Revisiting the mi2g controversy, part 2

Rob Rosenberger, Vmyths co-founder
Thursday, 25 July 2002 [Editor's note: it will help if you first read part 1 of this column.] ANDRESEN HIT THE reply button and changed the subject line from "urgent" to "Private and Confidential." The tone of the email changed as well. Threats turned into pleas.

"We repeat our request for you to remove the photograph of DK Matai from your web site(s)."

Dear Mr Rosenberger

We repeat our request for you to remove the photograph of DK Matai from your web site(s) immediately. We have not granted permission for you to display it publicly.
Our reputation is being damaged by the appearance of "the mi2g controversy" on the number two rank of every single search engine like google, altavista and yahoo (where you have no specific conclusion to offer other than cause damage to our reputation in a baseless way) . We urge you to remove this article with immediate effect because we are not "fearmongers" and have got very clear and explicit evidence to show for all the statements we have made.
mi2g data is shared with the appropriate government and financial authorities on a regular basis. We are being scrutinised on a regular basis. We appreciate your full co-operation and trust that you will comply with our reasonable requests. Thank you Jan Andresen
Intelligence Unit
mi2g This eMail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. We believe that this eMail and any attachments, are virus free. You should take full responsibility for virus checking. mi2g reserves the right to monitor all Internet traffic through their internal and external networks.

Again, I considered the email an open letter. mi2g accuses Vmyths of unethical journalism, so it behooves us to air their accusations in the court of world opinion. "Truth" is the first word in our website slogan and our readers deserve nothing less. They deserve to know if we misled them, even if only by accident: I wonder if mi2g really just wants to remove their founder's photo to keep Anglos from seeing his Arab features. Perhaps mi2g suffered a prejudicial backlash after 9/11? If so, then I would condemn it as baseless discrimination.
ANDRESEN CLAIMS MI2G shares its data with "appropriate" authorities. Which authorities? What constitutes "appropriate" scrutiny? Who makes this determination? Most importantly, can Vmyths scrutinize the data?

mi2g no doubt envies our search engine ranking. Our (pre-Vmyths) URL appears as the #1 link on Netscape and the #2 link on AltaVista, AOL, MSN, and Yahoo. We made the top 15 on Excite, HotBot, and Lycos. Vmyths garnered top links on so many popular search engines — and we didn't even try! We use a generic meta description and generic meta keywords on every page. (We added two more keywords to every web page this week: "criticism, critique.") Search engines rank us so high because we started criticizing mi2g three years ago. On the other hand, mi2g dominates NorthernLight, Teoma, and AskJeeves. I cried out Matthew 27:46 when I learned of it. mi2g calls it "reasonable" to ask us to squirrel away our criticism from those who would do a rudimentary web search. Ah, of course! Memo to our webmaster: use this robots.txt file from now on and put a "Censor The Net" graphic on every page. Vmyths will also take full responsibility for disinfecting mi2g's outgoing emails. Hey, I'd call it a good start. How else may we help mi2g to profit from its critics? Just don't ask us to publish a credulous story about them... I replied to Andresen as follows:

"I repeat: we gleaned the first press photo from your press page and you sent us the second press photo unsolicited."

Look, Jan. Your first email arrived while I played VIP at a computer conference — and where Vmyths' Internet lawyer happened to be on a couple of panels. We discussed your demands while relaxing on a sunlit patio. Our lawyer expressed confidence in our position. He even gave me the idea for the parody disclaimer at the bottom of my first reply. I repeat: we gleaned the first press photo from your press page and you sent us the second press photo unsolicited. Your firm went so far as to thank us for "all your free broadcasting of mi2g over the years. Please find attached a more up-to-date photo and profile of DK Matai... Hopefully this gives you enough material to write another charming paragraph about mi2g... There are plenty of mi2g clients who have enjoyed your excellent sense of humour over the years. Keep up the good work." I wonder if perhaps you really just want to remove your founder's photo to keep Anglos from seeing his Arab features. Did mi2g suffer any prejudicial backlash after 9/11? I condemn baseless discrimination. (For the record: an Englishman with Arab features sat with me at my reserved table at an awards banquet Saturday night.) Vmyths makes no concerted effort to control its placement on search engines. We use a generic meta description and generic meta keywords. Our page rank derives from the fact we started criticizing your firm three years ago. Indeed, the page in question only exposes mi2g's antics during 1999. This leads me to ask the obvious: "what took you so long to threaten us?" You, on the other hand, may want to improve your search engine placement for marketing reasons. Major search engines will sell you better page ranking (or sponsored links) when someone types "mi2g+criticism" in the search field. I encourage you to point each click-thru to a story written for Middleton or written by Ungoed-Thomas.

