Once again, Mr. HISTalk has it all wrong

[Neil Rouda]

Once again Mr. HISTalk has shown us why, if you want facts, you should look to trained journalists and not anonymous bloggers. This site may have entertainment value, but unlike Healthcare IT News, you can't trust what you read.

Unlike serious journalists, who feel a need to get their facts straight, no such obligation constrains the rantings of this blog's infamous host. In this particular case (Monday Morning Update 6/2/08) he had every single fact in the sentence about Healthcare IT News utterly wrong. It takes effort to get that many false statements in just five lines.

Just before maligning the folks at Health Imaging News for printing "whatever companies send over," Mr. you-know-my-info-is-reliable-that's-why-I-won't-reveal-my-identity does just the same thing with a release sent by our direct mail list broker. Mr. HISTalk didn't even read the release carefully before going off half-cocked and suggesting that Healthcare IT News makes HIMSS members' email addresses available to "anyone willing to pay."

In the first place, the release issued by the Information Refinery, new list broker for MedTech Publishing Company, referred to the availability of direct mail list names only and had nothing to do with our email database. We don't make our email names available to anyone, ever. Never have. Never will.

In the second place, the suggestion that HIMSS members' data is included in the lists we offer just because they receive our publications is also completely wrong. We are contractually restricted from selling any information we obtain directly from HIMSS and, in fact, our available addresses are comprised exclusively of names who have personally requested our publications - NOT those who receive Healthcare IT News just as a "member benefit."

In the third place, the suggestion that HIMSS members receive the publication as a benefit to "boost its ad rates" is completely false since MedTech Publishing, and not HIMSS, publishes Healthcare IT News and receives all advertising revenues. But HIMSS members include the best-and-brightest in this business, and we will not argue the fact that having these names on our list adds to our advertising value. All media - even this blog - uses the value of its audience to determine ad rates. The bigger and better the audience - and the closer they read - the more the ads are worth.

Finally, the Mr. HISTalk conveniently overlooks the fact that Healthcare IT News has, for three years in a row, been rated the top choice of hospital CIOs in independent research conducted by PERQ/HCI. It is the quality of our reporting, the caliber of our content, and the reliability of our industry coverage which compelled HIMSS to offer our newspaper as a benefit to its members. Not everything has an ulterior motive - and certainly not everything that the good people at HIMSS on behalf of this industry every day.

And that's because, unlike the author of this blog, our reporters take the time to check their facts and get their story straight before they put it in print or post it on the Web.

[Mr. HIStalk]

Hi Neil,

Insults to me and my readers aside, I approved your posting and left it unedited, which I think you'll agree is pretty darned fair.

1. I didn't say you made e-mail addresses available (I didn't even know you HAD e-mail addresses available since the story was plainly about postal addresses). Still, my off-topic drift about e-mail addresses may have misled someone, so I will clarify in the next HIStalk.

2. Your list broker's posting said "the list" was available, not "part of it." You might want them to clarify since the logical conclusion is that it contains all recipients.

Otherwise, I think we're back into the familiar territory of "reporters are wise saints and bloggers are evil and untrustworthy fools." Well, I've only been working in hospital IT 50 or so hours a week for the last couple of decades, so one of these days I'll get up to speed.

I guess I can stop holding that fan club spot for you.

Tim

[Neil Rouda]

Tim,

Don't give up all hope on seating me at your table just yet. You do get points, after all, for treating my posts with the same “hands off” standard you apply to all.

And you get more points for providing the kind of forum where people - including you, and even me - can feel free to express their opinions with impunity, even when they’re wrong. There's something to be said for that. You’re also right when you claim that publications such as ours would be saddled with the need for constant legal defense were we to put out the kind of stuff that you sometimes do – a fact which says as much about the benefit to our readers of knowing that our facts are always double-checked as it does about the litigious nature of our society.

My only beef here has been with the random blows this site occasionally levels, with a very broad stroke, at trade publications. I take it personally because I think that unfairly lumps the work we do at Healthcare IT News with others who may not feel as passionately about the industry, or about delivering solid journalism, as we do. It’s a strange theme because you are obviously enamored of our profession, if not of how it’s generally plied, as evidenced by your taking the time to do this, presumably for “the fun of it.”

