What does a journalist fear most? To be shown to be biased. Not being accused of being biased, but proven to be one.
What does a opposing lawyer’s want most? To prove that a journalist voting for the other party is biased.
There is another lesson to learn in this saga: Bring your own lawyer. SCO’s lawyer has no squirm in making public excerpts of the transcript available to argue for SCO, regardless of what it will do to Ms O’Gara’s credibility. Moreover, I do not see them objecting in the defense of Ms O’Gara in the deposition.
One word of caution: What we have is excerpts from the deposition, not the full deposition. In particular, the part just immediately after the infamous ‘Who is PJ’ article which got O’Gara fired from SysCon is missing. May be the lawyers moved on, may be not, I would prefer to determine myself instead of leaving it hanging.
Take home messages? One: O’Gara is right to say PJ is biased, but I won’t not agree that she is unbiased as she claimed. There is no love lost between the two women. We know they don’t like each other. PJ made it clear long ago, and O’Gara more-or-less confirm that the feeling is mutual in the deposition. Two: From the excerpt, Novell’s lawyer is definitely trying to link Blake Stowell’s “I need you to send a jab PJ’s way” email to that article, and O’Gara did her best to deny that, saying that article is her initiative instead and has nothing to do with the email. My take? The email is the straw that broke the camel’s back. O’Gara probably would had done it without Stowell’s email, but Stowell’s email did clear one potential obstacle. Three: Ms O’Gara is not sorry and stand behind the ‘Who’s is PJ’ story. What can I say? it is only to be expected that she had chosen behind whatever she wrote. To tell the truth, I can understand why she is not sorry about the article. PJ’s decision to not to divulge her true identity makes any effort to uncover her true identity a potentially good story and the increasing tempo of the spat between the two is coming to a boil. Then, SysCon’s editors did not see anything wrong about it initially. One is even quoted to ‘stand behind’ O’Gara. It took them quite sometime to change their mind. The length of time it took for them to make this decision raise this lingering doubt in my mind: Did SysCon let her go because she had become a liability? i.e., the decision to fire her was a business decision, not because they think she had done anything wrong. It does not, however, mean I agree with what she had done.
Finally, fair disclosure. I tried my best to be unbiased in this blog post, but I have an inherent bias toward Ms O’Gara, if you haven’t noticed.