To review or not to review
Interesting entry in Kieren McCarthy's blog this week. For those who haven't clicked through, he's been on the radio talking about Windows Vista, the new version of Windows, but he's conceding he hasn't actually seen it.
Initially my reaction was one of anger; he's been on the radio (something I'm keen to build on as long-term readers will know, so let's acknowledge the professional jealousy angle immediately) and talked about something of which he has little first-hand knowledge. And contrary to his blog's claim that Microsoft didn't send out any review copies of Windows Vista for review until January, I and loads of other tech journalists have been playing with the beta release for months (you get it by phoning the press office and asking).

Then I had another think. Isn't every journalist prone to review books or equipment turning up late? Can we honestly all claim that we've never done anything in a hurry with a slightly shaky brief? So how is this case different and why did I react angrily?

Two possible reasons spring to mind. One is simple professional jealousy. I'm not proud of my feelings here but I'd love to go on the World Service and if I've seen Vista and used it then a large part of me says that should have been my gig rather than that of someone who hasn't even seen the damned thing. The second, which is more serious to my mind, is in blogging the transgression afterwards. If someone found the broadcast interesting they might, for example, do a web search on the journalists involved. They might find the blog and then see the programme completely undermined by one of the contributors.

As a competitive journalist I'm annoyed at it for reasons of petty jealousy, I admit it. If I were the producer and found my programme being apparently dismissed in this way, I think I'd be furious.


|