Let's play "follow the money":
From the article:
----Jim Prendergast is executive director of Americans for Technology Leadership.---
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_for_Technology_Leadership Americans for Technology Leadership was founded by Jonathan Zuck in 1999 as a "grassroots" organisations for concerned consumers who want less regulation in the technology sector. It also campaigns on general tech issues such as spam.
It has been frequently described as a Microsoft front group. [1] (
http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/000421.shtml) [2] (
http://www.aaxnet.com/news/M010823.html) [3] (
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/blog/computers/tanks.html) ATL's domain name, techleadership.org, is registered to the Association for Competitive Technology. The site is hosted by Thomas E. Stock and Thomas J. Synhorst's LLC, TSE Enterprises. Synhorst is a founding member of the DCI Group, a Washington DC-based strategic consulting and lobbying firm which has counted Microsoft as a prime client for a number of years.
Joshua Micah Marshall reports in the July 17, 2000 American Prospect: "[W]hile Microsoft did confirm that Synhorst's DCI had been retained as a consultant, it insisted that another DCI employee, Tim Hyde, and not Synhorst, was handling the company's account. In any event, the web of connections among DCI, ATL, and Microsoft is striking. While working for Microsoft, DCI has also provided consulting services to ATL. And Josh Mathis, the man [ACT president Jonathan] Zuck installed as ATL's executive director, is also an employee of DCI, who still works out of the same Washington, D.C., office as Synhorst and Hyde."
[edit]
Pro-Microsoft letter campaign discovered
In August 2001 the Los Angeles Times reported that a ATL was behind a "carefully orchestrated nationwide campaign to create the impression of a surging grass-roots movement" behind Microsoft. "The campaign, orchestrated by a group partly funded by Microsoft, goes to great lengths so that the letters appear to be spontaneous expressions from ordinary citizens. Letters sent in the last month are printed on personalized stationery using different wording, color and typefaces--details that distinguish those efforts from common lobbying tactics that go on in politics every day. Experts said there's little precedent for such an effort supported by a company defending itself against government accusations of illegal behavior."
According to the Times, the campaign was discovered when Utah's Attorney General at the time Mark Shurtleff received letters "purportedly written by at least two dead people ... imploring him to go easy on Microsoft Corp. for its conduct as a monopoly."
Eighteen state's attorneys general were joining with the Justice Department in its anti-trust suit against Microsoft. Iowa's Attorney General Tom Miller reported receiving more than 50 letters in support of Microsoft during the summer of 2001. "No two letters are identical, but the giveaway lies in the phrasing," the Times wrote. "Four Iowa letters included this sentence: 'Strong competition and innovation have been the twin hallmarks of the technology industry.' Three others use exactly these words: "If the future is going to be as successful as the recent past, the technology sector must remain free from excess regulation."
Dewey Square Group and DCI Group sibling firm DCI/New Media are credited with assisting Microsoft with its "grass-roots" campaign, according to the Times.
----
http://slate.msn.com/id/1004941/ Who's Behind the Pro-Microsoft Poll?
Rob Walker
Posted Monday, March 27, 2000, at 7:36 AM PT
Settlement 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.
So 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."
Continue Article
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.
----
I guess we know where the butter for his bread comes from.
And that took me less than 5 minutes to find out.
Thanks for pointing out the obviously biased source of the article. Microsoft must be getting scared. I can't wait to see the hysterics when they really throw it into FUD overdrive.
