... Creative Writers' Workshops, poetry seminars and Festivals of the Arts will materialize midst campus greenery. The Failure of Hemingway The Failure of Faulker The Failure of Whitman The Failure of Melville The Failure of Crane The Failure of Twain The Failure of London and The Failure of Wolfe will be revealed by one-book novelists embittered by the failure of David Suskind to invite them to a party where they might have met George Plimpton or even Alan Funt. Just anybody.
Perpetual panelists will clobber perpetually rejected novelists with symbolisms concealed in the work of other perpetual panelists. Manuscripts will be returned with the instruction:Insert more symbols. This can happen anywhere but chances are better in Vermont.
Hand In Hand Through the Greenery,
with the grabstand clowns of Arts & Letters
in The Last Carousel, by Nelson Algren, 1973
Cross-posted from Etaoin Shrdlu.
Howard Weaver
Tweets
-
Frustration & anger over Congress & #hcr is not due to arcane procedural maneuvering but that 's accomplished nothing. http://bit.ly/aFn5YJ8 hours ago from Echofon
-
Each topic would remember your last login & quickly summarize the news since plus an updated summary of the whole story http://bit.ly/aTtLl08 hours ago from Echofon
-
As near as I can remember, every prediction so far about "ruling the web" for the next decade has been wrong.8 hours ago from Echofon
-
The audience would rather plow fake farms than read the news. A contextless news environment is partially to blame. http://bit.ly/c57y1G8 hours ago from Echofon
-
Journalists: do you know much about "transmedia"? You should.8 hours ago from Echofon
-
Closed? “Apple, RIM, Palm & Microsoft with Xbox have demonstrated benefits of hardware+software+services integration” http://bit.ly/c51iOG9 hours ago from web
-
"Multitouch, as implemented on current Android phones, is extremely buggy...it’s so buggy it borders on the unusable" http://bit.ly/9mQ3j89 hours ago from web
-
For the delicate: new day for journalism: Call SCOTUS Justice a "goat-fu*king child molester," get a job on CNN news. http://bit.ly/cneZ8R10 hours ago from Echofon
-
Yeah, it’s a new day for journalism: Call SCOTUS Justice a "goat-fucking child molester," get a job on CNN news. http://bit.ly/cneZ8R10 hours ago from Echofon
-
Bishops reject #hcr, but 60,000 nuns support it. Easy choice. http://bit.ly/cuHZM610 hours ago from Echofon
-
Sean Lennon: OK Go had "incredibly viewed video (the treadmill) but proportion of sales to video was incredibly small.” http://bit.ly/bssRgW10 hours ago from Echofon
-
@jerseyshorejen I take it this neighbor doesn't Twitter?21 hours ago from Echofon
-
"Don't settle." RT @CodyBrown 'Trust your enthusiasm' Reminded of commencement Steve Jobs gave at Stanford @robinsloan http://bit.ly/cFFS7j21 hours ago from Echofon
-
Google likes the same kind of "choice" Microsoft did. http://bit.ly/azAQbZ24 hours ago from Echofon
-
“Google declares itself champion of the “open web” while maintaining a moat around its cashcows, search & advertising” http://bit.ly/azAQbZ24 hours ago from Echofon
-
@jamie_love You were expecting this to end pretty?25 hours ago from Echofon
-
Lucky & Jimmy standing guard at Redwing this morning. Good dogs. #fb http://twitpic.com/19017j28 hours ago from Echofon
Posts
-
March 05, 02:39 PM
John Battelle and my many friends who can’t wait to disparage the iPad as “passive,” “old-school” or proprietary need to take deep breath and calm down.None of them had such harsh criticisms about the Kindle, a far more restrictive and decidedly more passive device. Most of them carry netbooks that are underpowered, cramped little boxes with almost no aesthetic appeal. Why are they so bothered
-
February 11, 05:39 PM
Why is a Facebook beer worth more than your news story?
As Chris O’Brien asks at the PBS IdeaLab, “Why will people spend $1 to send you a virtual beer on Facebook, but not to read a news story online?” Good question — and there’s a lot more than a dollar at stake. Americans are spending something like $1.6 billion a year for “virtual goods” — that is, things that exist only in cyberspace, like that Facebook beer, or status upgrades in a game — but we -
January 30, 04:12 PM
iPad will help us most when it disappears
Both in anticipation of and reaction to the Apple iPad, people playing the Future of News Game tended toward superlatives. It would save traditional models, some said, by making Plain Old Newsprint pretty and shiny and worth charging for. Others looked at the missing Flash plugin and multitasking capability and dismissed the device as irrelevant. They’re both wrong—and the truth isn’t somewhere -
December 18, 01:28 PM
Hegemony Watch
I'm planning to keep an eye on developments that suggest a growing concentration of media power in ever smaller circles—at the moment, mainly Google. I'll comment here when I have anything substantial to say. Otherwise, I'm going to post quick comments and links on The Weaver Wire at posterous. Like this one: Hegemony Watch, Google & Yelp edition. -
December 12, 08:26 PM
Revenue for news: What if we're asking the wrong question?
Some time last week, the usual suspects were riffing on Twitter about a post called “Where does the paywall go?” that postulates most website activity comes from a very small percentage of readers and they, consequently, must not be “paywalled off.” Jeff Jarvis' Twitter question was phrased thusly: “Okay, so where do you put the paywall? No seriously, look at the data.” The obvious implication -
November 25, 12:35 PM
How do you resist global information hegemony?
What if civic news has always been a niche market and we just didn’t recognize that? Mixed up with the sports readers and food page readers and folks who just wanted to see what was on TV, the people who bought and read the newspaper mainly for civic news probably were no more than a fraction of the total “news audience” all along. This is at odds with my sense that most people are inherently -
November 20, 12:04 PM
Should government policy affect news? Come on, it already does
I guess Jim Barnett must trust rich people a lot more than I do. Don’t get me wrong: some of my best friends, yada-yada, and I certainly wouldn’t mind if my sister married one. (If I had a sister). But why on earth does he think putting media decisions in the hands of the richest few Americans is the best way to go? I hope Jim and everybody else understands my own preference: journalism needs -
November 18, 01:18 PM
Looking toward one future for local civic journalism
If you’re a reader of this blog, chances are you’ve already heard about the new online news organization being formed in Hawaii by Peer News. The brainchild of Pierre Omidyar and Randy Ching, this next-generation news service will bring a lot of web cred to an issue of considerable current interest: the future of local accountability journalism. I’ve spent some time with them as an advisor, and -
November 13, 11:13 PM
What if internet advertising is a foundation made of sand?
I spotted a pithy, insightful notion early on while reading Ethan Zuckerman's post What if they stop clicking? , paused and sent it out as a Tweet right then. Moments later, I came across a second and Tweeted it, too. When I Tweeted a third too-good-to-pass-up nugget, I realized I should just encourage people to read the whole post. It's a cohesive, carefully sequenced contemplation and will -
November 08, 11:17 AM
Jerks, tweets and news
A TechCrunch article by Paul Carr (NSFW: After Fort Hood, another example of how ‘citizen journalists’ can’t handle the truth) stirred up a good bit of Twitter discussion for a Sunday morning. To me, the important question is not whether non-professional news reporting will be available or whether "jerks with cellphone" will run amok, but rather how we learn to handle that and incorporate it -
November 07, 11:10 AM
Enduring truths and narrative coherence
Let us start with Plato and finish with Dave Pell, with a little Jeff Jarvis mixed in to help bind it all together. Sometime around 370 BC Plato held forth against the invention of writing, a mere crutch that would cause memory to atrophy while offering only a pale reflection of discourse in its place. The fact is that this invention will produce forgetfulness in the souls of those who have -
October 12, 07:36 PM
Infobesity: the result of poor information nutrition
I've talked and written for some time about the need for serious journalism to stop marketing itself as "Eat your broccoli" and start describing the value of a balanced information diet. I had a discussion like this in Tacoma once, when I mentioned that it’s hard to make a living urging people to eat their broccoli when the guy in the next booth is selling curly fries. Editor Karen Peterson -
October 09, 12:17 PM
Pointing down a path to ruin
Rupert Murdoch and Tom Curley at some bizarre news summit in Beijing insist that news companies must "take back control of our content."This is madness on many levels, but most importantly, it's just impossible. Down that path lies ruin.I can't say this better than Jeff Jarvis and Kevin Anderson. Please go read their observations. -
September 19, 10:46 PM
Seminal work or sloppy thinking?
Jeff Jarvis has already ranked it as near "seminal" and reprinted more than 350 words of Paul Graham's Post Medium Publishing, so let me try and bring something different to the party: some examples of sloppy thinking and errors in the piece.Graham: A copy of Time costs $5 for 58 pages, or 8.6 cents a page. The Economist costs $7 for 86 pages, or 8.1 cents a page. Better journalism is actually -
September 15, 12:45 PM
Enlisting readers to improve journalism
How simple is this? NYT reporter Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) asked his Twitter readers (more than 12,000 at last check) to help him make an upcoming newspaper story better:My blog post about "GMA" http://bit.ly/djbpT is the 1st draft of a bigger story. So please comment, annotate it, ask questions, poke holes!Even more useful and impressive would be asking them to help shape and report the -
August 31, 03:38 PM
Looking at the web through reality-colored glasses
Internet triumphalists love the Wikipedia. In their view, it demonstrates why professionalism is no longer essential. The crowd-sourced online fact-a-palooza is a superior encyclopedia, news source and all-around reference, they say – and all that with volunteer editors and no paid editorial writing staff.I love Wikipedia, too, and often cite it in this blog and elsewhere. For a certain kind of -
August 28, 11:14 PM
Government subsidy, public decisions?
In a world where cheap, infinite and perfect copies are now the norm in many creative realms, old laws about limiting access – protecting copyrights, we called them – bear scant relation to reality. The world has out run the law.Robert Penn Warren has Boss Stark explain this is All The King's Men, generally acclaimed the best political novel in American literature: [The law] is like a single-bed -
August 18, 01:38 PM
What would a content site look like if you started from how to make money?
Here's a suggestion I haven't heard before: somebody ought to figure out what kind of business will support journalism rather than focusing on why our old business won't.Perhaps that's an oversimplification, but the whole argument is really pretty simple. Here's the nut graf from a discussion aimed at finding new journalism business models:The reason newspapers and magazines are dying is that -
August 17, 10:55 AM
One-book novelists and perpetual panelists
Apropos of "one-book novelists" wherever we find them, this note from one of the best American writers most people have never read:... Creative Writers' Workshops, poetry seminars and Festivals of the Arts will materialize midst campus greenery. The Failure of Hemingway The Failure of Faulker The Failure of Whitman The Failure of Melville The Failure of Crane The Failure of Twain The Failure of -
August 15, 07:24 PM
Why are newspaper doomsayers usually so sloppy?
I don’t know Bill Wyman from a posthole, and you probably never heard of him either. You might wonder why I’m sitting in the country on a sunny Saturday afternoon bothering to critque his analysis of Why Newspapers Are Failing. It’s certainly not like other people haven't plowed this ground before.And besides, he actually seems like a pretty interesting guy. I agree with 75- or 80% of what he’s -
August 06, 01:39 PM
Is a journalist a brand?
So, what’s with the logo? I’m glad you asked.A Twitter friend says it makes me look “corporate,” which I don’t think she meant as a compliment. It’s definitely a high-class design, done by my pal Peter Dunlap-Shohl in Anchorage. But it isn’t intended to signal a move back to the executive suites.Instead, it’s part of an experiment on my part. Thinking about the notion that individual journalists -
August 06, 12:34 PM
Nielsen numbers reported by Nieman don't support dire conclusions
The headline at the Nieman Journalism Lab website does sound apocalyptic, so of course it was quickly repeated and gained wide currency amongst folks who think the battles about journalism are already over.It says, “NAA/Nielsen stats show newspapers own less than 1 percent of U.S. online audience page views, time spent.”Less than one percent? We’re doomed.Well, no we’re not. The measure Martin -
July 30, 11:41 PM
A prejudice (and a prayer) for the power of the newsroom
Off the news ticker this week:McClatchy and a number of other newspaper companies recently surprised and pleased Wall Street with first quarter earnings reports far better than predicted. One analyst (who’s invested in newspaper stocks) predicts that cost-cutting at the papers has taken hold just as the economy bottoms out, meaning that even modest improvement could mean “spectacular earnings -
July 29, 03:05 PM
From oration to conversation
Whatever happens, however we rearrange our marketplace of ideas - as sooner or later we certainly shall - our sense of what “publication” means is bound to change. We will be able to make our commentary part of the text, and weave an elaborate series of interlocked commentaries together. We will, that is, be moving from a series of orations to a continuing conversation, and, as we have always -
July 26, 02:44 PM
Stupid headline words: the readers speak
I asked folks on Twitter what stupid words in headlines bothered them most. Here are the initial responses:Probed; spar; faces; linger; walks back; curb; spark; exec; inks; Solons; pokes (for the Dallas Cowboys); mull; nix; tapped kudo; eyed; inked; dissed; slay/slainOne person offered a three-fer: Moguls Ink PactAdd to the list in comments below. There must be more stupid words than these ...
Posts
-
January 30, 08:06 PM
Torches, pitchforks and America’s coming elections
This is a copy of Star Tangled Banner, a column I write occasionally for The Badger newspaper in Saskatchewan, Canada:
Remember those old horror movies where the townspeople decide to storm the evil castle, forming a mob in the street waving pitchforks and glutting torches?
I’m betting it won’t be long before you see the glow of those torches when you look south down toward the States. But this time the monster is not at Count Dracula’s castle or in Baron von Frankenstein’s laboratory. It’s on Wall Street.
The biggest factor in American politics today concerns the gap between an angry public and the disconnected politicians who claim to represent them. As we could tell from the relative emphasis economic issues received in President Obama’s State of the Union address last week, folks in Washington are starting to awaken, but I think a lot of them are too late.
