Why are voices of reason ignored?

I just read yet another Slashdot posting about some administrative group telling their people to ditch Internet Explorer because The Sky Is Falling or there's another vulnerability or some new virus is out that targets it, or something.

In this case, Information Week is playing Chicken Little.1

In the case of Slashdot, it's important to consider the source. They are so anti-non-open-source (now that's a new one!) that they would rather blame Microsoft than explain how to prevent problems in the first place.

I expected better from Information Week, though. I suppose everyone loves a sensationalist story, including technology mag editors. Ratings are more important than prevention, after all. And Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.

Instead, I ask: "Why aren't technology people taking charge and preventing these things before the fact?" I've been doing this for two years for one client, a year for another, and I'm sure they're all months behind in security patches yet they don't get viruses or worms or spyware or anything bad. Yet they all use Internet Explorer and Microsoft Windows. They don't even use any conventional anti-virus software.

Why aren't voices of reason listened to? Even in the face of working examples?

  1. http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=55301109&tid=6004