Path: sparky!uunet!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!ub!dsinc!satalink!stan.spotts
From: stan.spo...@satalink.com (Stan Spotts)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: MORE ZACHMANN MESSAGES
Message-ID: <12937.1088.uupcb@satalink.com>
Date: 9 Jul 92 22:48:00 GMT
Reply-To: stan.spo...@satalink.com (Stan Spotts)
Organization: SataLink Info Systems - Huntingdon Valley, PA - 215-364-3324
Lines: 53


 06-Jul-92  08:28:53
 Sb: Independence Declaration
 Fm: William F. Zachmann 72241,43

Eric,

PC Week, in effect, required that I narrow my focus to Windows
and related issues last fall -- *not* to OS/2.  Your recollection
of what I said over on IBMOS2 is incorrect.  It was made clear
to me that unless I agreed to do that, my column would have
been dropped at the end of last year.  I agreed to do so with
the understanding that OS/2 was a related issue and that I could
continue to write about both (and Unix as well).

When I did so, however, I began to have problems.  On April 23
PC Week Editor in Chief Sam Whitmore said I was "losing my
credibility" because of my "lack of objectivity" in what I was
writing about Windows and OS/2.  He made it clear that he did
not want me to continue writing the sort of stuff I'd been
writing about Windows and OS/2.  He several times mentioned
Carole Patton's column and its fate with the clear implication
(clear to me, at least) that my column would suffer a similar
fate if I did not shape up.

It was upon returning from that meeting with Sam that I received
the phone call from the individual at Microsoft who told me about
how they'd recently heard that I was going to be taking a more
favorable view of Microsoft and of Windows in my column.  In
response to Sam's pressure, I wrote the May 4, 1992 column
where I pointed out some problems and limitations with OS/2.
I had no problem getting that column printed.

Two weeks later, I intentionally and deliberately wrote a column
for the May 18, 1992 issue in which I discussed a very similar
set of problems with Windows 3.1.  I received a phone call from
PC Week Editor Eric Lundquist saying the column "didn't work"
for him and asking me to write another on another topic.  I had
a lengthy discussion with him in which I refused to do so and
argued that my column should run as submitted.

He finally agreed to mark it up with his problems/objections.
While a virtually idential column about OS/2 had gone through
without difficulty two weeks before, Eric was all over this one
like ants at a picnic questioning my statements.  I stood my
ground and the column was eventually, but quite obviously
reluctantly, printed.

That's a little bit more of the background about why I feel it is
necessary to leave.

Will