Discontent about flagging personal fortunes—things like high unemployment, decreasing home values, foreclosures and union busting—have now been mixed with high-octane disgust about the way bankers and money traders on Wall Street have avoided the damage and shrugged off even modest efforts to reform their rules. This is a highly combustable mixture and plenty of people are more than willing to strike a match.
Reaction amongst the monied class has been spectacularly tone deaf. Like Marie Antoinette suggesting cake or California land barons burning copies of The Grapes of Wrath, mortgage bankers whose companies and jobs were saved by a massive taxpayer bailout have started awarding themselves obscene bonuses. (Honestly, I try not to be overly judgmental here, but calling these bonuses obscene is just telling the truth).
Frank Rich in the New York Times presciently identified the movie Up In the Air as a contemporary morality tale that connects perfectly with the way real people are feeling. It’s worth seeing, and I don’t want to give too much away, but this much won’t hurt: the star, George Clooney, plays a hired-gun consultant who flies all over the country firing people that the corporate bosses he calls “pussies” doesn’t want to handle themselves.
Clooney’s own boss sums up how he feels in a way that reminds us of Wall Street: “Retailers are down 20 percent. Auto industry is in the dump. Housing market doesn’t have a heartbeat. It is one of the worst times on record for America. This is our moment.”
At least Clooney-the-hired-vulture is doing something to earn the money he makes off other peoples’ misfortune. Wall Street didn’t do squat.
Well, that’s wrong. They did a lot, but almost all of it was bad, reckless and self-serving. When it looked like the market might catch up to them at last—shares of once-mighty investment banks were trading for pennies—George Bush’s government stepped in with several hundred billion dollars of taxpayer money to save their bacon. A couple of months later, Obama did pretty much the same thing.
No doubt, as just about every economist assures us, this was unavoidable. The whole economy was teetering, and those big Wall Street failures would have taken us all down—harder, faster, deeper—if they had been left alone to fail. In other words, things would even worse.
So they got rescued, but here’s the truly infuriating part: they immediately started acting like they hadn’t done anything wrong. There was not a moment of apparent reflection or remorse before they started arranging business trips to play golf in Scotland and sending their managers on retreats at fancy resorts. Worse by far, after they made a lot of money cleaning up their own mess, they awarded one another huge bonus payments and laughed all the way to the Mercedes dealer.
The loss of Sen. Ted Kennedy’s once invulnerable Massachusetts senate seat in a special election has sobered some Democrats and invigorated some Republicans, all of whom are now talking the talk of populism. The problem is, nobody’s walking the walk. Republicans, for instance, have united solidly against a health care package that would drastically reform insurance industry practices most voters want. Neither party has been willing to cut its ties to lobbyists and other special interest pleaders, and last week the Supreme Court turned Big Business loose to spend as much as it wants to buy the Congressmen it likes.
One-third of all U.S. Senate seats and all of them in the House of Representatives are up for grabs in mid-term elections this fall. This is where the torches and pitchforks come in, because the only time voters’ voices get heard at all is at election time. To my mind, President Obama has really been the only one in Washington acting like a grown-up, and I’m willing to predict he will rally enough support to keep Democrats in charge of both houses. But there will be a lot of politicians’ bodies strewn along the roadway before we get there. -
January 12, 10:30 AM
We can talk about race, just not tell the truth in public
This is a copy of Star Tangled Banner, a column I write occasionally for The Badger newspaper in Saskatchewan, Canada:
Lots of people will tell you that Americans are not allowed to talk publicly about race. That is wrong.
We can talk about it all we like. We just aren’t allowed to tell the truth in public.
This is the nexus of the current commotion about election-year comments by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, about Barack Obama as a candidate. Probably you’ve heard something about this since it recently emerged in a new book. Reid said Obama’s race wouldn’t be as big an issue in the election because he was “light-skinned” and spoke with “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”
Much of the press coverage of this belated, incidental revelation has followed a predictable “gotcha” script, almost all of it focused on peripheral questions. Nobody has seriously suggested that Reid — an early, enthusiastic and persistent supporter of the Obama candidacy and presidency — is actually a racist. Instead, the conversation is primarily about the fact that people may be offended that he said it. How can an experienced politician have been stupid enough to say that?
The president, a political ally of Reid, moved quickly to accept the senator’s de rigeur apology: "I deeply regret using such a poor choice of words. I sincerely apologize for offending any and all Americans, especially African-Americans for my improper comments," Reid said. This is not surprising, for a couple of obvious reasons.
The first is that Obama needs Reid’s support in Congress. Health care reform. Economic programs. Regulatory changes. Stuff like that.
The second is that Obama himself has said much the same thing. In particular, he acknowledged that his speaking style changes when he addresses a mostly-black audience (which anybody with ears can hear, by the way). In 2005, he said, “I know if I’m in an all-black audience that there’s going to be a certain rhythm coming back at me from the audience. They’re not just going to be sitting there. That creates a different rhythm in your speaking.”
As to the other observation? Well, you may have noticed that the president actually does have lighter colored skin that lots of other Americans, including many whose hyphen isn’t African-.
Reid’s use of the word “Negro” also generated criticism, and that was indeed a strange thing to say. The term, once a respectable alternative to a hateful derivative, is long out of fashion although a fair number of African-Americans (mostly older) still prefer it. One of the leading civil rights groups is still called the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, but of course “colored” is otherwise discredited, too. “Black,” a description the president and many others use interchangeably with African-American, is also now rejected by many. This seems sensible to me since nobody I have ever seen is actually black. (I’ve noticed that people described as “white” aren’t really that color either. Go figure).
But as a wise old Juneau politician once warned me, “If you give your enemy a stick, he’ll use it to hit you.” Sure enough, the African-American chairman of the Republican Party and others have now picked up on Reid’s statement as reason for him to resign, at least as majority leader. One argument: Republican Sen. Trent Lott had to resign when he was majority leader in 2002 after revelation that he had praised the frankly racist and segregationist Sen. Strom Thurmond and suggested it would have been good had he been elected president. (If the Lott and Reid cases seem alike to you, the GOP wishes you were Americans and could vote here.)
There is one more thing worth noting about Reid’s observations: they are indisputably true. Barack Obama could not have been elected if he had much darker skin and usually spoke with a thick dialect. Everybody knows that, but it’s not okay to say it.
Personally, I think it’s going to be tough for Americans to come to grips with the way race yanks us around until we’re willing to be candid about how we feel, and talk about why. But what do I know? I’m a white guy. Well, pink, actually, or sometimes red. Purple, kind of. -
December 14, 01:11 PM
A new president embraces an old American ideal: pragmatism
Perhaps you felt a twinge of contradiction listening to America’s young new president accepting the Nobel Peace Prize just days after ordering an additional 30,000 troops to fight and kill in Afghanistan.I didn’t.He gave a remarkably straightforward speech for a guy known for soaring rhetoric and precise, surgical argument. There was a reason for that: Barack Obama took the lectern in Oslo to articulate the fundamental premise of American philosophy, an organizing concept that formerly helped shape everything from school boards to foreign policy: Pragmatism.You understand, I’m sure, that this is now true only on occasion. Too much of our national debate (from school boards to foreign policy) has been hijacked by ideology, by the kind of people who believe the world was created in six days 6,000 years ago and therefore all school children should be taught about that. They are the people whose questions about the president’s birth place (as the comedian Bill Maher noted) are like those who ask after sundown, “Where did the sun go??”But it is helpful to remind yourself, as I do regularly, those people didn’t win the election; Barack Obama and a multitude of fairly reasonable people at all levels of government did. Though the whackos get a disproportionate share of the headlines and make for the best punch lines, the birthers and their buddies actually represent a fragmented and (at the moment) diminishing slice of American life.I’m not saying Americans invented the idea of pragmatism in its classic, dictionary definition: reasonable, practical, not theoretical. But it was here that the notion took root as a philosophical movement, a unified way of looking at life and reality that favored reason and evidence over passion and faith. For more than a century now, it’s been the foundation of a national philosophy that guided debate and decisions here.Arising largely from intellectual despair after the carnage of the U.S. Civil War left more than 600,000 countrymen dead. (“Whatever guided us into that war has got to be wrong ...”) a small group of Boston intellectuals began exploring the notion of a reality-based, Darwinian inspired philosophy to explain and deal with the world. Early disciples included the writer Ralph Waldo Emerson and jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes.Now think about Barack Obama standing at the Nobel ceremony to accept a peace prize while he spoke of “just wars” and talked unapoligeticly about his reasons for sending troops to Afghanistan even though he knows they will both kill and die.While I personally disagree with his decision about expanding the war in Afghanistan, I celebrate his return to pragmatic decision-making. Generals and cabinet officers regularly presented President George W. Bush with Bible verses on the cover of military reports, things like “It is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.”That was no accident. They knew GWB was making decisions based on hearing an inner voice from God — more or less the opposite of classic American pragmatism. In contrast, Obama spoke in Oslo of efforts “to bend history in the direction of justice” rather than endorsing the Bush-era crusade to smite the wicked.Read Obama’s remarks anew, in light of the pragmatism I’ve discussed above, and you may find that you can join me in applauding his approach, even if disagreeing with his decision.“We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified,” he said in accepting the prize.“I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.”It was perhaps the most classic statement of American pragmatism made in this new century, and as such a beacon to those who wish to build a world based on reason and not on ideology.Originally written as "The Star Tangled Banner," a column in The Badger newspaper in Leader, Saskatchewan. Photo: official White House photo. -
November 27, 05:17 PM
Star Tangled Banner: looking for 'a downright moron'
Following is a copy of my column Star Tangled Banner, which runs occasionally in The Badger newspaper in Saskatchewan, Canada:Why electoral politics in the U.S.is a search for ‘a downright moron’In the last couple of weeks, the Sarah Palin Show has really moved into high gear here in the States.On Nov. 16, Sarah enjoyed what was probably her biggest celebrity moment since the GOP convention speech a year before: a guest appearance on the Oprah show. As television theater goes this was PG-13 all the way, a series of mild questions answered with the paint-by-numbers responses Sarah always gives when she stays on script.Still, this was Oprah, so all the slightly interesting questions and answers were quickly relayed throughout the nation. Perhaps the most enlightening came when Oprah asked if son-outlaw Levi Johnston would be invited to Thanksgiving dinner with his son and baby mama. Seemingly caught without a script on that one, Sarah squirmed and mumbled something about “Well, sure, he knows he would be welcome.” Right.Levi, as it turns out, was busy. On Nov. 20 we got our first look at photos of his nude (semi-nude?) photo spread in Playgirl Magazine, all that flat-stomached, tattooed flesh on display. Ha, Sarah. Yo, Oprah. Take that.Neither Sarah nor Levi had the biggest day, however. That prize would have to go to Sherry Johnston, Levi’s mom, who appeared in court in Alaska to be sentenced to five years prison for selling oxycontin — hillbilly heroin — to a police informant. She, presumably, was not invited to Thanksgiving with the former governor.Taken all together, it’s safe to guess that this sideshow managed to command more headlines, electrons and attention that did our famously media-savvy president, Barack Obama. Perhaps that is understandable, since all he had on his plate were things like a crucial Senate vote on health care reform, a decision about what strategy to follow in Afghanistan, and dealing with criticism that followed his decision to bow when meeting the Japanese emperor. (He would have been safer to follow the precedent of President George Bush the Elder, who simply threw up on the Japanese prime minister when he went visiting in 1992).You might be thinking by now that I have decided to descend into the celebrity gossip business myself. Not so.This occasional column in The Badger is intended to help Canadians understand a little more about the politics and culture of the interesting country across their southern border. You don’t need my help to understand the normal stuff (yes, there is some) so that means I will necessarily veer a little toward the outlandish. And believe you me, there is nothing much more outlandish around here right now than Sarah Palin.I should disclose at this point that I have special feelings about her on account of the fact that I was born in Alaska and lived there more than 40 years. I am tired of being laughed at by friends and strangers who ask about this woman. Her constant narcissistic quest for the spotlight makes me cross.People assume I knew her in Alaska, but I did not. When I left in 1995, she was not even mayor of Wasilla, although I believe she had already been crowned Miss Wasilla and runner-up for Miss Alaska. Also, although I edited the biggest newspaper in Alaska for a dozen years, I don’t believe I ever knew the name of any mayor of Wasilla. It just didn’t matter.However, I was back in Alaska for a wedding on the weekend after her selection by Sen. John McCain. I was in Juneau, the capital city, at a number of dinners and parties attended by many political people, so naturally I asked them what they thought of her vice presidential nomination.Almost without exception, everybody I asked answered with some variation on three consistent themes:1. Do not underestimate Sarah Palin. She is telegenic, has real gifts for communicating and she can be very charming;2. She is not remotely qualified to be the vice president (or, God forbid, president) of the United States; and3. John McCain better watch his back. Whenever Sarah’s in the room, it’s always all about Sarah.U.S. voters generally figured all that out on their own during the election, and Sarah was, by informed consensus, a net drag on the already moribund McCain campaign. But a sizable minority continue to adore her, seeing reflected in her crude vision their own frustrated world views.In a parliamentary system, a person of such limited experience or knowledge would never be considered for national leader, of course. But here in America, it’s practically guaranteed.Don’t take my word for it. Here’s what Baltimore journalist H.L. Mencken said about the process back in 1920:
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron." -
November 17, 01:06 PM
Which voices will carry across the centuries?
On my first visit to Florence, I walked into the empty, intimidating lobby of the Laurentian Library and stood, puzzled, for several moments.
All around me, blank walls rose in the pale, gloomy light to enclose an empty, two-story space. The walls display no art, no frescoes, no statuary. There are iconic pillars and arches, but they fame more nothingness, only emphasizing how vacant and slightly unfriendly the big space feels.
How could the genius Michelangelo, whose architecture might be his greatest achievement, have possibly designed this?
