No, rather he is "smart and skeptical"

Declan is not a butthead

-- Blue Himalayan (bh@k2.y), April 08, 1999

Answers

As mentioned before, I dont think Declan deserves the rude nickname.

About 80% of the time he has something Y2K "reasonable" to write about. (The glaring exception WAS the Time Millenium Madness issue).

Very few journalists are even trying to be Y2K "fair" or even informed.

BTW, Declan, there's always room for MORE and better investigative journalism minus the spin. Especially as we go through the "quiet" time in the next few months.

Dig even deeper, please!

Diane

Also check out ...

http://www.y2kculture.com/politics/19990401.truth.html

GOVERNMENT SHOULD TELL THE TRUTH

So far government officials haven't revealed all the Y2K info they have to the American public. It's time for this to change.
April 1, 1999

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), April 08, 1999.

I'm confused about the World Future Society's stance on Y2K. Didn't Jim Lord attend its Y2k conference in December and subsequently report that Harrison Fox (a staffer at Rep. Stephen Horn's office) predicted RATIONING later this year? Yep, I'm confused.

-- Gearhead (2plus2@motown2.com), April 08, 1999.

BH's link is to a Washington post article. It mentions Mr. M thusly:

" Declan McCullagh, chief Washington correspondent for Wired News, put in a good word for a couple of sensible Y2K stories. He was modest enough to not mention his own site called Y2K Culture. Smart and skeptical, McCullagh looks askance at both sides of the issue -- those who ignore, and those who are petrified of, the millennium bug." That's it. This cannot be the Mr. M we know, because "He was modest enough to not mention his own site called Y2K Culture."

The Post writer says: ". . .if you look to the Internet for guidance, you'll mostly find alarmists and opportunists. You have to search long and hard for rational, well-thought-out Y2K sites." Those apparently acceptable "rational" adn "well-thought-out" are: de Jager, Y2K Today, World Future Society and Continuum 21 Foundation.

The only sign of any concern on the writer's part comes in the last para: "The Y2K obstacle doesn't seem as insurmountable as it did a year ago. But there is one nagging concern: Many of these sites are focused on America's readiness, not on potential global pandemonium, which could include world finances and energy resources."

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), April 08, 1999.

Old Git, would you say that we fill the bill?

Scott Johnson Editor, y2ktoday

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), April 08, 1999.

Old Git, when you mentioned "BH's link..." I had to stop for a moment and scroll up; I thought you meant "Butt Head's link." Sorry, Blue Himalayan. :)

Jeannie

-- jhollander (hollander@ij.net), April 08, 1999.

Hi, Scott--Do you mean as alarmist and opportunist or as rational and well-thought out? (Sorry, I wouldn't resist.) Your today's editorial about the failings of the press re Y2K certainly falls into the latter category. Much needed, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

My point, although not clearly expressed, was that this forum wasn't mentioned as a Y2K source. Mr. McCullagh has seen fit to post many of his thoughts here, as well as links to his efforts elsewhere, but does n't see fit to recommend us to anyone else.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), April 08, 1999.

Ha ! Jeannie, I'll have to reverse my handle !!

;-)

-- Himalayan Blue (hb@k2.y), April 08, 1999.

Hey Old Git... interesting observation. I've been thinking of writing a column that discusses the "underground Y2K network," as it were, and this forum might be a good place to start. I've been coming here (mostly just reading) since last July, and while I do have to check the veracity of comments (as I would with any web forum), I still find it to be a great source of information. Thanks for your kind words about my feature.

scott

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), April 08, 1999.

The goal of every journalist in the mainstream press is to maintain the respect of his peers at all costs. 90% of his peers voted for Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, etc. The truth always takes a back seat to peer pressure. The reliability of the internet info, whatever it may be, is therefore exponentially greater than the mainstream press because these considerations are not normally operative.

-- James (b@b.com), April 08, 1999.