Who's Behind the Pro-Microsoft Poll?
Posted Monday, March 27, 2000, at 10:36 AM ETSettlement maneuvering notwithstanding, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson still looks set to make formal what everyone already assumes--his conclusion that Microsoft has violated antitrust laws. Once he has done this, perhaps this week, he will request a remedy proposal from the Department of Justice and the 19 state attorneys general involved in the case. The involvement of a bunch of attorneys general in an election year is going to mean that public opinion could actually count for something in hatching that proposal.
PRINT
DISCUSS
E-MAIL
RSS
RECOMMEND...
Facebook
MySpace
Mixx
Digg
Reddit
del.icio.us
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Sphere
StumbleUponSo what does the public think? One answer surfaced late last week in the form of a poll. As reported by Bloomberg, 67 percent of those polled said the antitrust suit is a waste of taxpayer dollars, 55 percent said Microsoft has benefited consumers, 80 percent said the case ought to be settled out of court, and only 16 percent said the company should be broken up. USA Today's headline over this story was "Poll: MS Case a Waste of Money."
This poll was conducted on behalf of Americans for Technology Leadership. I had never heard of Americans for Technology Leadership, and a search on Yahoo led me to an October 29, 1999, press release announcing the organization's debut. The release said Americans for Technology Leadership was "a new grassroots coalition." It also cited an earlier poll "presented by" the coalition, which found that "63 percent of Americans familiar with the DOJ suit against Microsoft believe the government should not be pursuing the case and 77 percent feel that it is an example of wasteful government spending."
There was also a link to the group's home page. On the home page was a link to a list of the group's founders. And if you haven't already guessed, there on the list of founders of the "grassroots" organization, is the Microsoft Corporation.
So, uh, America has spoken.
Sarah Palin's Brand of Populism Is Dangerous and Deceptive
New York Times Amazed To Find Jews in Montana
All Your Nagging Amanda Knox Questions Answered
No One Writes a Great Letter Anymore
Scientific Proof That Buying Green Products Makes You a Worse Person
Could a Tea-Party Candidate Actually Win an Election?
Reader Response from The Fray:
How am I supposed to react to this?
The cynical reaction: By allowing its publication to publish this, Microsoft is trying to show that it isn't a dangerous monopoly. It doesn't, after all, suppress news about itself.
The good reaction: Microsoft honored its commitment to not censoring the news and Slate writers and editors feel free to point out the facts about Microsoft whether good or bad.
The apathetic reaction: Microsoft doesn't care what the media says about it and anything Slate does is of no consequence to a giant corporation of which Slate is a tiny part.
The cynical reaction seems too paranoid to be true, the good reaction is what I'd like to believe, the apathetic reaction probably isn't true since Microsoft has a huge PR staff... So what's going on?
--Michael maiello
(To reply, click here.)
(3/27)