Are you calling me a liar?

The digital recorder is mightier than the sword

It's a tough job news journalism. You're competing against rival companies and always trying to get ahead of the game. On daily news for a website it's even more frantic.

So when the head of UK and Ireland operations for a big anti-virus firm tells you there's a new mobile phone virus scamming people for $5 a time, that's pretty big news. So far these viruses have just been proof-of-concept, which is a shortcut for saying they spread themselves around to prove they can but don't really do any damage or cost users any money.

So in the first meeting I had at the InfoSec trade show on Wednesday I landed a big scoop. Back to the press room to write it up and email it in.

The only problem is the alleged security expert can't remember the name of the new virus he read the email alert about. Not to worry, the guys back at the office will fill in the missing details, unless we're truly first up with the story in which case we'll do a follow-up.

The following day we get a call from the PR for the company saying can we change our story to make it clear it's not a virus, it's a Trojan, as there's a subtle difference. Being out of the office at the trade show again and in all the rush to get more news on the site this doesn't happen.

But it's with much more annoyance that the company post on its official blog - the place I and other journalists often look to pick up new alerts and interesting trends - that we've got the story wrong.

Following our 'scoop' lots of other people have been in touch with F-Secure to ask what the new virus is. Looking at out story, F-Secure's Jarno Niemela decided there'd been a mix up.

"Apparently the reporter misunderstood a quite harmless Java Trojan as a dangerous Bluetooth worm that is spreading in the wild. It seems that the reporter got mixed up with Redbrowser and Commwarrior."

Really Jarno? How did you come to that conclusion? Did you speak to Richard Hales, F-Secure's country manager for UK and Ireland, who I got the quotes from? After all it would be a PR disaster if you blamed it on us and it turned out the guy in charge of two big territories didn't know what he was talking about.

Alternatively, did you get back in touch with us to check the quotes? Or did you just print that we'd got it wrong without checking any sources? And you're accusing us of poor journalism.

In the initial confusion, we change the original story to say it was a Trojan not a virus, as that seems to be the problem. Unfortunately, F-Secure takes that as proof that we did get it wrong and says as much in an update on its blog.

For the first time in my life I realised what's it's like when someone you've written about doesn't like what you've said or the way you've portrayed them. We even discussed getting in touch with the company lawyers, who might find it interesting to be on the other side of the fence for a change.

After all, I make my living as a journalist and when someone says I got the story wrong and it's my fault, they are threating my professional credentials and putting my job in jeopardy. I've only been at Vnunet.com for six weeks and the company can wave goodbye to you for any reason during the three month trial period. No news site wants a liability on its hands - the market's too cutthroat for that.

So how do I prove that I haven't fucked up? (And here's where I laughed my ass off after checking my source). I've got the guy on tape saying everything I quoted him saying! He even calls the new threat a virus! He never even says it's a trojan.

So here comes a piece of the most satisfying journalism it has ever been my pleasure to write.

Following some major backtracking from F-Secure and an apology from the man in question, what does the company's blog say now?

"Edited to add: This blog entry was rewritten on Friday the 28th. The original version referred to an article on VNUNet and made it sound like a journalist at VNU would have gotten details wrong in an article - when in reality our country manager had provided incorrect information. Sorry for the hassle."

Nintendo loses the plot

Things not to do when you're trying to gain market share in the console game business.
* Launch a less powerful console games system after your competitors are already in the shops
* Try to charge more money for it

That's what Nintendo is going to do with the Revolution.

But hang on a minute, maybe that's not enough to ensure your console stays a minority player? How about you give it a stupid name that bars anyone who doesn't want to have the piss taken out of them from buying it?

Is that the thinking behind the name change from Nintendo Revelution to Nintendo Wii (pronounced 'we')?

I mean, why the feck would you think Wii is a better name than Revolution, which actually sounded quite cool? Have your marketing people been taking advice from dim celebs who name their kids ridiculous things on the basis that they're going to get beaten up in school anyway?

I think we need an explanation, and the official announcement finally gets somewhere after a bit of waffle.

"But you're probably asking: What does the name mean?
Wii sounds like "we," which emphasizes this console is for everyone.
Wii can easily be remembered by people around the world, no matter what language they speak. No confusion. No need to abbreviate. Just Wii."

Ahh, I see. Nintendo is setting up a global brand. That's clever. I mean, that way gameplayers all over the world won't buy it by mistake when they go looking for an Xbox 360 or the coming-eventually PS3.

You never know, maybe sales will boom as mums dragging kids around the world's malls mistake their cries of "I need a wee" for something more consumer than a simple wish to micturate.


Not to be confused with: WWII

Chicken little or chicken big and fat?

Chicken Escalope on a bap is just a glorified chicken burger. Discuss.

I used to love chicken escalope on a bap. With a bit of lettuce, some mayonnaise and a few squirts of black pepper.

And then someone asked me where I got the chicken burger from? And I had to re-evaluate exactly what it was I was eating.

Is this a triumph of marketing over reality? Did I think because it had a posh French name it must be haute cuisine? Apparently so.

Anyway, I'm tucking into one right now.

Well, KFC is a good 10-15 minute walk.

Gorkana update

Look, I'm famous again. And I'm keeping up my other work as well - two BBC Doctor Who novels and an Xbox 360 game on the go at the moment.

Vnunet.com
Matt Chapman has recently joined the technology news site Vnunet.com as a correspondent, where he will also write a daily games blog. He can be reached on +44 (0)20 7316 9670 and matt underscore chapman at vnu dot co dot uk. Matt also continues to write freelance film, DVD and book reviews and can be commissioned at matt at meejaboy dot com.

