In his own words: Competitor Plans 3rd Attack on EdisonReport
My competitor must have been having a bad day a few weeks ago when he decided to send me another harassing and sarcastic email. We thought his article in August, which appeared to be a personal attack on me, would be the end of his hyperbolic articles. Apparently, he has other plans. At EdisonReport, we prefer to focus on more constructive matters, but his continued behavior leaves us no choice but to respond.
In the above email, he unleashes more accusations, claiming that EdisonReport engaged in unethical “despicable” practices, including supposed copyright violations. His tone is one of hostility, sprinkled with sarcasm and laced with frustration.
Apparently he is now preparing a third hatchet job on me— a term from a CEO who was once the target of my competitor’s tirades, one so severe that it eventually was retracted. You can read the “When Journalism Goes Rogue” article here.
My competitor dragged in Bill Attardi’s work into his accusations, suggesting that Bill neglects proper attribution. In the above email, he says that Bill uses copyrighted material without “so much as a hint of attribution.” This simply is not true as there is much more than a “hint.” Bill credited his source and you can see the name of the author in the title. Further, Bill links to the article, and he adds the source, Offshore Magazine, to the link.
For the record, Bill Attardi has been publishing newsletters in the same style for decades. If our competitor has concerns with Bill’s newsletter, he should address them directly with Bill, rather than harassing me.
He implies that EdisonReport copied content from Reuters without attribution. This is not only false but also baffling. In the Reuters article, EdisonReport cited Reuters three times, including a direct link to the original source. Furthermore, we have a license to use the Reuters article. We have established a relationship with Reuters and you will see more unique content from them on the EdisonReport.
His 14 August article concludes his tirade by stating, “My repeated, behind-the-scenes communications with Randy have yet to spur positive change.” This is laughable. His condescending remark is epitomized by the tone of his emails, which are rife with anger and hostility, reflecting the volatile nature of his so-called “behind-the-scenes” communications.
He may attempt to portray his vitriolic email as a crusade for journalistic ethics in our industry. However, this is not journalism; it is simple harassment. I have tried to ignore his comments and I tend to turn the other cheek, almost to a fault. This time, however, I felt compelled to address his unwarranted hostility head-on.
Although I rarely look at his website, my competitor is undeniably intelligent, a skilled writer, and runs a solid business. There is ample room in the industry for both of us—indeed, for many more.
Unfortunately, he seems unable to resist indulging his adversarial impulses, which only serve to undermine his credibility and professionalism.