The Media Unspun weblog is open! Visit us at http://www.mediaunspun.com/weblog.html

Media Unspun serves business news and analysis, authoritatively, irreverently, and independently, every business day. An annual subscription costs $50, less than a dollar a week. If your four-week free trial is coming to an end soon, please visit http://www.mediaunspun.com/subscribe.html and sign up via credit card or check.

Raise your hand if you're sick of Harvey Pitt and the SEC. Frankly, Unspun has both hands in the air (you may wonder how we're typing), so we'll try to make this quick and painless, for both our sakes.

There's a new episode in the soap opera about choosing the head of the SEC's new accounting oversight board. (For past episodes, search on "John Biggs.") Yesterday, the New York Times said the new board boss, William Webster, headed the audit committee of a company that's now accused of fraud. Think Arthur Anderson's relationship to Enron, but, of course, not as bad. Not wanting a hassle later, Webster told Pitt about this, but Pitt didn't tell the commissioners who were to vote on Webster's appointment. As the Times dropped its bomb, Pitt quickly went into damage-control mode and asked the SEC to investigate Webster's appointment. Who watches the watchmen? Looks like they watch themselves.

In an age when Enron's ex-CFO gets indicted on 78 counts and we barely blink, the Pitt mess still inspired harsh words. "Hey Harvey ... pardon my bluntness but ... are you stupid?" asked CNN's Allen Wastler. Elsewhere on CNN, Lou Dobbs said his jury was still out but also said, "Mr. Pitt has again created more questions about his leadership ... and that has to end. Now." Is it mandatory for CNN columnists to use so many ellipses?

The Motley Fool had a few ideas about what Pitt could have been thinking, ranging from "He thought it would never come out" to "Pitt knew it would come out and that he and/or Webster would have to go." The latter is a long, paranoid theory invoking Nixon and Reagan, and that's what the links below this story are for (though we fear we already broke the "quick and painless" promise).

Democrats have been calling for Pitt's head for a while, but even now, the White House is standing by its man. TheStreet.com's Jim Cramer had a conservative-friendly solution: Get a Republican senator to demand Pitt's ouster, and maybe Bush can restore some confidence in America's regulatory procedures without looking "like he is caving to the Democrats." Is that all it takes? Can we get a Republican senator to ask for 0% unemployment, too? - Jen Muehlbauer

Audit Overseer Cited Problems in Previous Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/31/business/31ACCO.html

S.E.C. Orders Investigation Into Webster Appointment
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/31/business/01CND-ACCO.html

Pitt Requests Internal Probe Into the Selection of Webster
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1036076521376626311,00.html
(Paid subscription required.)

Pitt at Centre of Storm Over Webster (Financial Times)
http://tinyurl.com/2d1q
(Paid subscription required.)

A GOP Senator Must Call for Pitt's Ouster
http://www.thestreet.com/_tsclsii/funds/smarter_up/10051720.html
(Paid subscription required.)

Harvey, Harvey, Harvey
http://money.cnn.com/2002/10/31/commentary/dobbs/dobbs/

Harvey, What Were You Thinking?
http://money.cnn.com/2002/10/31/commentary/wastler/wastler/

Pitt and Webster Must Go
http://www.fool.com/news/Take/2002/take021031.htm

Late yesterday the Justice Department announced that the judge weighing the Microsoft antitrust case will issue "opinions" at 4:30 Eastern time today. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly has two intertwined tasks before her: Rule thumbs-up or thumbs-down on the settlement Microsoft and the DoJ signed (with half of the 18 complaining states); and decide what to do about the far harsher remedies proposed by the nine remaining states. For a refresher course on what the judge's options are and what the various proposed antitrust remedies could mean to Microsoft, see Matt Berger's bulleted summary in Information World.

Outlets had to cover the news that in 24 hours there will be big news -- the Boston Globe called the cases "the most significant antitrust rulings since the Bell telephone system was broken up" -- but they didn't have to like it. Especially in early stories, most outlets didn't so much as call a friendly law professor for a comment. This morning the New York Times headlined the story high but ran five paragraphs; in the Wall Street Journal the headline linked to an unsigned "online news roundup."

"Another year, another ruling," sighed the Register. And who could disagree? The time mismatch between the worlds of jurisprudence and technology has never been more stark. The Microsoft case has dragged on for four years now. Most outlets noted that any of the parties to the complex cases could file an appeal. The AP's D. Ian Hopper was more forthcoming: "Microsoft already has indicated that it plans to appeal to the Supreme Court if necessary." We may not see an end to it until 2005.

There was little in the UsCourts.gov announcement to speculate on, but reporters seized on what little there was, particularly how long it took to get this far and the use of plurals in the announcement itself: the judge "will issue Opinions in the Microsoft cases." On the first point, an early story by the AP's Ted Bridis made an observation that much of the later coverage echoed: "Many trial observers -- even Microsoft supporters -- have said the length of time Judge Kollar-Kotelly took to reach her decision might suggest she was leaning toward rejecting the settlement." Hopper's later AP story quoted a law professor: "I think it means the states are going to get something." But by the time they get it, will anybody care? - Keith Dawson

MS/DOJ - Dueling remedy proposals are far apart
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/10/31/021031hnmsdoj2.xml

Landmark Microsoft rulings today (Boston Globe)
http://tinyurl.com/2d73

Ruling Scheduled in Microsoft Case
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/01/technology/01SOFT.html

Ruling on Microsoft To Be Issued Friday
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1035922108497904831,00.html
(Paid subscription required)

Judge CKK to issue MS antitrust ruling today
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/27886.html

Microsoft Awaits Antitrust Ruling (Hopper, AP)
http://tinyurl.com/2d7s

Microsoft Notice
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/

Judge to issue ruling tomorrow in Microsoft trial (Bridis, AP)
http://tinyurl.com/2d7t

Microsoft antitrust ruling set for today
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/93750_microsoft01.shtml

Key Rulings Due Today in Microsoft Case
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48530-2002Oct31.html

The Five Dumbest Things on Wall Street This Week
http://www.thestreet.com/_tsclsii/markets/dumbestgm/10051514.html

U.S. and States Sue on Satellite TV Merger
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/01/business/media/01BIRD.html

ICANN approves election reform plan (Reuters)
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-964091.html

Net Critics Mull Breakaway Plan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/2376707.stm

HP ships wrong PDA figures, revival now not a revival
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/54/27883.html

Wal-Mart expands Linux offering
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-963999.html

Former Enron Executive Fastow Indicted on 78 Counts
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46828-2002Oct31.html

Economy overshadows Iraq for US voters
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,822883,00.html

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid.
http://www.fortune.com/ontech/20021028.html

Town ponders life as Got Milk? Calif. (AP)
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/bayarea/4416232.htm

Copyedited by Jim Duffy (jimduffy86@yahoo.com).

Advertising: Erik Vanderkolk (erikvanderkolk@yahoo.com).

Editor and publisher: Jimmy Guterman (guterman@vineyard.com).

Media Unspun is produced by The Vineyard Group Inc.
Copyright 2002 Media Unspun, Inc., and The Vineyard Group, Inc.
Subscribe already, willya? http://www.mediaunspun.com