The stairs leading up to the reading room are themselevs a small treasure: an understated, elegant design that invites footfalls and encourages you upward. I put aside my doubts about the entry and climbed, where I found a long, beautiful room filled with sunlight from continuous windows on both sides. The reading benches (like everything here, also Michelangelo’s design) are clever and functional. The floor is an intricate masterpiece of repeating design that subtly echoes the ceiling.
After touring an exhibit tracing the development of the book — clay tablets, papyrus, scrolls, illuminated manuscripts — I wandered back to spend more time in the comfortable, inviting reading room itself.
There I encountered a young employee, a recent art history grad who was clearly excited to be there and happy to talk about the library. Eventually I mentioned how I’d felt in the entry lobby, and how puzzled I was.
She was delighted to hear that. “But that’s just what Michelangelo intended!” she exclaimed. The whole idea was for the experience of entering the library to reflect the human transition from darkness (ignorance) to light (knowledge). Michelangelo has set out almost 500 years ago to communicate that through his architecture, and it has spoken as plainly to me as if he was there explaining it himself.
Realization of that accomplishment captured me then, and lingers still. He spoke to me across 500 years, and his message carried no less meaning today than in those centuries past.
And I wondered: what is it we are saying, painting or building today that will be as eloquent 500 years from now? -
October 09, 11:07 PM
Star Tangled Banner: on gun laws
This is my second column attempting to introduce Saskatchewan readers of The Badger to the intricacies of U.S. politics and public policy. An easy one this time: gun laws.America: Where gun controlmeans using both handsAT THE MAIDEN’S GRAVE, California – We were headed out to hike in the Sierra Nevada last month near a spot on Highway 88 hauntingly called “The Maiden’s Grave.” It was named for a young pioneer woman who never made it all the way to the Pacific with her family; actually, the historic marker does mention that they aren’t sure there’s anybody buried beneath the pile of stones, or if there is, whether it’s really The Maiden. Besides, nobody knows the maiden’s name.Whatever. It was a crisp, blue-sky day in the mountains and we’d been told there was an expanse of granite pluton to be explored just on the other side of the high country cow pasture there.Just above the only gate was somebody’s camp, an old trailer with gear hanging from the nearby pine trees. A fair-sized American flag was waving up in one of them.I asked one of the women ask permission and a chubby guy with a U.S. Marines field cap and no shirt waved us in. We were up alongside the trailer before I saw the second guy, who was dressed more formally: he wore a shirt and a .45 automatic. He seemed to want to talk politics but we pressed on.That was only the first sidearm I saw that day. At a rest stop for lunch a bit later we came across a much older fellow who likewise saw fit to walk around with his pistol holstered on his hip. He also had a t-shirt that said NEVER AGAIN on the front and quoted Adolf Hitler on the back.No kidding. It said, "This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"I had a pretty good idea of his politics, too, and so I spent my time talking to a motorcycle rider who dreamed of hunting elk with his brother up in Idaho. Since I grew up in Alaska, I could trump any elk story with one about a moose, and we got along pretty well.(When we got home I Googled that Hitler quote and found out in a couple of minutes that it’s a pure fabrication. You can check it yourself.)What is it, do you suppose, that makes grown men want to walk around armed in public?I understand why people own guns. Lots of people in Alaska have firearms, maybe most of the people. Along with fish, game meat taken by hunters supplies a substantial fraction of the food consumed there, especially in the Bush. In the U.S. as a whole, there are estimated to be more than 235 million guns of various types, which is only about two for every three people, counting the kids and babies. (Of course, I have three myself, so there must be somebody out there going without.)For me, the worrisome issue isn’t people who own guns, it’s people who own guns that are basically good for just one purpose: to kill other people. In late September, a candidate who wants to be elected general in charge of the South Carolina National Guard (yes, they vote on that) raised campaign funds by auctioning a semiautomatic AK-47, the most legendary military rifle in the world today. It is tough, light and lethal to humans – but you wouldn’t take it bear hunting.Most handguns, likewise, have little actual purpose other than what is politely called “home defense” here in the states. I’ve known guys who hunted with them, but damned few. Sometimes you’d see a hiker on the trail in Alaska who claimed his .357 magnum was bear protection. Standard procedure was to advise that he file down the site on the end of the barrel, so it wouldn’t hurt so much when the bear took it away and stuffed it up where the sun don’t shine.America has lived with its gun fixation since earliest times. Unlike Canada, we had this revolutionary war where farmers with hunting weapons were the main combatants against the British Redcoats. That sort of heritage lasts a while.As a result, the Second Amendment to our Constitution says “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Now it sounds like that is talking about guns for the military, doesn’t it? Ha! Over the years our courts have regularly interpreted it to endow that right to each and every citizen.The majority of Americans want some limitations on gun ownership, but the minority who oppose that are much more passionate, much better organized and – let’s face it – much better armed. Through organizations like the National Rifle Association, they’ve been brilliant in advancing their political agenda, and they own a fair chunk of the Republican Party outright. Hell, Dick Cheney used one of his to shoot a buddy in the face, and Sarah Palin never saw a gun she didn’t like. (While you are Googling that Hitler quote, you should also Google “Sarah Palin gun” and look at the pictures that turn up. Whew.)But any consuming passion can be dangerous, of course. Right-wing Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) might well have been fanning flames of gun paranoia earlier this summer when she warned against the scary, invasive people who would be going door-to-door across the country taking the Census and asking all kinds of prying questions.Of course, that may have had nothing to do with the death of Census worker Bill Sparkman, 51, who was discovered a few weeks later hanged to death “naked and gagged [with] his hands and feet bound with duct tape” near Big Creek, Kentucky.The authorities did note, however, that somebody had scrawled the word “FED” on his bare chest in red magic marker.Howard Weaver, a journalist for 40 years,was born and raised in Alaskaand owns three shotguns. No sidearms, though. -
October 06, 11:54 AM
Star Tangled Banner
I got asked to write a column for a small, new newspaper in Saskatchewan, and said yes. We decided on a monthly piece interpreting the mysteries of American politics and public policy for Canadians, and Editor Sheri Monk came up with a great title: Star Tangled Banner.Here is a draft of the first one, as submitted:Health care reform debaters in U.S.
not yet on same planet, much less page
By Howard Weaver
Canada doesn’t usually play a big role in U.S. journalism unless your PM’s wife is carrying on in a backseat somewhere or Wayne Gretzky has signed with L.A. But that’s been different lately.
You’re at center stage right now, of course, because of your radical policy of making sure everybody has access to basic health care. Believe it or not, this is a matter of considerable debate in the states.
Any complex proposal that makes substantial changes to the status quo is guaranteed to generate vigorous debate, and thank goodness for that. The various proposals that have surfaced since President Barack Obama pledged to make health care reform a priority have ranged all over the map. Depending on which version of the voodoo math you embrace, it might cost a trillion dollars. Under a competing analysis, it might also be essentially free.
Certainly those kinds of differences do need to be sorted out.
So it shouldn’t surprise you to hear that debate has been hot and political posturing enthusiastic in the USA. What might puzzle you a little is how much of the debate seems to have been imported from Mars or Xerpylon or some other planet most regular people don’t ever visit.
The former governor of Alaska – and the GOP’s vice presidential candidate just months ago – claims with apparent sincerity that the president’s proposal includes plans for “death panels” that would ration care and make life-or-death decisions about Downs syndrome babies and gray-haired grannies who need care. After she floated that whopper and was pounded by criticism from Democrats and even some Republicans, she did the only reasonable thing: She repeated it and took her show on the road.
This has not been a debate a reasonable person can respect. In addition to death panel madness, many of the fringe protestors display a keep-government-out-of-my-Medicare mentality that simply defies belief. (Medicare is – as you probably know but they don’t – a 100% government program). Others of course are military veterans, who likewise receive medical care at the hospitals of the Veterans Administration, likewise completely federal.
In the meantime, many have decided to brand Obama both a socialist and a fascist, and altered photos of Obama with a Hitler mustache became popular – perhaps because the mustache is so easy to draw.
Obama responded with a powerful 48-minute speech to a joint session of Congress making financial, practical and humanitarian arguments in favor of reform. You can watch it all on YouTube.
You can also see South Carolina’s Republican Rep. Joe Wilson lose control and yell “You lie!” during the president’s speech. Of course, such behavior would hardly be noticed in a parliamentary debate. I remember reading that when a member yelled “Bullshit!” at Winston Churchill, the old bulldog pivoted and replied “We will address your special interest in a moment.” In the Congress, however, Wilson’s outburst was treated like a matter of some importance.
That’s perhaps because the subtext of the Wilson imbroglio – and much other behavior in this debate – is racism. Former President Jimmy Carter, himself a native of the Confederate south, said as much in Atlanta this week: "I think it's based on racism. There is an inherent feeling among many in this country that an African-American should not be president."
Some elected Democrats who have faced the fury of the fringe at town hall meetings have at last decided not to pretend this is all a reasonable debate between reasonable points view.
Rep. Barney Frank, a 27-year Congressional veteran widely respected for his command of complex financial matters and other issues, listened to a young woman characterize Obama as Hitler and finally asked her, in turn, “On what planet do you spend most of your time?”
It got even crazier out in California (as most things do) when a protestor told Rep. Peter Stark, "Mr. Congressman, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining." Stark’s response: "I wouldn't dignify you by peeing on your leg. It wouldn't be worth wasting the urine.”
In a government responsive to party discipline, the outcome of the president’s proposal ought not be even slightly in doubt. Democrats command the House of Representatives by roughly 256-178 votes, and in the 100-member senate the Democrat edge is 60-40. Importantly, 60 votes in the Senate is enough to disable the parliamentary stalling tactic of filibustering, by which minority members can postpone or even eliminate passage of legislation. (This proud Senate tradition was made famous years ago by Southern senators who filibustered against racial equality.)
Here’s that discipline question again. Members are not bound to support their party leadership or legislation, and a sizable group of more conservative Democrats worried about public reaction to spending increases has been dragging its feet to force alteration of the president’s proposals. (These members are called “Blue Dog Democrats,” but we don’t have time to get into why right now.)
It looks from here like they will succeed to some degree. Perhaps the most significant point of contention now is what we call “the public option,” meaning creation of a government insurance program to compete with private companies and extend coverage to many otherwise left out in the cold. I haven’t been much of a betting man since I stopped drinking, but I would be willing to bet this gets resolved with adoption of one of two compromise proposals: allowing the alternative insurance plans to be run my quasi-public co-ops instead of the government, or instituting a threshold test, where a government plan could come if private systems failed to cover, say, 95% of the people in a state.
I know this is Byzantine and hard for reasonable people to follow. Next column we will tackle something more straightforward – the president’s birth certificate, maybe.
-----------------
Howard Weaver, a native of Anchorage, Alaska, has been a journalist for 40 years. He now lives in California. © 2009
-
September 26, 07:26 PM
A storm blowing in from Paradise
I share this sense of catastrophe piling up the wreckage of so much of what I thought I understood and could count on. I certainly feel the storm caught in my wings.
But still, I welcome the future.
A Klee painting named ‘Angelus Novus’ shows an angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing in from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such a violence that the angel can no longer close them. The storm irresistibly propels him into the future to which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress.
–Walter Benjamin
On the Concept of History
-
September 18, 05:27 PM
My enviable mix of Old World and new
Working in the orchard early this morning to beat the heat, I checked my phone and saw a Twitter DM from a reporter who wanted to talk about social media. I replied that I was picking olives and asked if we could do it later.click images to to enlarge
“I envy your mix of Old World and new,” he tweeted back.
Well, I can understand that. It’s fantastic.
Barb and I bought the property here amidst Shenandoah vineyards about 10 years ago, and saved to build a small house that was finished in 2006. We transplanted a few mature olive trees next to the driveway before we had a house; the fruit orchard likewise precedes our residence. Since then we’ve been working like Irish peasants (oh, we are) and have done a hell of a lot here, if I do say so myself.
We now work about 45 olive trees, 30 fruit trees and a rapidly expanding truck garden. We heat almost entirely with wood we haul and split ourselves from many wooded acres surrounding the house. We’ve added a tool shed, barn and residential treehouse, built an adobe oven and gaspowered fire box. Barb has in mind to dig a root cellar next.
I mention this not simply to brag (though I’m proud of it) but as contrast to the work I’m still trying to do bridging from one news era to another. I do know some about social media, mainly gleaned from living it enthusiastically online. After fighting bandwidth limitations for years, I’ve settled into an acceptable satellite service I can live with. I get a decent AT&T signal on my iPhone, and have discovered one spot in the yard were the Kindle’s Sprint service works.
I read omnivorously about media, mainly online nowadays, though two shelves of books behind me speak of earlier explorations. My work with the Publish2 board has introduced me to many good thinkers busy pushing boundaries, and I’ve been lucky to connect with others in media who want to keep talking, as well. I’m working with talented videographers on a web-based interview program and writing fiction.
I’m posting on this blog because these thoughts are personal, not media-related. I’d writing it down to make myself pause and consider how lucky I am to have found a mix of earthy and heady things I love to spend my days on.
If I weren’t here, I’d envy me, too. I need to remember that. -
September 17, 01:32 PM
My first rejection letter
I'm in the process of looking for an agent to help me finish constructing and then selling my work-in-progress, a novel about politics, oil and corruption in Alaska 30 years ago. I don't actually know any agents, so it's a bit random at this point.
This morning I got my first rejection letter (email, actually), which I very much appreciate. It's the first feedback I have gotten from anybody but a few close friends, and it gives me plenty to think about.
Here's the entire message:
I've always been a pretty good writer and I am happy with the writing here; this is my first foray into lengthy fiction, so I have some adjusting to do, but I feel like I am getting better as I proceed. I've written just over 70,000 words at this point and I'm pleased with the story and feel I've covered most of what I wanted to address. I thought the architecture was pretty good, too, though I'll need to think more about that now.
Hi Howard: Thanks so much for sending us your novel and for your incredible patience while we took a look at it. I've read, and so have a few of my other colleagues, and we have to say, this was a tough call. Your writing is wonderful--great dialogue, descriptions, touches that we found very engaging. The issue for us is that we feel that the disconnected nature of the structure (which we understand was entirely intentional and part of the novelty of the, well, novel) was not as successful for us as we would have liked. It had the effect of reading like short stories rather than an integrated book that works as a whole. Now, I have to say, that this is entirely subjective--our opinion is based on what we think we can successfully sell and market in this tough publishing world, and if we're not clear on how to position it and market it, we're not the right agents.
So we will thankfully and regretfully pass. We so appreciate your kindness in letting us consider it, and wish you great success with it (which would certainly be in keeping with your incredible career).
My friends who are published authors agree that I should try to get an agent even before I feel like the book is finished, mainly to help inform me about the current publishing environment, timing, competition, etc.
If you have any ideas, please let me know: howard.weaver (at) gmail.com
And thanks. - September 16, 05:24 PM
-
August 17, 11:15 AM
One-book novelists and perpetual panelists
Apropos of "one-book novelists" wherever we find them, this note from one of the best American writers most people have never read:
-
August 14, 10:30 PM
"people are like, screw you."
I’m trying to figure out what I think about copyright and IP law. I have conflicted feelings.
But it’s clear to me David Bryne is right about this much:“Major labels aren’t doing well because they put out terrible records for years and years and kept raising the price of those terrible records and finally people were like, ‘Screw You.’ “ -
August 06, 03:01 PM
My car ride with Jeremy Roenick
The best hockey in the world – the World Junior championships – came to Anchorage in 1989 and I missed very little of the 28-game, eight nation contest. It’s always a treat to watch the youngest, most ambitious stars from the globe’s best hockey nations play with intensity and style, and in 1989 the talent line-up was especially wonderful.
In the course of that tourney I got to watch future NHL stars like Pavel Bure, Alexander Mogilny, Teemu Selänne, Rod Brind’Amour, Martin Gelinas, Sergei Zubov, Sergei Federov and Reg Savage play on young, swift legs in an all-out attempt to prove themselves. There were also a couple of noteworthy Americans on the team that finished a disappointing fifth in the tournament: Jeremey Roenick and Mike Modano, who finished 1-2 in tourney scoring.
I think they were both 18 at the time and had been signed to NHL contracts. I know Modano had, because his bonus had made headlines in the hockey world, a high price tag for a young American skater. He proved himself worth it over a substantial career, much of it with the North Stars.
But the pick of the litter was Roenick, in my view. His statistics will prove Hall Of Fame worthy, in my opinion, but they don’t describe his full worth. Roenick was fast, tough and a fierce competitor, applying back-checks Modano would never dream of. Over the course of a 20-year professional career he always elevated the level of his teams, giving whatever it took, whether throwing down his gloves or leaving defensemen alone and embarrassed after rushing from blueline to blueline to score.
Perhaps most appealing was his irrepressible personality and joie de vivre. Very few hockey players break through to pop culture stardom in the U.S., but Roenick managed. There’s a good retrospective online here.
On the occasion of his retirement, I want to tip my hat in appreciation by sharing a recollection of the time I drove Roenick and Modano around Anchorage. I’m sure neither of them will remember it, and sure I will never forget.
It came during that World Junior tourney at the Sullivan Arena in Anchorage. At an afternoon match not involving the U.S. one day I spotted several American players in the stands, watching and scouting. I joined them, and not long after got into a conversation with Roenick, comparing impressions of the other players and talking briefly about Alaska.
At some point they mentioned that they had to find their way back to the hotel, so I offered a ride. I was excited at the notion of driving around talking hockey with two of the brightest young stars in the country.
At the time I was driving a new red Saab Turbo with butterscotch leather seats, and from the moment the doors opened that’s all they wanted to talk about. How fast would it go? Did I like the front-wheel drive for snow? Could I turn up the stereo and show them how it worked?
I realized then that they were teenage boys, and while their interests certainly included hockey, it was probably third or fourth on the list. I’d guess girls, beer and cars all outranked it.
I dropped them off and probably went back to watch a Finland-Czechoslovakia game or something. Later I’d got to cover one game for the paper (I was the editor, and made the sports department let me) that turned out to be interesting in its own right when an extra puck mysteriously appeared on the ice after Sweden scored against the USSR and nullified the goal. The USSR went on to win the game 3-2 and later the championship, as well.
The whole nine-day tournament is firmly embedded in my memory as the best sporting event I’ve ever watched. A lot of it revolves around Jeremy Roenick, who’s retiring now and “hanging up the ax,” as they said in Slapshot. He’s leaving the rink, bjut I hope he stays in the game.
Thanks, Jeremy. -
August 02, 11:23 PM
What is America's great political novel?
Since I’m trying to write a somewhat political novel, I thought I could profit from rereading a few of them. It’s been fun.
Some I knew well from early exposure: "The Last Hurrah," "Roscoe," "The Fly On the Wall." Others were either lost in the mists of memory or, perhaps, never really read that closely the first time.
Top of that list is "All the King’s Men," a Pulitzer winner for Robert Penn Warren that is (as its cover prominently reminds us) “generally considered the finest American political novel.”
And while it is indisputably a fine novel, here’s the thing I don’t understand: it doesn’t seem like it’s mainly about politics.
Political developments in this novel just happen, apparently emerging full grown from a backstory we never get to see. Things are not arranged, or constructed or negotiated. Except for exceptionally fortuitous scandals The Boss’ muckraker pulls out of his pocket whenever needed, there’s not much rhyme or reason for Willie Stark’s remarkable ability to capture votes and compel cooperation from a legislature we’re told is controlled by his fiercest opponents.
"All the King’s Men" is about force of personality more than anything else, a detailed portrait of the man who navigates from rural, Deep South poverty to the pinnacle of power in his unnamed state. We see him charm and bend and use people repeatedly, but catch only fleeting glimpses of him actually practicing politics.
I’m not finished rereading the book this time around. I’m a slow reader and this is – let’s be honest – a slow story. I’m worried now that my own work is way too once-over-lightly; some of Warren’s central themes have already been explored a half-dozen times in the first couple of hundred pages.
I remember "The Last Hurrah" as a masterpiece about campaigning. "Roscoe" deals a fair amount with actually governing (or at least assembling a machine to govern). "All the King's Men: seems to be portraiture and texture.
But just what is the great American political novel?
All suggestions (especially accompanied by arguments) greatly appreciated. -
July 15, 04:50 PM
The New Liberal Arts

What are the new liberal arts? What does "a liberal arts education" imply nowadays?
That's a discussion educated people everywhere need to be engaged in, helping define what we mean when we think and talk about equipping citizens for life in our times. New Liberal Arts can kick start that conversation.
This slim volume offers a place to stand while pondering, and a few observations about what's worth looking at. You'll encounter thinkers of surprising range and ideas of surprising depth. Chances are you will find it a beginning, certainly not an end.
"Intelligenda longa, vita brevis should be a motto of the information age – life is short, but long indeed the list of things to be known in it." (Richard Lanham, The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts" 1989.
Start learning, thinking and knowing. - July 13, 09:49 AM
-
July 09, 02:28 PM
A message for this time (and all times)
Hope is a state of mind, not of the world. Either we have hope or we don't; it is a dimension of the soul, and it's not essentially dependent on some particular observation of the world or estimate of the situation. Hope is not prognostication. It is an orientation of the spirit, and orientation of the heart; it transcends the world that is immediately experienced, and is anchored somewhere beyond its horizons ...Hope, in this deep and powerful sense, is not the same as joy that things are going well, or willingness to invest in enterprises that are obviously heading for success, but rather an ability to work for something because it is good, not just because it stands a chance to succeed. The more propitious the situation in which we demonstrate hope, the deeper the hope is. Hope is definitely not the same thing as optimism. It is not the conviction that something will turn out well, but the certainty that something makes sense, regardless of how it turns out.-- Vaclav Havel -
July 03, 07:34 PM
The Being of Unbearable Lightness
Owing to my Alaska background, I’ve been asked a few times already today what I think about Sarah Palin’s resignation. I couldn’t fit it into 140 characters (I tried; see below) so I’m expanding a bit here.
I’m in no better shape than anybody else to sort out the “Huh? Why now?” question that’s on everybody’s mind at the moment. I didn’t know Sarah Palin in Alaska; when I left she was 30 years old and nobody much beyond Wasilla knew her name. I know a lot of folks
still active in Alaska politics and public affairs who’ve told me about her, and I’ve watched her meteoric career with grim, embarrassed fascination since the first email alert notified me of her VP selection.
If I was guessing, I’d say “impending further scandal” is just about tied with “selfishly wants spotlight without accountability.” She seems addicted to the adoration of unquestioning zealots, which she can continue to find on a carefully selected lecture circuit; her departure speech was calculated to tap into the conspiratorial obsession that animates the extreme right wing in this country: “they” hounded poor Sarah out of office. In case you hadn’t noticed, “they” also hired a sultry Latina to seduce Mark Sanford, according to wingnuts in South Carolina. You see how this works? The greater your fall or your more profound your ignorance, the more that proves you’re right and the victim of the Liberal Media Complex.
Sarah can make a bunch of money out there, too, if she acts while her star is still bright in those precincts. Don’t underestimate the attraction of sudden wealth on anybody from Alaska – and certainly not from Wasilla.
Far more important is what this spectacular meltdown says about John McCain and the political cynics who played out the rope with which Sarah has now hung herself. Americans have always thought McCain a decent man; if he has a shred of it left, he’s sobbing himself to sleep tonight about this proof of how recklessly he sought the presidency. Bill Kristol and other discredited neocons who saw her as an empty vessel into which they could pour their own ambitions rolled the dice on the country’s security by backing her – thank God they lost that wager.
It pains me as a native-born Alaskan with 45 winters experience there to think what my home state must look like to Americans now. Sarah Palin, Frank Murkowski, Ted Stevens and their posses do honestly reflect what Alaska became in recent years, but they don’t represent the best of it. Somewhere in the vastness and grandeur of that most beautiful place there is something much finer, more decent, and more admirable. Perhaps it will now rise again.Early @howardweaver Tweets:
David Gergen: "I think most of us long ago gave up trying to figure out what goes on in Sarah Palin's head." Whoa. (via @brianstelter)
Surely, somewhere, John McCain is shaking his head and sobbing silently.
Anchorage Daily News held contest to name Palin's upcoming autobiography. One favorite: "The Being of Unbearable Lightness."
People are speculating about Sarah Palin and reality TV. I'm thinking surreality TV might be a better fit.
Scandal's always good bet in cases like Palin resignation. But I think she's become addicted to adoring crowds of zealots, will seek more.
Basic logic in Palin statement: I love Alaska so much I have to quit half-way thru to ensure success. Seriously disconnected from reality.
Palin quotes in Anch Daily News really sound like she's gonna run, at least campaign. Another disastrous decision, IMO. http://bit.ly/42gki
Here's my bet as 40-yr Alaskan: Palin either has a big scandal about to break, or wants to make as much money as possible while she's hot. - May 31, 01:40 PM
-
May 02, 11:14 AM
Gurney to the Dark Side

Peter Dunlap-Shohl is one of the freshest and most distinctive voices around. Typically presented as strikingly original cartoons and animation, his views and reliably progressive but not predictably knee-jerk.
Apparently unsatisfied by trying to chronicle Alaska politics, national idiocy and his own journey through Parkinson's, he's now tackled another modest topic: the quest for a civilized health care policy in the United States.
It's new. Click on the logo above to come along on his journey from the beginning. -
May 01, 07:17 PM
I'll be back
When I left McClatchy for what I refer to as my "post-employment period," I intended to wean myself from journalism blogging and write more personally here.I still intend to, but I am also trying to write fiction, and find that leaves me with little energy or attention for this at the moment. For those few of you who still stop by to check: apologies.I do intend to pick up here again, perhaps before long. In the meantime, I write about journalism when I can't help it, and Twitter more than I should: @howardweaver. - March 03, 05:23 PM
-
February 23, 12:40 PM
Masters Class: how Michael Lewis likes to write
I found this short interview via kottke.org on a site called Daily Routines. Michael Lewis is one of my favorite book-length journalists (probably the best in the game right now) and so his style is of particular interest to me.
The most interesting single tidbit here? For me, it's the fact that he writes without his notes – "as if I were writing a novel" – and then goes back later to check his notes and ensure accuracy. This makes great intuitive sense to me, but I've never heard anybody else cop to it.
How do you begin writing?Fitfully. I'll write something, but it won't be the beginning or the middle or the end -- I'm just getting an idea out on the page. Then, as the words accumulate, I start thinking about how they need to be organized.
What is in front of you when you begin to write?Nothing, except for the computer screen. I write from memory, as if I were writing a novel. When I finish a day's writing I go back and check the text against my notes to make sure the facts and quotes are right, and that I haven't inadvertently made anything up. The quotes are almost always accurate because by that point I've gone over the material so many times in my head.
Is there any time of day you like to write?I've always written best very early in the morning and very late at night. I write very little in the middle of the day. If I do any work in the middle of the day, it is editing what I've written that morning.
What would your ideal writing day look like?Left to my own devices, with no family, I'd start writing at seven p.m. and stop at four a.m. That is the way I used to write. I liked to get ahead of everybody. I'd think to myself, "I'm starting tomorrow's workday, tonight!" Late nights are wonderfully tranquil. No phone calls, no interruptions. I like the feeling of knowing that nobody is trying to reach me.
Is there anywhere you need to be in order to write?No, I've written in every conceivable circumstance. I like writing in my office, which is an old redwood cabin about a hundred yards from my house in Berkeley. It has a kitchen, a little bedroom, a bathroom, and a living room, which I use as as study. But I've written in awful enough situations that I know that the quality of the prose doesn't depend on the circumstance in which it is composed. I don't believe the muse visits you. I believe that you visit the muse. If you wait for that "perfect moment" you're not going to be very productive.
Robert Boynton, The New New Journalism -
February 20, 11:20 PM
“Between a high, solid wall and an egg that breaks against it, I will always stand on the side of the egg.”
Here's an extraordinary, short speech by Japanese novelist Haruki Murakami by way of Robin at Snarkmarket. I've not read any of his work, and wouldn't have heard about this "Jerusalem Prize" if not for Robin, but I find the remarks powerfully resonate on several levels. It puts into clear words and vivid images much of what I believe about fiction, and about life.
It's short, and the link seems to be to a mainly Japanese site, so I'm posting the full text here:
“Jerusalem Prize” Remarks
by Haruki Murakami
Good evening. I have come to Jerusalem today as a novelist, which is to say as a professional spinner of lies.
Of course, novelists are not the only ones who tell lies. Politicians do it, too, as we all know. Diplomats and generals tell their own kinds of lies on occasion, as do used car salesmen, butchers and builders. The lies of novelists differ from others, however, in that no one criticizes the novelist as immoral for telling lies. Indeed, the bigger and better his lies and the more ingeniously he creates them, the more he is likely to be praised by the public and the critics. Why should that be?
My answer would be this: namely, that by telling skillful lies--which is to say, by making up fictions that appear to be true--the novelist can bring a truth out to a new place and shine a new light on it. In most cases, it is virtually impossible to grasp a truth in its original form and depict it accurately. This is why we try to grab its tail by luring the truth from its hiding place, transferring it to a fictional location, and replacing it with a fictional form. In order to accomplish this, however, we first have to clarify where the truth-lies within us, within ourselves. This is an important qualification for making up good lies.
Today, however, I have no intention of lying. I will try to be as honest as I can. There are only a few days in the year when I do not engage in telling lies, and today happens to be one of them.
So let me tell you the truth. In Japan a fair number of people advised me not to come here to accept the Jerusalem Prize. Some even warned me they would instigate a boycott of my books if I came. The reason for this, of course, was the fierce fighting that was raging in Gaza. The U.N. reported that more than a thousand people had lost their lives in the blockaded city of Gaza, many of them unarmed citizens--children and old people.
Any number of times after receiving notice of the award, I asked myself whether traveling to Israel at a time like this and accepting a literary prize was the proper thing to do, whether this would create the impression that I supported one side in the conflict, that I endorsed the policies of a nation that chose to unleash its overwhelming military power. Neither, of course, do I wish to see my books subjected to a boycott.
Finally, however, after careful consideration, I made up my mind to come here. One reason for my decision was that all too many people advised me not to do it. Perhaps, like many other novelists, I tend to do the exact opposite of what I am told. If people are telling me-- and especially if they are warning me-- “Don’t go there,” “Don’t do that,” I tend to want to “go there” and “do that”. It’s in my nature, you might say, as a novelist. Novelists are a special breed. They cannot genuinely trust anything they have not seen with their own eyes or touched with their own hands.
And that is why I am here. I chose to come here rather than stay away. I chose to see for myself rather than not to see. I chose to speak to you rather than to say nothing.
Please do allow me to deliver a message, one very personal message. It is something that I always keep in mind while I am writing fiction. I have never gone so far as to write it on a piece of paper and paste it to the wall: rather, it is carved into the wall of my mind, and it goes something like this:
“Between a high, solid wall and an egg that breaks against it, I will always stand on the side of the egg.”
Yes, no matter how right the wall may be and how wrong the egg, I will stand with the egg. Someone else will have to decide what is right and what is wrong; perhaps time or history will do it. But if there were a novelist who, for whatever reason, wrote works standing with the wall, of what value would such works be?
What is the meaning of this metaphor? In some cases, it is all too simple and clear. Bombers and tanks and rockets and white phosphorus shells are that high wall. The eggs are the unarmed civilians who are crushed and burned and shot by them. This is one meaning of the metaphor.
But this is not all. It carries a deeper meaning. Think of it this way. Each of us is, more or less, an egg. Each of us is a unique, irreplaceable soul enclosed in a fragile shell. This is true of me, and it is true of each of you. And each of us, to a greater or lesser degree, is confronting a high, solid wall. The wall has a name: it is “The System.” The System is supposed to protect us, but sometimes it takes on a life of its own, and then it begins to kill us and cause us to kill others--coldly, efficiently, systematically.
I have only one reason to write novels, and that is to bring the dignity of the individual soul to the surface and shine a light upon it. The purpose of a story is to sound an alarm, to keep a light trained on the System in order to prevent it from tangling our souls in its web and demeaning them. I truly believe it is the novelist’s job to keep trying to clarify the uniqueness of each individual soul by writing stories--stories of life and death, stories of love, stories that make people cry and quake with fear and shake with laughter. This is why we go on, day after day, concocting fictions with utter seriousness.
My father passed away last year at the age of ninety. He was a retired teacher and a part-time Buddhist priest. When he was in graduate school in Kyoto, he was drafted into the army and sent to fight in China. As a child born after the war, I used to see him every morning before breakfast offering up long, deeply-felt prayers at the small Buddhist altar in our house. One time I asked him why he did this, and he told me he was praying for the people who had died in the battlefield. He was praying for all the people who died, he said, both ally and enemy alike. Staring at his back as he knelt at the altar, I seemed to feel the shadow of death hovering around him.
My father died, and with him he took his memories, memories that I can never know. But the presence of death that lurked about him remains in my own memory. It is one of the few things I carry on from him, and one of the most important.
I have only one thing I hope to convey to you today. We are all human beings, individuals transcending nationality and race and religion, and we are all fragile eggs faced with a solid wall called The System. To all appearances, we have no hope of winning. The wall is too high, too strong--and too cold. If we have any hope of victory at all, it will have to come from our believing in the utter uniqueness and irreplaceability of our own and others’ souls and from our believing in the warmth we gain by joining souls together.
Take a moment to think about this. Each of us possesses a tangible, living soul. The System has no such thing. We must not allow the System to exploit us. We must not allow the System to take on a life of its own. The System did not make us: we made the System.
That is all I have to say to you.
I am grateful to have been awarded the Jerusalem Prize. I am grateful that my books are being read by people in many parts of the world. And I would like to express my gratitude to the readers in Israel. You are the biggest reason why I am here. And I hope we are sharing something, something very meaningful. And I am glad to have had the opportunity to speak to you here today. Thank you very much.
Posts
-
March 15, 02:02 PM
Get 'er done
The Cult of Done Manifesto came from Bre Pettis and Kio Stark. The posters are from Joshua Rothaas and Jim Provost. via Xark
-
March 05, 02:38 PM
Yes, we still consume media, and iPad will make that better
John Battelle and my many friends who can’t wait to disparage the iPad as “passive,” “old-school” or proprietary need to take deep breath and calm down.None of them had such harsh criticisms about the Kindle, a far more restrictive and decidedly more passive device. Most of them carry netbooks that are underpowered, cramped little boxes with almost no aesthetic appeal. Why are they so bothered about the fact that the iPad will (reportedly) be a gorgeous canvas on which all kinds of media — yes, including interactive media — can be enjoyed?Yeah, you won’t use the iPad to create the rich media. So what?Many of them criticize me every time I mention “consumers.” Yet the fact remains that most people — overwhelmingly so — consume most of their media diet; they are not co-creating much of it at all. The stuff they do create — social media, mainly — will work fine on iPad.These critics might consider that a third of the country doesn’t have broadband access. They should look at the statistics that show content creation vs consumption is more lopsided than the standard 80/20 rule of thumb.Until the next-best device comes along, most of us will enjoy having a well-designed, easy to use, highly portable device for reading the new enhanced Penguin books or Condé Nast magazines or whetever other wonderful new media will populate the new ecology.
916.531.4561
Information about Howard -
February 28, 10:54 PM
North American won a game worthy of gold
It started when team USA had a good night in the first round, caught Marty Brodeur napping and got a career game out of a goalie not one person in a million here could name. All of a sudden, we’re a hockey power?Look, I’m an American. I cheered like crazy for the U.S. goal at 41 seconds and I was hoarse way before the empty-netter. But I come from Alaska, where city all-star teams from Anchorage used to get creamed by Whitehorse, and it’s gonna take more than one Olympic victory to bedazzle me.All over America the following morning, people who don’t know icing from offsides were crowing about USA Hockey. Headline writers had a field day with puns and insults (U.S. eh U.S. eh U.S. eh).It was a big deal, no doubt. The initial game set a record for viewership in the Great White North; according to Canada’s Olympic Broadcast Media Consortium, an average audience of 10.6 million viewers watched the showdown, beating the 2002 Salt Lake City Canada-U.S. gold-medal game’s 10.3 million viewers.In the U.S. it was hockey’s biggest TV audience in 37 years, matching MSNBC’s rating on election-night: Obama (Canada) vs McCain (USA), in case you don’t remember.A question, then: where were all these fans in 2006, when USA Hockey lost to Russia, Sweden, Finland, Slovokia and (no shit) Latvia. (We did beat Kazakhstan, though).I’m proud of the strides USA Hockey has made since I was a kid in used skates, but I’m also a realist. I was cheering for the Yanks on Sunday, but I put my money on the Canadians.In Alaska we learned to be realistic about the appropriate relationship between Canadian and U.S. hockey. At college games in Anchorage, our section had a regular chant that went like this: “Our Canadians can beat your Canadians.” (Most of the good U.S. college teams in those days had a lot of Canadian players, mostly guys who weren’t good enough to play juniors back home.)Speaking as a former goalie, I felt a shudder when I heard Mike Babcock had benched Martin Brodeur after the loss. Remember 1980, when the Yanks scored a couple of quick goals and USSR coach Viktor Tikhonov replaced Vladislav Tretiak in the net between periods, putting the world’s best goalie (and, it turns out, his chances for victory) on the bench?The bottom line was this: Canada had the best goalie on the planet sitting on the bench in a baseball cap. How could that be good?I wore sweater number 30 myself long enough to know that Brodeur could easily win enough games on his own to capture gold. There’s no denying that Roberto Luongo pulled rabbits from hats on the way to the showdown (Germany doesn’t count) and proved he really is the “money goalie” his fans adore. He wasn’t especially sharp in the medal game, but he had enough left when it mattered.The All Stars on the ice Sunday were mostly Canadians, but there were great hockey players on both sides of the line. It made you proud just to be a North American.While the U.S. served notice that American hockey is for real, Canada continues to be the deepest, richest talent pool on Planet Hockey. The things you love about Canada today will still be true tomorrow.This column published in The Badger newspaper, Leader, Saskatchewan. -
January 30, 04:18 PM
The iPad will help news most when it disappears
Both in anticipation of and reaction to the Apple iPad, people playing the Future of News Game tended toward superlatives. It would save traditional models, some said, by making Plain Old Newsprint pretty and shiny and worth charging for. Others looked at the missing Flash plugin and multitasking capability and dismissed the device as irrelevant.
They’re both wrong—and the truth isn’t somewhere halfway in-between them, either.Here’s the most important thing about the iPad: it can be one of the biggest steps yet toward taking the technology out of our way and letting human beings get on with communicating, creating and consuming news. In much the same way the desktop metaphor and mouse made computer power more accessible than the command line, iPad’s touchscreen, instant-on availability, intuitive interface and extreme portability promise still greater opportunity.If the Macintosh was “the computer for the rest of us” (and it was), maybe the iPad will be “networks for the rest of us.” If it’s easy, intuitive and relatively cheap to experience constantly updated Facebook and Twitter and the New York Times on a bright, colorful screen, doesn’t it make sense that more people will do so?The technoids who instantly set upon the iPad for what’s missing — Flash, total multitasking, no camera, no SD slot, yada, yada — don’t get it. Apple didn’t build the iPad for them (although I’ll bet most will end up owning one). They built it for the people who love it when technology “just works.” (It’s also illuminating to see what these critics had to say about the iPhone in version 1.0; they look silly now. By the time iPad cycles through a few software and firmware updates, today’s arguments will be even more hollow.)It’s also obvious that expecting a miracle cure for what ails newspapers and magazines is deeply stupid. The fact that the iPad’s roughly the shape of a published page, or that it will be used primary by holding it in your hands doesn’t offer any new hope for content created by hierarchical, top-down newsrooms that haven’t figured out consumers are in control. People will get news about subjects they want, when they want it—and many will be creating it, as well. What the iPad’s likely to mean for them is that they’ll get what they want easier and consume it more pleasurably—but it will be what they value, not what a gatekeeper decides to give them.Here’s what I think—and devoutly hope—will happen: the iPad (and even better devices sure to follow) will enrich human beings by removing technological barriers.For all their failings, newspapers were equally accessible to everybody who could read: cheap, portable, intuitive, ubiquitous. Poor boys had about the same chance as bankers to keep up with the news. Good newspapers worked to shape content to meet a wide range of interests—football scores and shipping schedules and how-they-voted charts—because they knew a lot of different people would be looking through the window those pages opened.Alan Kay, the computer visionary who famously declared Macintosh “the first computer worth criticizing, hasn’t weighed in directly on the iPad as far as I know. It’s hard to imagine that he won’t see it a significant realization of his Dynabook dream, a tool that makes information and communication ubiquitous and makes devices disappear.In the middle 1980s, Kay visited Alaska for a lecture and was interviewed in the Anchorage Daily News, articulating intoxicating ideas that helped awaken me to the brewing information revolution. He was careful even then to caution against focusing too much on devices. “The music’s not in the piano,” he said. “If it was, we’d have to let it vote.”When iPads start arriving two months from now, we’ll be a lot closer to realizing his long-time vision.The device is becoming as simple as a newspaper—and infinitely more capable. It’s now up to producers to be sure what they offer thrives in a world where accessing their work (or a competitor’s) is as easy as picking up a book, or the newspaper. - January 19, 04:26 PM
-
January 16, 02:43 PM
Recalling great letters to the editor
Twitter conversation this morning featured a fabulous letter to the editor in the Minneapolis Star Tribune from Satan, setting Pat Robertson straight on some of the Haiti developments. Some called it the greatest letter ever.
I agree it’s a contender, but I know of two I like better. One, from the Anchorage Daily News, was short enough to Tweet. (Indeed, we used to show it to writers who complained at the 250-word limit).
In total: “I smoke pot. So what? Put me in jail. I can get it there.”
My all-time favorite requires some backstory, also from Alaska. I was running a political alt-weekly (The Alaska Advocate) during a multi-candidate gubernatorial primary in the late 1970s. We received an astonishing letter from a reader in Seward, Alaska (1980 population: 1.800). As I recall his name was Robert White.
In the form of an epic poem — all in carefully rhymed iambic pentameter — he dealt with the candidacies of eight or 10 contenders. One was Lt. Gov. Lowell Thomas, Jr. (yes, the son of that Lowell Thomas). He was in the news at the time for having returned from a junket to South Africa to tell a reporter he didn’t think blacks there were ready for the vote. When he tried to extricate himself from that, he said in a later interview that he guessed he was just old fashioned because it still bothered him to see a white woman walking down the street with a black man.
Two verses (of many) from my favorite letter ever:
Then there’s the son of
old Lowell Thomas.
One would have thought him
a man of great promise.
Perhaps he’ll be mayor
of South Africa’s Pretoria.
Auf Weidersein, junior:
sic transit gloria.
-
January 11, 02:36 PM
Agreeing (mainly) about the future of news
When preliminary news of Pew’s study of news generation in Baltimore came out last night — before release of the study itself, let us note — there was a flurry of uninformed commentary (including my own) in some media Twitter streams.Some seemed to dismiss the unseen report without looking at it, describing it as inconsequential. Another went further, not only dismissing the announced findings but characterizing them as flawed and misleading—before reading them.I whined some about that, and thought I’d sit down this morning to read the report and write something in context about what the findings do or don’t suggest to those of us pondering the future of “news.” I was relieved to discover that I wouldn’t need to since somebody else beat me to it: Jeff Jarvis.Of course I don’t agree with every nuance of Jeff’s analysis. Well, okay, I disagree strongly with some of it. But the point is that he’s made a plain case based on the actual results and stated his interpretations clearly. He has accurately and usefully fixed this study as one point in an evolving process; he has moved the discussion forward. I’m going to embrace that and not fuss about whether I agree with every paragraph or claim.We agree about where any conclusions are weakest: As Jeff points out, the contemporary definition of “news” is, essentially, “that which the news media reports.” Given that, it would be startling for a study to find that most of it came from anywhere else. Or, as Jeff says, “No shit.”And a lot of that “news” is lame (and has been for a long time): repetitive, incremental, institutionally focused, falsely “balanced” (dare I say “savvy”?). He didn’t say it in this piece, but I feel sure Jeff and I also agree in hoping new voices, new methods and new standards will help produce more journalism done for consumers, not to them.I think Pew did a good job of selecting the six targeted stories to probe: they are generally substantive local news that an engaged citizen would want to know about. Everywhere I’ve examined (which includes a lot of McClatchy newspaper cities beyond my own) a huge majority of such coverage originates with traditional outlets and then gets picked up, commented on, spun and sometimes extended by non-traditional news voices. It is still rare to find an exception, as with the Talking Points Memo work on the U.S. attorneys’ scandal — though new institutions like California Watch, Pro Publica et al are changing that.I can’t help objecting to conclusions unsupported by critical thinking, but I will try to save that for substantive transgressions. I’m going to try hard not to nitpick or lecture about these subjects from now on. I know I have done, and I know it isn’t effective. Apologies to those who felt aggrieved, and especially to readers who had to wade through it in search of occasional nuggets.FInaly, @jeffjarvis and I also agree, fundamentally, about this from his post:"We must keep mind that we are at the dawn, the very dawn of the new news ecosystem … just beginning to see experimentation with the form of news, moving past the articles the study measures. News is becoming more of a process than a product; it is being disseminated in new ways thanks to search and social and algorithmic links. News is changing."
-
January 09, 09:01 PM
Holding pundits accountable
Macintosh blogger John Gruber (Daring Fireball, @gruber) does a great job saving computer pundit predictions and waiting long enough to expose how stupid they are with a feature he calls “Claim Chowder.”
It’s vastly entertaining — and educational, too. Seeing how dumb these guys were about the iPhone, iTunes, App Store, iPod etc. helps you calibrate how much attention their new predictions deserve. (Answer: between slim and none).
Why don’t journalists do this for all kinds of predictions? This time of year is filled with them, from politics to pop culture to tech. Wouldn’t it be a public service to track how they fare?
-
January 01, 10:11 PM
Moonlighty
I Should Have KnownLast night I left the moonlightIn the hope that I would find youIn Andromeda or Cygnus,Or perhaps onFormalhaut.On a hunch, I traveled quicklyTo the Pleiades, my heartland,Thinking you were also searching;But alas, IFound you not.When the hour grew late, I hastened,Barely stopping at Antares,Skipping Sirius entirely,Once unheard ofOn these trips.I left messages on SaturnOn my way back home, disheartened,Where I found "Que bella luna!"In the moonlight,On your lips.CSB/11-4-88 -
January 01, 08:28 PM
The fences were down. The institutions that strung them were in disgrace...
We had grown up with the myth of the open range, with that unreflective, visceral cowboy hatred for fences, and, just for that moment, the fences were down. The institutions that strung them were in disgrace, and the borders were open: the president was a crook; the generals were losers; corporate culture was in disarray; and the universities were irrelevant. So there was a sense of making it up as you went along, with new rules in a new place, where , if you wished, you could bring your Deleuze and your Stratocaster, too. And there was plenty of sleazy fame to go around -- except that, back then, it was still the colossal joke that Warhol intended it to be, still marketing and not yet a religion.
– Dave Hickey
From the essay “Magazine Writer” in Air Guitar (p116)
916.531.4561
More about me -
December 22, 12:00 AM
This is health reform failure?
I'm no expert, so please help me out here: how does this package (roughly what Senate is set to pass and congruent on major issues with the House) amount to the "failure" critics are citing?
- Brings health insurance to 31 million additional Americans
- lowers Medicare costs
- taxes insurance industry and premium plans to pay costs
- Increases payroll taxes for >200k/yr individuals
- govt assistance for families ≤ $88k income
- expands Medicaid to poor
- limits out-of-pocket costs to individuals, families
- Reforms insurance industry in significant ways
- - no prior condition denials
- - can't withdraw coverage after you're sick
- - allows non-profit co-ops to compete
- CUTS DEFICIT BY $132 BILLION in 10 years, more in 10 after that (CBO)
- December 18, 01:48 PM
-
December 18, 12:50 PM
Hegemony Watch, Google & Yelp edition
From an earlier post on my media blog, this point speaks to the Yelp acquisition:Newspapers were protected against competition by barriers like the expense of presses and costs of delivery. Google’s supremacy grows form the fact that it makes so much money on its brilliant, friction-free advertising it can give away billions of dollars worth of services — YouTube, Maps, Gmail — to create and protect a self-serving ecosystem that keeps Google at the center. Meanwhile, its search pages and algorithmic Google News aggregation have become a crucial source of news distribution that gain strength every day.
Net result? Google now combines the equivalent of yesterday’s newspaper monopolies with control of today’s state-of-the-art distribution system.
916.531.4561
Information about Howard - December 16, 06:38 PM
-
October 08, 12:45 AM
We like deer – but not here
We’re going to build a deer fence around these four raised beds, and wonder if anybody has ideas about how to make it look nice? It’s not a huge area, maybe 30X40 or so. We’d love to see examples.
- September 18, 11:14 PM
-
September 18, 11:08 PM
A new tool at the ranch
Today Barb came back from Placerville Hardware (repeutedly the oldest continuously operating hardware store west of the Mississippi, a relic of the California Gold Rush) with a new toy tool. It's a hand-driven apple peeler and corer, a completely hman-powered, luddite tool that pleases her greatly.
It pleases me, too: we had a wonderful apple crumble for dessert tonight, made from the Redwing orchard apples in these photos. -
September 18, 11:00 PM
Blessed are the cheesemakers
Yesterday I did something I never thought I could do. I made ricotta cheese. Fresh milk, cream, a little salt and lemon. It was amazingly simple and very satisfying. Today I think of myself as an artisan cheese maker. It's a good feeling. Goat cheese tomorrow.
-
September 17, 09:56 PM
More treats from the ranch
House-made riccota and fresh-picked sage flavor squash ravioli.
Howard Weaver
twitter = @howardweaver
quantumdice.blogspot.com
editor.blogspot.com
Apologies: this message typed with my thumbs. -
September 09, 10:18 PM
A storm blowing in from paradise
A Klee painting named ‘Angelus Novus’ shows an angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread. This is how one pictures the angel of history. His face is turned toward the past. Where we perceive a chain of events, he sees one single catastrophe which keeps piling wreckage and hurls it in front of his feet. The angel would like to stay, awaken the dead, and make whole what has been smashed. But a storm is blowing in from Paradise; it has got caught in his wings with such a violence that the angel can no longer close them. The storm irresistibly propels him into the future to which his back is turned, while the pile of debris before him grows skyward. This storm is what we call progress.
–Walter Benjamin
On the Concept of History
916.531.4561
My digital lifestream
Posts
- March 09, 12:37 PM
-
March 09, 01:33 PM
Web Standards for E-books
Joe Clark lays out the case for using an HTML format as a Web standard for e-books. It's an obviously brilliant and necessary thing, but will publishers see proprietary formatting as a form of de facto DRM? - March 03, 02:53 PM
-
February 26, 01:01 PM
Operational transparency
Shared by howardweaver
Jeff jarvis on an essential transformation: to transparency.I am in Tampa waiting to fly back home to New Jersey and, thanks to the snowicane but rather than sitting in the usual information vacuum to which airlines subject us, I am watching as Continental shows us the status of the flights that were supposed to bring our jet in from LA to Cleveland to Newark to Tampa. I saw the flight to Cleveland canceled, then the one to Newark canceled, and I figured we were doomed when I saw the aircraft number for my flight erased. But then I saw us assigned a new jet, one that flew into Tampa from Houston last night.
That’s simply amazing. Continental is practicing operational transparency. It opened up information is already has to us, the customers, so we can be informed and empowered. This way, I’m not cursing the airline and its employees. I’m well aware that our flight might be canceled and that’s entirely out of Continental’s control, so I wouldn’t blame them. But every time this has happened in the past, I hated being in the dark; I hated being lied to by airlines; I simply want more information. And now an airline is giving it to me. Bravo for Continental.
What information does your company have that you can and should share with your customers?
The essence of Google’s value is that — though it’s opaque about its algorithms and ad splits — it turns around the information it gathers from us and feeds it back to us (that is, our aggregate links and clicks inform its search results for everyone). OpenTable lets us know when tables are open in restaurants so we can plan on our own. In What Would Google Do? I suggest that a Googley restaurant should share data on how many people order each dish on a menu so we can use that to choose what we want. A manufacturer should expose the provenance of the component parts that go into its products. A newspaper should footnote its work so we can know the provenance of its information and we can judge the sources. A store could reveal its inventory so we know there’s only one left (better hurry). I say we should expect doctors and hospitals to reveal data about the patients they treat. What else?
Jeff jarvis on an essential transformation: to transparency.
- February 24, 04:56 PM
-
February 24, 12:19 PM
The Google/China hacking case: How many news outlets do the original reporting on a big story?
Shared by howardweaver
12 of 13 genuine journalistic stories produced by traditional organization. Duh.
We often talk about the new news ecosystem — the network of traditional outlets, new startups, nonprofits, and individuals who are creating and filtering the news. But how is the work of reporting divvied up among the members of that ecosystem?
To try to build a datapoint on that question, I chose a single big story and read every single version listed on Google News to see who was doing the work. Out of the 121 distinct versions of last week’s story about tracing Google’s recent attackers to two schools in China, 13 (11 percent) included at least some original reporting. And just seven organizations (six percent) really got the full story independently.
But as usual, things are a little more subtle than that. I chose the Google-China story because it’s complex, international, sensitive, and important. It’s the sort of big story that requires substantial investigative effort, perhaps including inside sources and foreign-language reporting. Call it a stress test for our reporting infrastructure, a real-life worst case.
The New York Times broke the story last Thursday, writing that unnamed sources involved in the investigation of last year’s hacking of a number of American companies had traced the attacks to a prestigious technical university and a vocational college in mainland China. The article included comment from representatives of the schools and, while it had a San Francisco dateline, credited contributions from Shanghai staff. Immediately, the story was everywhere. Just about every major American newspaper and all the wires covered it.
When I started investigating the issue on Monday morning, Google News showed 800 different reports. But how many of these reports actually brought new information to light? By default, Google does not display duplicate copies of syndicated (or stolen) content, bringing the total down to more than 100 unique pieces of copy. I read each one, and several hours later, I had a spreadsheet recording the sourcing for each story. I also recorded the country of publication, the dateline or contributor location if noted, and the primary publishing medium of each outlet (paper, online, radio, etc.) An excerpt of this data is reproduced in the table below.
Here’s what I found:
— Out of 121 unique stories, 13 (11 percent) contained some amount of original reporting. I counted a story as containing original reporting if it included at least an original quote. From there, things get fuzzy. Several reports, especially the more technical ones, also brought in information from obscure blogs. In some sense they didn’t publish anything new, but I can’t help feeling that these outlets were doing something worthwhile even so. Meanwhile, many newsrooms diligently called up the Chinese schools to hear exactly the same denial, which may not be adding much value.
— Only seven stories (six percent) were primarily based on original reporting. These were produced by The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, Tech News World, Bloomberg, Xinhua (China), and the Global Times (China).
— Of the 13 stories with original reporting, eight were produced by outlets that primarily publish on paper, four were produced by wire services, and one was produced by a primarily online outlet. For this story, the news really does come from newspapers.
— 14 reports (12 percent) were produced by Chinese outlets, had a China dateline, or mentioned the assistance of staff in China. For a story about China, that seems awfully low to me. Perhaps this has to do with cutbacks of foreign correspondents?
— Nine reports (7 percent) mentioned no source at all. Five more were partially unsourced. Given the ease of hyperlinks, this frightens me.
— Google News tended to rank solid original stories fairly high in its list. Google says they rank stories based on criteria such as the reputation of a source, number of references by other articles, and the headline clickthrough rate — though they won’t reveal exactly how it’s done. The spreadsheet and table below list stories in the order that Google News ranked them.
— Google’s story-clustering algorithm included three unrelated stories and missed at least one original report. The three extraneous stories were about Google and China, but not about the recent trace. The exclusion of the Financial Times’ excellent piece is a disappointment — perhaps this has something to do with their paywall? Maybe I’m biased because, as a computer scientist, I appreciate the difficulty of the problem — but I actually think this means that Google News works remarkably well, for a completely unsupervised algorithm that crawls billions of pages to find millions of stories in dozens of languages.
— What were those other 100 reporters doing? When I think of how much human effort when into re-writing those hundred other unique stories that contained no original reporting, I cringe. That’s a huge amount of journalistic effort that could have gone into reporting other deserving stories. Why are we doing this? What are the legal, technical, economic and cultural barriers to simply linking to the best version of each story and moving on?
— The punchline is that no English-language outlet picked up the original reporting of Chinese-language Qilu Evening News, which was even helpfully translated by Hong Kong blogger Roland Soong. A Chinese reporter visited one of the schools in question and advanced the story by clarifying that serious hackers were unlikely to have been trained in the vocational computer classes offered there. Soong told me that Lanxiang Vocational School is well known in China for their cheesy late-night commercials and low-quality schooling — more of an educational chop shop for cooks and mechanics than the training ground for military hackers than the Times claims.
Tracing one story doesn’t prove anything conclusive beyond that one story, of course. And using Google News as a filter doesn’t truly represent the new news ecosystem: It excludes lots of smaller blogs and other outlets. Soong said Google News told him that his site is not eligible for inclusion in their results because they don’t include small blogs written by a single author. This seems like an arbitrary distinction, but it’s hard to imagine what defensible choice Google could make in an era where the definition of a news source is so up for grabs.
The table below is an extract from the data I collected, with original reporting highlighted. The full spreadsheet also includes country of publication, primary medium for each organization, and lists whether or not each story hyperlinked to its sources.
Article Sources Dateline Calgary Herald Xinhua, NYT (via AFP) ABC AP, Xinhua Shanghai Xinhua original Shanghai MarketWatch NYT, Xinhua San Francisco Reuters Xinhua, NYT Shanghai OneIndia China Daily, NYT (via ANI) Bejing Economic Times ? Washington PC Magazine Blogs NYT Washington Post original, NYT Bejing Times Online NYT Washington Information Week NYT, original FOX News NYT (via AP) The Canadian Press NYT (via AP) Taipei Times (via NYT) San Francisco The Register NYT, Guardian UK, blog The Inquirer AP MarketWatch NYT San Francisco ComputerWorld NYT, blog Telegraph UK NYT PC World NYT, Xinhua Telegraph UK NYT Los Angeles Wall Street Journal original, Xinhua, NYT The Guardian NYT, original Business Week (Bloomberg) Washington AFP NYT New York Reuters NYT New York New York Times original San Francisco, Shanghai Daily Contributor PC World CCTV China Daily, NYT, original Australia Network News Xinhua, NYT After Dawn ?, NYT Top News NYT Daily Latest News ? Press Trust of India China Daily, NYT Bejing UPI NYT New York Security Pro News ? Gizmodo NYT Tom’s Guide NYT Digital Media Wire NYT Mountain View Tech News World original, NYT Global Times original, “agencies” io9 NYT, Guardian ZD Net NYT Benzinga NYT Fox Business NYT CrunchGear NYT AOL News NYT, Guardian, WSJ Tech Blorge NYT KLIV NYT Silicon Valley eWeek NYT TMCnet NYT News.am NYT Chattabox NYT Datamation NYT The New New Internet NYT IT Pro Portal Business Week, Telegraph, PC World The Hill NYT Grab Geek Points NYT DBTechno NYT Boston IT Chuiko NYT All Things Digital NYT Before It’s News NYT V3 ? San Jose Business Journal NYT Help Net Security NYT Channel Web NYT Marketing Pilgrim NYT The Money Times NYT TG Daily NYT, Guardian ABH News NYT, ? Top News NYT, ? PCR NYT Top News NYT Daily Finance NYT, Hacker Journals Shuttervoice ? Thinq NYT Top News NYT New York Magazine NYT Venture Beat NYT Fast Company NYT Gather News NYT Newser NYT NASDAQ NYT (via Dow Jones Newswire) Reuters Xinhua Shanghai PC World NYT, Xinhua Herald Sun NYT, Xnhua (via AFP) Bejing The Hindu ? The Times of India ? Daily Mail NYT PC World NYT, blogs ComputerWorld NYT (via IDG) News.com.au NYT The Globe and Mail NYT, original (via Reuters) 9News NYT Redmond Pie NYT,? Red Orbit NYT New Public NYT Sydney Morning Herald NYT (via AP) Gulf Times NYT MyNews Xinhua, NYT (via Indo Asian News) Zeenews (India) NYT, Xinhua (via PTI) The Tech Herald NYT, Guardian Bejing Web Pro News Financial Tines, NYT Business Insider NYT The Financial Express original, NYT (via Bloomberg) Tech Eye NYT, ? CIO NYT, WSJ (via IDG) Tech Blorge NYT, Xinhua CNET NYT, Xinhua ZD Net NYT, Washington Post China Daily NYT, original Bejing News ? What’s on Xiamen NYT, Xinhua NPR NYT San Francisco Chronicle NYT, Xinhua (via AP) Shanghai The Cap Times NYT, AP, Computer World Little About NYT, Xinhua (via Indo Asian News) Jinan Little About NYT, original (via Asian News Intl) Bejing San Francisco Chronicle NYT (via AP) San Francisco Portfolio.com NYT World Market Media ? 12 of 13 genuine journalistic stories produced by traditional organization. Duh.
-
February 22, 08:21 PM
America and torture: no resolution in sight
If you want to have a truly dispiriting, soul-shrinking experience, read Justice Department official David Margolis’s decision to let Jay Bybee and John Yoo off the hook for any professional misconduct in authoring “torture memos” for the Bush White House.
The sad thing is, Margolis’s disagreements with the recommendations of the Office of Professional Responsibility seem reasonable. He takes a critical view of the memos in question. Here’s what he has to say, for example, about Yoo:
I would be remiss in not observing, however, that these memoranda represent an unfortunate chapter in the Office of Legal Counsel. While I have declined OPR’s findings of misconduct, I fear that John Yoo’s loyalty to his own ideology and convictions clouded his view of his obligation to his client and led him to author opinions that reflected his own extreme, albeit sincerely held, views of executive power while speaking for an institutional client. These memoranda suggest that he failed to appreciate the enormous responsibility that comes with authority to issue institutional decisions that carried the authoritative weight of the Department of Justice.
Read further, and Margolis describes a process in which the OPR – going through drafts and responses from the principals – struggles to see how the Bush lawyers’ conduct might violate various ethical and professional codes of the Justice Department, the DC Bar, and other associations. In one of his responses, Yoo taunts the OPR for doing what it says he was doing: trying to make the code fit a predetermined conclusion. Ultimately, Margolis concludes that the standards they were compelled to follow were simply too low:
I conclude the DC rules created an unambiguous obligation on Yoo and Bybee to not provide advice their client that was knowingly or recklessly false or issued in bad faith. While the OLC best practices may require more, failure to meet those standards should result in poor evaluations or administrative disciplinary action, but not bar referrals.
So Yoo and Bybee were not lying or acting in bad faith. They were sincere in their perfidy! And even if they violated the higher standard, it doesn’t rise to the level of disciplinary action from the bar.
The problem here is not that Margolis has an overly bureaucratic sensibility, or even lawyers writing codes of conduct that protect lawyers and lawyerly institutions and not the public trust. It’s that a departmental disciplinary procedure is a terrible venue for adjudicating this issue. And it’s pathetic that we’re stuck looking to this arcane bureaucratic process for some measure of corrective justice here. Of course the result – whatever it was – was going to fall short.
There are many questions here that demand answers. The lack of resolution on torture is a kind of open wound in the body politic. It will fester if left alone. We ought to look backward. Can we determine exactly what went wrong, who was responsible, who violated domestic or international law, and what, if any punishment, they deserve? Is Yoo the villain here? Dick Cheney? Bush? Can we, as a society, agree that something went seriously wrong here? This gets us into the realm not of departmental hair-splitting but South Africa-style truth commissions.
Of course, that’s not going to happen. The more likely outcome is this fades into the background until the next big terror attack. Then all the unresolved issues will erupt in our faces. The intense pressure to “get tough” on prisoners will resume. Ticking time bombs will once again fill our op-ed pages. And because we lack clarity on exactly what the law allows, how institutions should behave, there may be nothing to stop them from going dangerously awry again.

-
February 23, 12:42 PM
HuffPost editor "a big fan of paying student journalists," but won't be doing it
Shared by howardweaver
New York Observer
Hypocrisy allows exploitation with a straight face.
"We expect that the byline and exposure offered by our millions of readers will be the best way to give credit," says Huffington Post citizen journalism editor Adam Clark Estes. || Yale Daily News: Arianna Huffington talks future of journalism.
> Jay Rosen explains NYT, NYU East Village project collaborationHypocrisy allows exploitation with a straight face.
-
February 22, 03:22 PM
Once Upon a Time, Long Before the iPad, Steve Jobs Rode a BMW Motorcycle
Two years before the Macintosh was unveiled, Apple’s then-and-future CEO was photographed by Charles O’Rear for a National Geographic Magazine feature on Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, riding a 1966 BMW R60/2 motorcycle.
27 years old, with longish hair (no helmet), wearing tan boots and a light-colored shirt with sleeves rolled back (no black turtleneck), Jobs looks like he’s having the time of his life riding the two-wheel Bimmer in San Francisco freelancer Moira Johnston’s feature “High Tech, High Risk, and High Life in Silicon Valley,” published in the magazine’s October 1982 issue.

However, notwithstanding his (excellent) taste in bikes, Steve’s stated ambition, when interviewed by Johnston over herb tea at a vegetarian restaurant, was modestly at the time to become “the Volkswagen” of the microcomputer sector rather than its BMW — which became a popular automotive analogy with Apple-watching commentators later on — although he emphasizes that “We’d rather call the Apple a personal than a home computer.”
The article notes that the Apple computer “has inspired a dedicated cult of hard-core enthusiasts who trade new uses for the computer in the columns of Apple magazines” and that Jobs had “become a potent role model for a new breed of bright kids who are writing and selling software programs and, with their arcane computer skills, gaining the prestige formerly tasted only by the high-school football team.”
Johnston also reports that besides the BMW two-wheeler, Jobs, already holding $100 million worth of Apple stock, also owned “the requisite Mercedes,” but that “success seems not to have spoiled the first folk hero of the computer age,” who still preferred according to an unnamed friend quoted, “to drive his motorcycle to my place, sit around and drink wine, and talk about what we’re going to do when we grow up.”
Of more than passing interest is that not unlike Apple’s performance through the current economic recession, the company seemed to be weathering a late ‘82 downturn the microchip sector rather well, with revenues soaring 81 percent year-over-year and Apple occupying 22 buildings in Silicon Valley as well as having plants in Texas, Singapore, and Ireland.
Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.
Read here for a scan and transcript, with photos, of the entire National Geographic article.
A tip of the hat to Modern Mechanix for posting the article scan and to Peter Orosz of jalopnik.com for drawing my attention to this fascinating snippet of history.

-
February 19, 08:05 PM
Obama explains climate science to global warming deniers.
“The anti-science crowd has been doing a killer job pushing the myth that the big recent snowstorms somehow undercut our understanding of human-caused global warming,” writes ClimateProgress’ Joe Romm. Indeed, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), Sean Hannity, and even Donald Trump have found great pleasure in mocking Al Gore over the snowy winter storms. Today in a Nevada town hall meeting, President Obama took on the global warming deniers, explaining in straightforward language how record snowstorms in the nation’s capital are connected to manmade climate change:
First of all, we just got five feet of snow in Washington and so everybody’s like-a lot of the people who are opponents of climate change, they say, “See, look at that. There’s all this snow on the ground, you know, this doesn’t mean anything.” I want to just be clear that the science of climate change doesn’t mean that every place is getting warmer. It means the planet as a whole is getting warmer. But what it may mean is, for example, Vancouver which supposed to be getting snow during the Olympics, suddenly is at 55 degrees and Dallas suddenly is getting seven inches of snow. The idea is that as the planet as a whole gets warmer, you start seeing changing weather patterns and that creates more violent storm systems, more unpredictable weather. So any single place might end up being warmer. Another place might end up being a little bit cooler. There might end up being more precipitation in the air. More monsoons, more hurricanes, more tornadoes, more drought in some places, floods in other places.
Watch it:
<embed allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="never" height="260" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JPwHnU5ObPY&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="320"></embed> Read the entire Global Boiling series at the Wonk Room.