The changes in media make for an interesting discussion, as evidenced by yesterday’s reader contribution in your defense (though I would argue that my post wasn’t a “bitch fit” but rather a point-by-point rebuttal of errant information posted on this site; that we do not feel “threatened,” in fact we are excited by all the ways new media is driving substantial growth in our business; and that a “letter to the editor” – as opposed to a private email requesting correction - is our preferred method for allowing contributors to “set the record straight” when they feel the need). On this topic it’s my humble opinion, at least, that the rise of “citizen journalism,” the “blogosphere," and a host of other “Web 2.0” user-driven content adds something new, but does not take replace, the work of seasoned professional journalists in vertical fields like ours.

As an example, I cited your ability to post information without the need to check facts nor identify yourself as an author. While that anonymity promotes healthy and free discussion, it hardly creates the kind of environment where facts are paramount and everything-you-read-can-be-believed. That you may feel this is true, as well, of publications such ours is indeed where the rubber-hits-the-road for us and it’s our job to prove you wrong by reporting accurately, completely, and impartially.

I think there’s plenty of room for a healthy coexistence between a blog like yours, which puts the soap boxes at Hyde Park inside all of our computers, and a service like ours in which all information presented is carefully vetted for relevance, accuracy, and import. There’s something to be said for that, too.

Neil Rouda, Publisher
Healthcare IT News

[Tom Hamilton]

[quote=Neil Rouda;403]Once again Mr. HISTalk has shown us why, if you want facts, you should look to trained journalists and not anonymous bloggers. This site may have entertainment value, but unlike Healthcare IT News, you can't trust what you read.QUOTE]

I would love to see you make a post like this at EMR Update. They would tear you apart.

KnowBrainer, Inc. Support Staff – Tom Hamilton
A Nuance Gold Certified Endorsed Vendor

[Tom Hamilton]

[quote=In the third place, the suggestion that HIMSS members receive the publication as a benefit to "boost its ad rates" is completely false since MedTech Publishing, and not HIMSS, publishes [I]Healthcare IT News[/i] and receives all advertising revenues. But HIMSS members include the best-and-brightest in this business, and we will not argue the fact that having these names on our list adds to our advertising value. All media - even this blog - uses the value of its audience to determine ad rates. The bigger and better the audience - and the closer they read - the more the ads are worth.QUOTE]

After a few minutes of google research I found that this site is doing a bit better than Healthcare IT News in the search engines and without being lathered in advertising.

KnowBrainer, Inc. Support Staff – Tom Hamilton
A Nuance Gold Certified Endorsed Vendor

[i.s.often]

It is a very old original post but I had to chuckle a bit at the 'quality of reporting' and 'checking the facts' statements made by Neil. Now this is a quality piece of reporting that states 'Lorenzo is already in use in 37 countries across five continents, and was launched globally last year.'

http://www.healthcareitnews.com/topics/15771

Right! This was certainly great news to all organisations that had been waiting for Lorenzo. All of us current users gathered into a small room to applaud the progress of our journey. As for the 'launched globally' comment, I presumed that Eric was referring to the low budget, sci-fi film clip and Powerpoint presentation? It appears to me that when Jobs does these Global Launch events, at the very least, he holds a close-to-working device in his hand whilst he waves his arms wildly.

Eric/Neil - you might want to double check your sources and facts better next time.

Ian

Originally Posted by Neil Rouda

Finally, the Mr. HISTalk conveniently overlooks the fact that Healthcare IT News has, for three years in a row, been rated the top choice of hospital CIOs in independent research conducted by PERQ/HCI. It is the quality of our reporting, the caliber of our content, and the reliability of our industry coverage which compelled HIMSS to offer our newspaper as a benefit to its members. Not everything has an ulterior motive - and certainly not everything that the good people at HIMSS on behalf of this industry every day.

And that's because, unlike the author of this blog, our reporters take the time to check their facts and get their story straight before they put it in print or post it on the Web.