Sumser of My Discontent

 

There are times when writing a daily column must be a terrible burden – time pressures surely preclude extensive background research, and yet it is generally accepted that one can only write non-fiction when one has the facts.

   

Conviction without foundation in fact is simply prejudice.

   

   

A few days ago, I flipped out in response to John Sumsers’ Of Note article.  I was wrong to call John a bombastic emperor with no clothes … I’m sorry John … and Ami took me to task in a truly fantastic post: John Sumser: A Sheep in Wolf’s Clothing?  Don’t miss the comments on Ami’s site … man that guy can write.

   

In a follow-up post, An Error in My Thinking, John admits that “Something I'd never considered was the idea that AJB served a useful function other than a checkbox on a compliance form.”

   

John, if there had been a single error in your thinking, I wouldn’t have run screaming from the room.  You see, I know something about AJB, NaviSite and Direct Employers – I worked inside the State and Federal workforce system for 15 years, participated on consortia that helped guide AJB, have met with members of the NaviSite team, have attended a Direct Employers annual meeting, and I license software to Direct Employers in support of their new National Labor Exchange.

   

So John, did you know that one of the reasons that AJB was so expensive is that job ads were reviewed by staff before going live on the site to ensure that the jobs were non-discriminatory, real employment opportunities (as opposed to phishing schemes), from real employers?  Does Monster do this?  HotJobs?  Indeed? 

   

And did you know John that Direct Employers doesn’t really care about traffic to their site?  Instead they care about driving quality traffic to their members’ HR sites, which is why Direct Employers actively seeks out distribution partners for the listings, and why interested job seekers are sent directly to employer sites. 

   

John, did you grab the phone and do any fact checking before writing Of Note?  If not, then I believe you abused the trust of your readers. As I read your article, it seems that:

   

Wondering passes for answers

   

-          “…having wondered often in this column why the government is competing with industry in classified advertising…”

   

-          “…we wonder why small employers should feel comfortable about large organizations banding together to manage a national labor exchange.”

   

   

Fallacy passes for fact

   

-          “Unfortunately, all of the smoke conceals the fact that there are major assets at stake in this transition.  None of the competitors are talking about them.” – Actually, they’re not talking about them because the Employment and Training Administration (ETA) is not releasing the assets.

   

-          ”The domain name is a major asset and its disposition will make the difference in the transition.” – ETA has no plans to release the domain name at this time.

   

-          “The real problem, however, is that both Navistar and Direct Employers are offering safe harbor where there is none.” – Neither party is foolish enough to promise a ‘safe harbor’ … they are offering to help meet compliance requirements.

   

-          “No corporation has ever reported broad success from its use.” – Please John, you talk to all corporations?

   

   

Notions pass for knowledge

   

-          ”Any system that proposes to "replace" AJB will need its traffic.” – Direct Employers’ primary goal in replacing AJB is to help their employers with federal compliance.

   

-          “AJB was always the most aggravating job board to use.” – AJB is a WEDDLE’s 2007 User’s Choice Awards winner; and Cyndy Geier certainly disagreed with you from an employer perspective.

   

   

John, in reading your Of Note article I’m reminded of the Lord Norcliffe quote:  "Journalism: A profession whose business is to explain to others what it personally does not understand."

   

Comments

[Amitai Givertz]

Some things are worth repeating: Bob, you are a class act.

[Chad Sowash]

"Conviction without foundation in fact is simply prejudice."

Unfortunately, I believe most have taken Mr. Sumser's prejudice as fact for years. The blogging community provides an opportunity to uncover such prejudice, while applying a new notion of journalistic accountability.

Well executed post Bob.

[Bill Warren]

Bob...I agree with Ami --- You are a class act. This is well said without malice. I hope John takes this as an opportunity to reflect on himself and his approach during the last few years.

[Executive Restaurant Recruiter]

Nice post Bob... you took him nicely to task. Something that I don't think is done often enough.

[Recruiting Animal]

Hawaiian Shirt, this is a good posting. I don't know enough to comment on the issues myself but you appear to give John a clear basis on which to respond. Well done.

Although, I think it's fair for him to say that he wonders about something out loud. It doesn't indicate that he knows all of the answers.

Regards from The Recruiting Animal

[Bob Wilson]

Thanks all for the words of encouragement.

Animal, I agree that wondering aloud is a good thing if one is listening for an answer.

Since John doesn't accept comments on his site, his 'wondering' appears to me to be more of a 'turn of phrase', implying that if the other party knew as much as I do, then I wonder why they'd be doing what they're doing.

Maybe I'm wrong though ... it happens more than I'd like.

Bob