I consider myself well read and politically savvy but I had never heard of this body. When was the last time they made news outside of maybe the narrow interests of federal trial lawyers?
Java isn't something a guy on the street would recognize, but if you were writing to a lay audience, would you describe the Oracle v. Google as involving a "little known programming language?
That wouldn't be good journalism. It would give the reader an inaccurate depiction of what the lawsuit is really about. It would be good lawyering, depending on which side you are on. A classic lawyering tactic is to use the most favorable (to your side) characterization of something you can justify.
> It would give the reader an inaccurate depiction of what the lawsuit is really about
Yeah. Part of the EFF's job is educating us. When they add such slant they lose credibility in my book. They're still great at keeping tabs on government actions that impact tech.
EFF is an advocacy organization. They're like Sierra Club or PETA.[1] They're not in the business of neutral analysis; they're in the business of pursuasion. Their job is not to provide the most reasonable take; it's to give up no ground to their opponents.
[1] Both of which are organizations I hold in high esteem, so that's not a negative comparison.
> Their job is not to provide the most reasonable take; it's to give up no ground to their opponents.
That sounds like a lawyer's perspective. You could say that about anyone working towards any particular goal. Please pardon my disagreement.
One of the EFF's jobs is to educate technologists. When they use slanted language, they lose some readers/"students".
The EFF has many roles, including educating and lobbying the government. Totally fine if you want to call it advocacy too. I often find myself digging for extra facts after reading their slanted positions. I wish they'd do full reporting of both sides more often. C'est la vie.
> Java isn't something a guy on the street would recognize but if you were writing to a lay audience, would you describe the Oracle v. Google as involving a "little known programming language?
If it barely entered the public consciousness, sure.
In the case of Java though, I think it's actually more recognizable than this committee, which personally I'd never heard of. Between the Oracle vs. Google lawsuit, the browser plugin vulnerabilities, and Java just being such a popular computer language... I'd assume a lot of laypeople have heard of it. Though many might not realize JavaScript is a different language.
My point is that the EFF (and whoever was drafting this press release) certainly knows what the Judicial Conference is, and are (is) willfully misrepresenting them through careful word choice.
The only misrepresentation going on is this nonsense that a headline's language should be based on the knowledge of the author instead of the intended audience.
That wouldn't be good journalism. It would give the reader an inaccurate depiction of what the lawsuit is really about. It would be good lawyering, depending on which side you are on. A classic lawyering tactic is to use the most favorable (to your side) characterization of something you can justify.