers and listeners who very much trust your expertise and who will prepare for the roll-over largely with your perspective in mind. Complete and reliable information is every bit as important to our country's success in preparing with Y2K as is all the technical work that is going forward."[bold face my own]
You really must listen to the whole conference. The press will never report it right as they should. It's the press.
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 11, 1999.
Parachutes & Y2K testing - it was a backup chute - right?Without rigorous "pre-fall" testing, you COULD not know it was going to fail until you tried to open it - which is immediately after your primary parachute failed. Until then, the backup chute is never deployed in mid-air.
But people are now trying to claim: "We are (...insert Y2K here...) parachute compliant because it never failed before in a thousand jumps." But - if in those 1000 jumps he never needed to open his backup parachute, is he still parachute (Y2K) compliant?"
Just to have fun with the thought - and I like Diane's recommendation - use parachute the few days instead of Y2K. It puts a different spin on life.
For example, 240 days of freefall left - enjoy it while you can.
----------------
Isn't it amazing that the "independent press corps" is so eager to mouth the words of these guys - Are they even noticing here (no cry of censorship !) that they are being told what to report and how to report it?
Instead, the complaint was that here is conflicting information being presented - thank God someone is presenting conflicting information!
Also- notice that Mr. K. is the one now blabering about elevators falling, VCR's and ATM's, and planes falling form the sky. And all this time, we were the ones getting blaimed for these misconceptions = and he was spreading the terms!
-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), March 11, 1999.
Here's the direct link to the conference audio:http://webevents.broadcast.com/freedomforum/mar99/freeradio990310.ram
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 11, 1999.
What happened here, in essence, is the the K-boys spun the media away from the Senate report and completely neutralized it ("events have already changed, you see, life is moving soooo fast").ROTFLMAO.
-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), March 11, 1999.
Right on Big Dog. It was too late last year, it's still too late now. Throwing money at and smooth talking to a computer screen will not fix the computer any faster.It's time, stupid!
-- Chris (catsy@pond.com), March 11, 1999.
Another article on yesterday's conference...http://www.msnbc.com/local/WNBC/336037.asp
[snip]
According to Edward Kelley of the Federal Reserve Bank, I dont think anybody should be a Pollyanna about Y2K, but based on the enormous amount of work that is being done to prepare for it, I dont believe it is responsible to simply be a Chicken Little either.
President Bill Clinton has called on all government agencies to be Y2K compliant by March 31 a deadline that most believe is unlikely to be met. Surveys show that Americans want to know in frank, open terms what the Y2K bug could mean, including how it might affect computers, phones, stock market investments, hospitals and fax machines.
Many Americans do not know whether their communities are Y2K ready.
In New York City for example, its impossible to find out what is the state of Y2K preparedness with respect to our hospitals and the like, said Charles Halpern of the Nathan Cummings Foundation.
Meanwhile, leaders in the world of news, government and finance met at the Newseum in Manhattan for an assessment of the medias role in reporting on the Y2K bug.
Joe Caldwell of New York Life Insurance Company said, Is it possible because we have so much time that a lot of these stories are fluff pieces that we keep hearing, Take your money out of the bank, take your money out of the bank, were actually creating panic?
According to John Koskinen, who sits on the Y2K Council, One of the things were trying to get people to understand when we talk about creating panic is not that we have a goal of lulling people into a false sense of security, which clearly I think would be a terrible mistake.
The federal government also is accused of playing a Y2K information shell game.
Edward Yardeni of Deutsche Bank Securities said, The federal government has apparently completed 71 percent of mission critical systems as of the middle of February. Interestingly, the number of mission critical systems has dropped by 25 percent in the past year and a half. Id like somebody to investigate exactly which mission critical systems were viewed as mission critical a year and a half ago that are suddenly not mission critical after all.
On April 15, Clintons council will report on the current state of the countrys local and federal Y2K compliancy.
[snip]
-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 11, 1999.