Issue date: 9 December 1999 Article source: Computer Weekly Columns / Opinions Don't censor Y2K

The last thing we need from the Government is spin

The Government seems intent on a Y2K information lockdown. From next week it plans to centralise all news of millennium bug breakdowns - both at home and abroad - within the Home Office.

There is a laudable aim behind this: to avoid rumour-fuelled panic. With much of the UK's critical IT infrastructure declared "blue" (ie safe) weeks ago, crisis planners think the real chaos could be caused by families stockpiling food, fuel and cash.

But if the Government's attempt to stem panic turns into a wartime-style bad news blackout it could compound the problem.

IT decision-makers need real-time intelligence on the impact of the Y2K rollover worldwide. They will clog the pores of the Internet and the mobile telephone networks to get it if they believe government is hiding the truth.

Why should a government team of experts be trusted to filter worldwide information before informing business IT users of the "relevant" facts? Only you know what is relevant for your business.

Despite the efforts of the IT profession over the last three years the threats remain numerous: Y2K hacker attacks and viruses could still cause disruption, no matter how Y2K compliant your system is. IT breakdowns in other countries could have an unforeseen impact on our systems.

We face, in reality, two rollover dates: midnight 31 December and 8am 4 January. Even in a Y2K-aware country like the UK it could be the latter date, when corporate Britain goes back to work, that brings disruption. If there is anything we can learn from the mistakes of others we need to learn it fast in that short period.

The thought of Tony Blair's spin machine having a monopoly of information over Y2K is probably the most frightening prospect of all.

-- Roland (nottelling@nowhere.com), December 09, 1999

Answers

...so now we know the purpose of that BUNKER in DC! Um, do they have to declare marshalLaw to suspend freedom of speech then, or does a state of emergency suffice? And what's this about a .gov team of experts? Not that I agree, but my college friends would have called .gov experts an oximorron.

-- Hokie (nn@va.com), December 09, 1999.

That's "martial law", not "marshalLaw". I hate to bring up something this petty, but I see repeated posters that seem to think that "martial" is spelled "marshall" (misspelling of "marshal", as in to marshal one's argument, as opposed to the Marshall Islands), and finally had to say "wrong spelling". The DWGIs will use anything they can to characterize us GIs as ignorant; let's not give them any ammunition voluntarily, O.K.?

www.y2ksafeminnesota.com

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), December 09, 1999.

Not to put too fine a point on it, switchyards where trains are assembled are called marshalling yards because trains are Marshalled, as in...

They will Marshall the Martial Law trains here!

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in January.com), December 09, 1999.

Er, this post is about the UK. There IS no freedom of speech there. The UK has no constitution, just a bunch of laws that say what you CAN'T do. That's one reason why there's no discussion of what might happen in the UK in terms of martial law and press blackouts - there's no political impedement to doing so. If it happens, it'll happen uncontested in the short term.

-- Servant (public_service@yahoo.com), December 10, 1999.