Select your localized edition:

Close ×

More Ways to Connect

Discover one of our 28 local entrepreneurial communities »

Be the first to know as we launch in new countries and markets around the globe.

Interested in bringing MIT Technology Review to your local market?

MIT Technology ReviewMIT Technology Review - logo


Unsupported browser: Your browser does not meet modern web standards. See how it scores »

{ action.text }

13. Who is Frank Kennedy, the retired optical engineer, you quote in the article?  How did you find him and how can we get in touch with him?

I met Kennedy at Andy Antipass’ art gallery in New Orleans and interviewed him during the last week of October 2004 (I don’t recall the specific date). I had discussed the story on urban camo with Antipass – just reviewing the stories we’d done and discovered during the road trip – and as I discussed the idea of making soldiers invisible to onlookers he mentioned that he had a regular gallery visitor who was an engineer and had done work with optics who might be able to add something to the story.

I attempted to email Kennedy via a hotmail address but got no reply. Called Antipass on Saturday the 17th and asked him if he had a phone number or could get a message to Kennedy. He said he hadn’t seen him for a few months and was concerned since Kennedy had been ill. You can confirm this via Antipass at (CONTACT INFORMATION REMOVED). He asked that you put my name in the subject line to distinguish it from junkmail.

14. Both Michael Logue and Col. Rowan said in interviews we had with them last week that they did not speak with you about the camouflage technology.  Do you have notes or tapes?  How would you respond?

On 1/18, Bobbie Galford from the Corps, who sat in on the interview with rowan, called me to say that Col. Rowan wasn’t sure if we discussed urban camo, as that is not part of the Corps mission (they aren’t involved in developing it). I told her that I was sure he did, recounted the part of the conversation that led up to the brief discussion on urban camo, but said that if they were uncomfortable with the quote I would have Brad remove it and issue a correction. She told me no, it was fine, she was primarily calling to get info on what military agency was developing the technology.  Bobbie’s phone number is (CONTACT INFORMATION REMOVED).

Recently Logue also told a blogger that I’d misquoted him in a Wired News story. When I contacted him to ask for details, again offering to correct the quote, he told me it was a very small issue, that the info in the quote was correct but he didn’t think he said it – he thought perhaps someone else who was there did or I’d gotten it from the PR stuff he’d given me, but that there was no need to fix it, he loved the stories and had been ‘bragging about them.’ I’ll forward that email to you.

Frankly, I’m at a loss here, I offered to correct the quotes even though I was confident I’d gotten them right, assuming the source should be given the benefit of the doubt, but each time was told it wasn’t necessary. Additionally see above – I was discussing the story back in October when I got to New Orleans right after leaving Vicksburg.

0 comments about this story. Start the discussion »

Tagged: Communications

Reprints and Permissions | Send feedback to the editor

From the Archives


Introducing MIT Technology Review Insider.

Already a Magazine subscriber?

You're automatically an Insider. It's easy to activate or upgrade your account.

Activate Your Account

Become an Insider

It's the new way to subscribe. Get even more of the tech news, research, and discoveries you crave.

Sign Up

Learn More

Find out why MIT Technology Review Insider is for you and explore your options.

Show Me