"I wonder if perhaps you really just want to remove your founder's photo to keep Anglos from seeing his Arab features. Did mi2g suffer any prejudicial backlash after 9/11? I condemn baseless discrimination."

Or, hey, you can always threaten Google & AltaVista with legal action. Vmyths prides itself for an industry-leading "corrections & clarifications" page. Please write to [VeaCulpa] to contest our claims & accusations; please write to [Letters] to rebut our opinions & criticisms. Listen to me closely, Jan. I will now state the obvious. #1: Vmyths feels confident in its legal footing. #2: Vmyths is a widely respected & critically acclaimed underdog critic. #3: Vmyths offers mi2g a time-honored way to challenge us before taking us to court. #4: A critic always benefits from the threat of a lawsuit. #5: A critic usually benefits from the actual filing of a lawsuit. #6: All of mi2g's critics (from NTK to PaX), underdog or not, will receive wider airplay if you take Vmyths to court. #7: If you take Vmyths to court, you'll need to produce all of the "very clear and explicit evidence" you have. Rob

Believe it or not, I included the last paragraph just to make sure mi2g didn't overlook anything I'd call obvious. However, a seasoned critic knows employees tend to take corporate criticism very personally. (Ask anyone who works for Microsoft.) So I won't pout if mi2g interprets my bluntness as "posturing."
MI2G RESIDES IN Britain while Vmyths resides in the U.S. But you'll notice I didn't make a point of it in my "obvious" paragraph. I did bury a reference to national borders in my parody disclaimer, but I honestly don't want to taunt mi2g over it. A sincere critic wants his own critics to appeal to the court of world opinion before taking it to a court of law. It makes sense at this point for mi2g to appeal to Vmyths for specific corrections and/or clarifications before they pursue legal action:

mi2g's legal threat forced us to lay a trap. It will spring if they leave our criticisms unchallenged.

But a trap can sometimes snare the one who sets it...

People will still find our website if they type "mi2g" into a search engine. Think of the impact it would make if those people read "oops, we screwed up" at the start of a critique about mi2g.
An employee in January claimed "there are plenty of mi2g clients who have enjoyed your excellent sense of humour over the years." It implies mi2g knew of and ignored our alleged errors for years. Their legal footing will grow stronger if they at least follow time-honored procedures for redress & rebuttal. (They don't need to actually change our minds to please a court — they just need to work at changing our minds.)
mi2g will strengthen its legal footing if they succeed in changing our minds. Think of the impact it will make on a court of law if we acknowledge a screw-up!

If mi2g can refute our claims & accusations, or if they can defeat our opinions & criticisms, then I want our readers to see us squirm. We've squirmed for Network Associates and The Register, you know. Now let's talk about another "obvious" issue. mi2g's legal threat forced us to lay a trap. It'll spring on them if they ignore our established procedures for redress & rebuttal. But a trap can sometimes snare the one who sets it. Think of the embarrassment Vmyths will face — the embarrassment I'll face! — if we cough up so much as one major correction or clarification. If mi2g can hoist us by our own petard, then they should do it! Go on, make us squirm like a gerbil in a microwave for "publishing material about mi2g which is not true and illfounded." Trust me: Vmyths wouldn't hold back if the traps were turned. An old adage says "anything that doesn't kill a critic will make him stronger." Our website earned its reputation as a place to go for trustworthy criticism. This means we will automatically benefit from any threat to silence us — and yet I don't want our readers to blindly take our side! Our readers should take a side after weighing the facts, accusations, reputations, opinions, conclusions, and rebuttals. Especially the rebuttals. (There I go, laying the trap again.) mi2g didn't use the word "libel" but they certainly accused us of it. I once again urge them to appeal to the court of world opinion. Vmyths will squirm for mi2g if we deserve it. We'll even give them a soapbox...