The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998.
Informational Websites ChronoMaddox -- the legacy of Chuck Maddox OnTheDash -- vintage Heuer website Zowie -- Omega information
Discussion Forums ChronoMaddox Forum Heuer Forum Omega Forum
Counterfeit Watchers ChronoTools Forum ChronoTrader Forum

zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

Opened July 1999, zOwie is the Internet's first and longest running discussion forum dedicated to Omega brand watches.

Feel free to discuss pricing and specific dealers. But 'for sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Full archive of all messages is accessible through options in the Search and Preferences features. Privacy, policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.

For the answer to the NUMBER #1 most frequently asked question here--for details or value of a specific older Omega watch you have--go to: Tell Me About My Omega. Learn more about How To Include Photos and HTML In Your Postings. To contact someone with a question not relevant to other readers of the forum, please click on their email address and contact them privately.

Re: d'Osvaldo Patrizzi's robust response

: in the following link.

: And reading it would appear that the Wall
: Street Journal article is simply slanderous,
: erroneous - deceitful misinformation and
: baseless fabrication of lies.

I have commented elsewhere that given a few weeks perspective, the WSJ article is a very carefully written article which implies much more than it says. Some of us, me especially, implied a lot that was not in evidence. However, everything in the article is factual, so calling it a "baseless fabrication of lies" is erroneous.

I contributed to the misinterpretation of the story by noting that there were are large number of lots which did not have owners noted, and that these watches must have come from Omega. This appears to be false.

My view of the auction if very different if Omega provided 9 or 10 watches than if they provided 154, as I first believed.

Tony Blair, the former UK prime minister, said in a speech recently that today the press is more interested in "impact" than in "truth".

This story had impact, and was skillfully written to maximize the impact, based on a few items of truth.

Not to say that my suspicions are completely gone -- far from it. But I will not speculate without firm documentation.

Overall, I am chagrined by much of what I see in journalism today. This article may be an example of an journalistic attitude which seems endemic.

I don't recall which US-based right wing commentator made this observation recently (perhaps Bill Bennett?). He noted that the most common answer from journalism students about why they want to be a journalist today is "to make a difference in the world".

I don't know about you, but I don't want the person reporting my news to be primarily motivated by changing the world to how they see it should be. I want someone to report the way things are, and let me make my own decisions about how it should be.

I think that observation may explain much of why there is little distinction between reporting and editorial opinion today. Objectivity and impartial reporting of the facts seems to be completely out of fashion today.

Sam

Current Position
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE