From a Rawstory article about Chomsky’s interview on NPR:
“If you take a look at the progressive changes that have taken place in the country, say, just in the last 50 years – the civil rights movement, the antiwar movement, opposition to aggression, the women’s movement, the environmental movement and so on – they’re not led by any debate in the media,” Chomsky said. “No, they were led by popular organizations, by activists on the ground.”
Sounds consistent with what we see in education and edtech – progressive changes are made in the trenches. The media (and other parasitic corporate organizations) does not lead the changes – they follow (usually with a poor level of fidelity, and with co-option of ideals through monetization, financialization and other greedmongering urges).
It might be interesting if we recognize the power of in-the-trenches progressive changes led by activists (i.e., us), and use that influence to harness the corporate lapdogs rather than limply ranting against them…
With journalism being neutered in favour of fluff pieces like [cat](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,400242,00.html) [fashion](http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26089618) and covering the [latest reality tv shows](http://www.globaltvcalgary.com/Wipeout+Canada+Auditions/3301351/story.html), there is a real danger. If real professionals aren’t left in the newsrooms, who will be asking the tough questions?
From [an interview with climate scientist Stephen Schneider](http://www.stanfordalumni.org/news/magazine/2010/julaug/features/schneider.html):
> The reason that we do not ask focus groups of farmers and auto workers to determine how to license airplane pilots and doctors is they have no skill at that. And we do not ask people with PhDs who are not climatologists to tell us whether climate science is right or wrong, because they have no skill at that, particularly when they’re hired by the fossil-fuel industry because of their PhDs to cast doubt. So here is where balance is actually false reporting.
>
>What the media needs to do is not to ignore outliers—we should never ignore outliers—[but] to frame where they sit in the spectrum of knowledgeable opinion. The good reporters always did that. They said, ‘There are a small number of people, many of whom are funded by particular industries, who make the following point.’ That’s completely legit, because now the public knows where these guys sit.
>
>But now, given the new media business-driven model, where they fired most specialists and the only people left in the newsroom are general-assignment reporters who have to do a grown-up’s job, how are they going to be able to discern the north end of a southbound horse?
The majority of those left in “journalism” aren’t able to perform the role that society needs them to. They’re so busy being generalists, trying desperately to pump up advertising revenue, that they’re simply unable to do what’s needed.
Scary stuff. And with many of the remnants of old school professional journalism now [actively pushing themselves](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/henry-blodget/murdochs-first-newspaper_b_652309.html) [into irrelevance](http://www.fastcompany.com/1671597/times-paywall-readership-subscriptions-circulation), what’s left? Bloggers? For serious, critical journalism?
it’s pretty easy to compare messages sent by various mass media outlets via twitter. it’s also pretty surprising how they spin the same information in different ways.
update: mainstream media never fails to disappoint. an hour after posting this, CBC went live with the actual story, in line with how the Herald spun it on their first try. sigh.
Wow. While surfing the NFB archives, I found the trailer to an upcoming film called RiP: A remix manifesto. An open source film about copyright.
From the NFB page for the movie:
Web activist and filmmaker Brett Gaylor explores copyright in the information age, mashing up the media landscape of the 21st century and shattering the wall between users and producers.
The film’s central protagonist is Girl Talk, a mash-up musician topping the charts with his sample-based songs. But is Girl Talk a paragon of people power or the Pied Piper of piracy? Creative Commons founder Lawrence Lessig, Brazil’s Minister of Culture Gilberto Gil and pop culture critic Cory Doctorow are also along for the ride.
A participatory media experiment, from day one, Brett shares his raw footage at opensourcecinema.org, for anyone to remix. This movie-as-mash-up method allows these remixes to become an integral part of the film. With RiP: A remix manifesto, Gaylor and Girl Talk sound an urgent alarm and draw the lines of battle.
Which side of the ideas war are you on?
Oh, man. I need to see this film. I need to screen it on campus. I wonder if it’s too late to contribute to it somehow… Have I mentioned how much I love the NFB?