-
February 19, 08:24 PM
Going to hell #7: a different way to choose the Congress
Previously here; "going to hell" article here. Many correspondents have argued, as I did in my original article, that something basic in the structure of government has made it hard or impossible for national officials to concentrate on real national problems. (As opposed to score-settling, posturing, fund-raising, and so on.)
Sol Erdman, of the non-partisan Center for Collaborate Democracy, and his colleague Lawrence Susskind of MIT, wrote in with a proposal to change the nature of Congress by changing the way Congressmen are elected. Before you ask: they argue that the changes they propose would not require a Constitutional Amendment, and therefore are in the realm of "things that could actually be done."
Their whole paper is now online as a PDF here. It is long but worth reading. A few representative quotes:
What's wrong with Congress now (may sound familiar, but stay tuned...)"U.S. elections are organized in such a way that each lawmaker gets powerful incentives to act against the public interest. To begin with, a typical member of Congress can win reelection just by convincing a majority of his or her district's voters that the other party is more untrustworthy, incompetent or corrupt than his own. And any politician knows how to make that case in graphic terms that voters can easily grasp.
The behavior current incentives reward:
"Voters today have equally perverse incentives. That is, in each congressional district, every voter -- every young single, middle- aged parent, senior citizen, truck driver, teacher, salesperson, lawyer, business owner, conservative, liberal and moderate -- has to share the same representative. These diverse groups of district residents have distinct -- often opposing -- needs, values and political beliefs.... So, if a member of Congress advocates a detailed solution to a controversial issue, several large blocs of voters in his or her district are likely to oppose his stand, perhaps even enough to want to throw him out of office. The typical lawmaker therefore avoids proposing real solutions to the most controversial issues."The members of Congress have found that there are far safer ways to stay in office [than dealing with the nation's real problems]. The safest tactics include:
Could a change in Congressional election procedure be Constitutional?
"1) Reducing hard issues to simple slogans.
"2) Passing measures that seem to address major problems but which put off the hard decisions into the future.
"3) Blaming the country's direst problems on the other political party.
"These strategies succeed so often because of how congressional elections are organized today. Typically, one Republican competes against one Democrat for each district's House seat. Any lawmaker can therefore stay in office just by convincing most voters that the other party is more incompetent than his own.""Fortunately, the Constitution doesn't require that members of the House represent districts. The Constitution doesn't even mention districts. It lets each state decide how to elect its own Representatives, with Congress having the right to supersede the states' decisions."
More in their paper, including an elaboration of a new election system they have in mind. Worth checking out. -
February 19, 05:12 PM
Kubrick and Clarke’s ‘Newspad’
From Arthur C. Clarke’s novel of 2001: A Space Odyssey:
When he tired of official reports and memoranda and minutes, he would plug his foolscap-sized Newspad into the ship’s information circuit and scan the latest reports from Earth. One by one he would conjure up the world’s major electronic papers.… Switching to the display unit’s short-term memory, he would hold the front page while he quickly searched the headlines and noted the items that interested him.… The postage-stamp-sized rectangle would expand until it neatly filled the screen and he could read it with comfort. When he had finished, he would flash back to the complete page and select a new subject for detailed examination.
-
February 16, 11:25 PM
Stay-at-home legislators? The saviors of democracy?
Ralph Benko proposes in an op-ed that our federal legislators amend the rules so that they can cast votes from their local offices. That would get ‘em out of Washington, that den of iniquity.
There’s undoubtedly some good that comes from allowing our Senators and Reps to hang out together. But there’s certainly some bad that comes from it, including making it easier to lobby them, and keeping them isolated from their constituents. And, as Ralph points out, if reps could vote from their local office, they’d very likely start making the voting a public act, with supporters cheering and at least having a sense that they’re being represented.
Good? Bad? Certainly interesting.
-
February 17, 11:05 PM
You can do it, Sen. Bayh!
Shared by howardweaver
Yesterday I expressed my hope and dream that Sen. Evan Bayh would use the next ten months -- while he's still in the Senate and has both a vote and a public megaphone -- to do something about the things he says are driving him out of public life.
I'm joining the James Fallows crusade to get Sen. Bayh to spend his last 10 months trying to fix some of the partisanship issues -- starting with the fillibuster.
Today, in an interview with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC, Bayh said flat out that he thought the filibuster was being abused and the rules should be changed. Even (gasp) that he might "lead" an effort to reform it! See the discussion in this clip, which starts two minutes into the interview:Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the
Representative passage:"It's [the filibuster]just brought the process to a halt, and the public is suffering. So the minority needs to have a right. I think that's important. But the public has a right to see its business done. And not routinely allow a small minority to keep us from addressing the great issues that face this country. I think the filibuster absolutely needs to be changed."
Who says dreams don't come true! At the very least, an encouraging dreamlet-scale start. Ten months to go, Sen. Bayh; nothing to lose; a lot of good to be gone; and a reputation to gain.
I'm joining the James Fallows crusade to get Sen. Bayh to spend his last 10 months trying to fix some of the partisanship issues -- starting with the fillibuster. -
February 17, 03:32 PM
Mellencamp for Senate? It's only rock and roll
It’s suddenly “a lonely old night” for Indiana Democrats with Sen. Evan Bayh’s decision to retire.
But as they scramble to find a candidate to run in his place, a former Capitol Hill aide and columnist for The Hill newspaper, offered a novel choice:
John Mellencamp, the Indiana troubadour of working men and women, and purveyor of populist rock and roll.
Championing the Mellencamp candidacy is Brent Budowsky, who at one time worked for Bayh's father, Birch Bayh, when he held an Indiana Senate in the 1960s and 70s.
Budowsky wrote today in The Hill: "John “Mellencamp is one of the great advocates of small-town America, of the kind of "square deal" for Americans that Teddy Roosevelt once championed. He is a voice for working people and a champion of farmers who puts his talent, his body and his money behind his words
-
February 17, 02:17 PM
Earth: 6.8 Billion People, 5 Billion Cell Phone Subscriptions
And just under 1 billion with Internet access on their phones.
-
February 16, 11:36 PM
Kontra on Google Buzz
Shared by howardweaver
Why Google Buzz was NOT about lack of testing.Kontra:
Why Google Buzz was NOT about lack of testing.Google is a $170 billion company. It employs thousands of engineers and developers. It tests, tests, tests, and tests more. In fact, its “designers” once unable to pick a shade of blue tested 41 variations of it. It’s ludicrous to think that the Buzz fiasco was simply a result of under-testing.
-
February 16, 11:11 PM
Bayh pere et fils: the opportunity for Evan
Shared by howardweaver
As my colleague T-N Coates has pointed out, Evan Bayh's very-last-minute decision not to run for the Senate is graceless by most normal measures. He didn't talk with the President or the leader of his party in the Senate, both of whom obviously had a stake in his decision. He caught his state's party organization so much by surprise that they may not be able to get a substitute on the ballot under the normal rules.
What Jim says.
The puzzlement to me is how this fits with the previous 25 years of his political life -- rather, what retrospective light it sheds on that time. Bayh has held elective office since he was 30. He became Indiana's governor at 33 and U.S. senator at 43.
If he really cared about his Indiana constituents and their problems through that time, great! But if so, how can he walk away with this kind of careless disregard about whether, in the style of his departure, he is smashing up things that had said were important to him. If, on the other hand, these issues and people never really mattered that much, and public life had been a kind of popularity contest -- well, that may be true of a lot of politicians, but they don't like to reveal it quite this bluntly.
Here's a constructive suggestion: Do you really care about the partisanship that is ruining public life and that, as you said, has driven you from the Senate, Mr. Bayh? Then why not use the fact that you are still in the U.S. Senate for most of another year -- a platform 99.999% of Americans will never occupy -- and apply all the power you can to advance causes you care about. What is holding you back?
Unlike everyone else up for election this year, you don't have to worry how this or that bout of truth-telling will look on Election Day. Let 'em bitch! You don't need an interest group to endorse you or a civic club to applaud you any more. Do you think hyperpartisanship is destroying the Senate? Why not call out people -- by name, by specific hypocritical move -- when you see them doing what they should be ashamed of? I guarantee that the press would eat this up. Why not a ten-month public seminar, through the rest of this year, on who is doing what, and how it could be different? Do you object to personal "holds" on nominations? Make it an issue! You have an idea of some issue where Republicans and Democrats might agree? Be specific about it and see what you can do. Again, if I know anything about the press and the melodrama of public life, I know you could turn it to your advantage -- and the public's, Mr. Smith style.
Suggested role model:
Your father, Birch Bayh, became a senator even younger. He was 34 when he took office, and 52 when defeated by Dan Quayle. In between -- through three Senate terms, 18 years -- he acted as if he was using his office for something, rather than just occupying it. That is part of the reason he eventually became vulnerable, as someone too "liberal" for his base. His punishment was to leave the Senate involuntarily, something you're now doing by choice. What he tried to do, at some risk to himself, you can now do risk free. His reward is his reputation. Yours could be the same.
(I can always dream.)
What Jim says. - February 17, 12:25 PM
-
February 16, 10:39 AM
Going to hell #5
Shared by howardweaver
Whole series here; original article here. Reader Malcolm McPhee of Washington state writes to suggest a single Constitutional amendment to solve several problems at once:
"America's fundamental ills may be incurable without constitutional change. This was the case with slavery, civil rights, women's rights and other nation altering constitutional amendments. It may be the case with voting rights.""I agree with you that our old, broken and dysfunctional governing system is an alarming problem. I want to suggest another possibility for reform that requires neither a constitutional convention nor a coup. I also want to suggest that there is a better way than continuing to work within our system's flaws and limits to secure our nation's future.
"I maintain that a single constitutional amendment that cuts to the core of American government's dysfunction would work vastly better than a coup, a constitutional convention or continuing to muddle through within the present system.
"That constitutional amendment would deal with election, election finance and the use of money in the public sphere. Obviously, actual wording warrants considerable thought and effort. However, I can suggest some example content:"1. Prohibit the contribution of anything of value to candidates for federal office or to federal officials.
"This amendment would be designed to return the right of government "by the people" to America and to reduce the influence of money in American elections and governance.
"2. Establish federal government funding and procedures for federal elections.
"3. Provide for direct election of the president.
"4. Prohibit the use of super majorities in any public election and in the rules of legislative bodies except in amending the US or state and local constitutions/charters.
"5. Other
This recommendation rests on several arguments: 1. That this amendment does cut to the core of the American government's dysfunction 2. That government of the people, by the people, for the people, is still worth dying for and preserving. 3. That money has corrupted our system so gradually, so insidiously and so thoroughly that we do not even recognize it as a serious problem per se and often view it as a given."American voters have been disenfranchised as their voting rights have been denied or abridged or their vote nullified as those for whom they vote receive large amounts of money to influence their legislative vote... The vote of the people has been usurped by concentrations of money to promote the special interests of labor, business, religion, the right to bear arms, military procurement, war and peace, foreign governments and a multitude of others whose interests are often at odds with the public good.
"America's fundamental ills may be incurable without constitutional change. This was the case with slavery, civil rights, women's rights and other nation altering constitutional amendments. It may be the case with voting rights."
"The subversive influence of money on the political process is the underlying cause of most of that which ails our country. It has led to social, political, economic and international disaster for our country. It has led to unnecessary wars, the near collapse of our economy, staggering public debt, little hope for any near term recovery for our country, and collapse in public confidence in our entire political system....
"James Madison said that we cannot change the nature of man. All we can hope to do is reduce the ill effects of man's most destructive instincts (Federalist, Number 10). He realized our government could conceivably take a bad turn through the machinations of men of factious tempers, local prejudices, and sinister designs who would betray the interests of the people.
"This is precisely what has happened to America. The voice of the people has been supplanted by moneyed interests whose primary interest is in increasing or preserving their money through reduced taxes and expenditures. What the Founders could not possibly have foreseen was the incredible convergence of interests through modern technology and monetary systems. The latter increased liquidity and the influence of money in general.
"Since then, regional, political and economic factions converged into only two major political parties. Those two parties have effectively become one with money as the common denominator for the special interests of both parties. Hence, Madison's dream that a multitude of interests would prevent Congressional corruption was shredded by the passage of time and technological and economic advances.... It is futile to think we can rely on the mainstream media, a free press, to expose money driven domestic and foreign policy influence and corruption in our government....
"America's fundamental ills may be incurable without constitutional change. This was the case with slavery, civil rights, women's rights and other nation altering constitutional amendments. It may be the case with voting rights."
Updates
-
Lucky & Jimmy standing guard at Redwing this morning. Good dogs. http://twitpic.com/19017jPosted 28 hours ago
-
Failure counts as done. So do mistakes … Done is the engine of more. http://bit.ly/bUxNezPosted 2 days ago
-
Check my friend Kim's "life lessons": “Did I do some good? Did I tell the truth? Did I try to make somebody else something good to eat?”http://bit.ly/aKQcIvPosted 5 days ago
-
It's not about digital, stupid. http://bit.ly/alN9Aw and more at http://bit.ly/a2Zmm2Posted 17 days ago
-
iPad critics might consider taking a deep breath and calming down. http://bit.ly/92aT0kPosted 19 days ago
-
You can find my Facebook feed and other information at flavors.me/howardPosted 2 weeks ago
-
Barb tells Ray Wylie Hubbard she sponsored a car in the Amador County Demolition Derby & named it Snake Farm. http://twitpic.com/15bdbaPosted 2 weeks ago
-
Why is a Facebook beer worth more than your news story? My blog suggests an answer. http://bit.ly/a3Q1QyPosted 8 weeks ago
-
"Torches, pitchforks, and America's coming elections" — my column for a Canadian newspaper. http://bit.ly/9cV2v8Posted 10 weeks ago
-
Have always thought this: "Secretly, we technologists quite liked the idea that Normals would be dependent on us for our technological shamanism." http://bit.ly/9JVfKdPosted 10 weeks ago