Today's best quote

I've just been researching a story about a company which is producing a Nintendo Revolution game completely in black and white.

It seems rumours may have been circulating that Nibris are not as substantial as they claim, hence the quote on the company's website:

"PS. Answering some rumors that have been spreading across the net recently - yes, we do exist."

Domain Names is an anagram of...

"Do me ma, sanni" which is Norf London for "Fuck my mother".

And that's what I said on Monday morning when I found the email from domain name company 1&1.

All the internet domains ending in .eu went up for registration on Friday and I bought nowplaying.eu; gameguru.eu; and justonemorego.eu. At least that's what I thought I'd done.

Those twonks at 1&1 accepted my order, took my credit card details and I went off all happy. I picked a few names because one of them was going to be used for the game blog I'm going to write on Vnunet and I wanted a choice before we settled on one.

So the email on Sunday (which I didn't pick up until Monday because of poker commitments) telling me "Your domain(s) nowplaying.eu etc. could not be registered" was a kick in the swingers.

I had been blasé about looking into any more domains, thinking those ones were in the bag. And while I'd been sitting on my hands everyone else had been piling in on the .eu landrush.

The consequences were that I had to come up with some alternatives pretty quickly on Monday morning - one of the busiest times on a newsdesk that doesn't employ weekend staff. That wasn't helped by the fact our news editor's daughter had wandered into the plague pit again and picked up chicken pox, so he was out of action.

However, I still made time to fire off an inquisitive email to 1&1 asking what the problem had been. The company's email had been extremely vague about why I hadn't got my domains.

"Sorry, but this is a bit vague?

'Regrettably, the domains you have requested were not
available or could not be registered due to policies
of the specific registration authority (NIC)'

Which is it? Were they already pre-registered? Or have
I broken some NIC policy? I need to know if I'm going
to try and register some other domains instead.

Since you've taken two days to let me know (two days
when everyone else has been buying up popular
addresses, I might add), can you get back to me ASAP.
That's if you'd still like my business.

Also, I just wanted to clarify. There's no charge at
all for the above aborted domain registrations?

Thanks,
Matt Chapman"

I got the standard automated response back immediately, followed by, well, nothing.

1&1's expectations to answer my email "within the next 12 to 24 working hours" were wide of the mark. That's just one more sign of its sterling service and another big "Phew!" that I didn't manage to use them in the end.

Clowns to the left of me, Joker to the right

In the end I went with Joker.com.

Joker has an annoying site, with poor navigation and the occasional business-focused mentleness like demanding a fax number (do even proper businesses bother with faxes these days?).

But it checked the name and sent me confirmation that it was registered within the hour. And that's all I really wanted.

It's been a bad week for...

Christian Fundamentalists.

Let's stack up the facts from the past few days:
* That whole "walking on water" miracle stuff is about as real as David Copperfield's tan. Next you'll be telling me there was handy fish sandwich shop that had a rush order during one of Jesus'speeches.

* Those hardcore loonies who think evolution is a test of our faith by god have more evidence they can ignore. A fossil discovered this week shows how creatures first managed to walk out of the water and into a queue at McDonalds.

* A document has been found that seems to clear Judas of any wrongdoing. Alleged to be a copy of an even older text, it casts Judas as a benevolent figure, helping his best bud Jesus to save mankind. Seems the bad boy of scripture was actually more Ned Flanders than Mr Burns.

Still, if you can't believe an organised religion that lied and rewrote the bible to suit its own needs, who can you trust?

It's what Shakespeare would have wanted

It's not often a new theatre production can grab your attention, especially something as well known as Shakespeare.

I actually like Shakepeare, being one of those clever gits who used to 'get it' in school and college while everyone else relied on the study guides to see them through.

But the performance of Hamlet using tiny plastic ninjas is clearly what his work has been crying out for all this time.

I'm genuinely thinking of going to this!

Things we learned today

You might think the third - and less famous - member of Bros was now working in B&Q. Not so.

I'm writing a story about a girl who got a major record deal by performing webcasts in her basement in Tooting. And who was inking the contract? None other than MD of RCA Records, Craig Logan.

Here's his quote:

"I'm thrilled that Sandi is the first signing to the RCA Label Group, she is a very talented artist with an already unique story," said RCA's managing director Craig Logan.

Seems he finally has something to offer the music industry after all these years of trying.

Google to Advertise on the Moon

Superb! Great to see that Yahoo's editorial standards are as high as you'd expect from a major news site. It picked up our April fool and put it up as genuine news.

Here's the story in full:

In the most wide-scale advertising attempt ever known, Google plans to brand its logo into the surface of the moon so that it is visible from Earth.

The search giant will pay the US government an estimated $1bn for the rightsto the lunar land.

"You've heard of GoogleMars and GoogleEarth, where we show you maps of those planets? Well this is Google Moon, where we become the world's biggest brand," said an unnamed source at thecompany.

The Americans were the first to lay claim to the moon back in July 1969 when Neil Armstrong took "one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind".

Planting the flag on the Moon's surface has always been considered a gesture of being there first, but that claim has now paid off in real money terms for the US Government.

Google announced this week that it would sell afurther 5.3 billion shares to raise $2.1bn.

Google's official filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission said that the sale of shares was designed to raise additional capital for future acquisitions, but the company declined to be more specific about any current agreements or commitments.

Analysts speculated at the time that the company must have a major purchase in mind and it is now clear where the funds will be heading.

VNU Trackback: http://www.vnunet.com/actions/trackback/2153220