Alan‘s getting some grief from Anarchy Media Player under WP 2.3.1 so I installed the latest Anarchy plugin to see if it works on my 2.3.1 blog. Now, to find an audio file that won’t get me sued…
test mp3 file
test podcast
[kml_flashembed movie="http://youtube.com/v/6mhbxlz_wrI" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]
Did that work?
Kevin Newman has been mentioning Global National’s podcasting project for the last couple of weeks, but I only checked it out on Monday. This could be one of the coolest things to happen to Mass Media and podcasting so far this year. The entire audio portion of the Global National newscast is available via a podcast subscription, with only a minor delay after it goes to air (they do have to encode/publish the audio of the live newscast). It’s also available directly from the iTunes directory.
I listened to Monday’s show on the way home from work Tuesday (I missed it “live”) and it was great! The 30 minute newscast distilled down to 22 minutes of content (no commercials). It was a combination newscast and open microphone forum at a university in Toronto. Content that is harder to get from “traditional” podcasts (how ironic is that?)
I really hope they keep this project going!
Global National has been experimenting with this stuff for a while now – it looks like each of their key reporters was given a blog sometime in the summer, with the predictable results that usually happen when someone is “given a blog” – about one post per month, orphaned blogs for several months, then periodic posting. Also, I just tried to subscribe to feeds for a few of the blogs, and there doesn’t appear to be any RSS feeds (so, it’s not really a blog in my mind). I’ll be subscribing as soon as that’s fixed.
But the podcasting project may just be sustainable – it’s only a minor additional step in the show production workflow, and could largely be automated.
Kudos, Global National!
Update: I just read through a few posts on Kevin Newman’s blog and it’s so refreshing to read the unpolished, unmassaged, “risky” published thoughts/insights/rants of a Big Media Personality. I’ve trusted Kevin’s reportage since he started at Global National, have appreciated his obvious sense of humour in tackling the issues, and now totally respect him for putting himself out there.
Note to Global: your weblog software is teh suck, though. No easy way to navigate through the posts. No RSS feeds. No seaarchability within a blog. Waaay overly NASCARed advertising/branding on the pages, etc… Please, grab a copy of WordPress (or WordPress MultiUser, or Drupal, or Movabletype, or anything) and give the reporters some decent tools so they can do a better job of blogging (and we can follow along – and maybe respond).
Kevin Newman has been mentioning Global National’s podcasting project for the last couple of weeks, but I only checked it out on Monday. This could be one of the coolest things to happen to Mass Media and podcasting so far this year. The entire audio portion of the Global National newscast is available via a podcast subscription, with only a minor delay after it goes to air (they do have to encode/publish the audio of the live newscast). It’s also available directly from the iTunes directory.
I listened to Monday’s show on the way home from work Tuesday (I missed it “live”) and it was great! The 30 minute newscast distilled down to 22 minutes of content (no commercials). It was a combination newscast and open microphone forum at a university in Toronto. Content that is harder to get from “traditional” podcasts (how ironic is that?)
I really hope they keep this project going!
Global National has been experimenting with this stuff for a while now – it looks like each of their key reporters was given a blog sometime in the summer, with the predictable results that usually happen when someone is “given a blog” – about one post per month, orphaned blogs for several months, then periodic posting. Also, I just tried to subscribe to feeds for a few of the blogs, and there doesn’t appear to be any RSS feeds (so, it’s not really a blog in my mind). I’ll be subscribing as soon as that’s fixed.
But the podcasting project may just be sustainable – it’s only a minor additional step in the show production workflow, and could largely be automated.
Kudos, Global National!
Update: I just read through a few posts on Kevin Newman’s blog and it’s so refreshing to read the unpolished, unmassaged, “risky” published thoughts/insights/rants of a Big Media Personality. I’ve trusted Kevin’s reportage since he started at Global National, have appreciated his obvious sense of humour in tackling the issues, and now totally respect him for putting himself out there.
Note to Global: your weblog software is teh suck, though. No easy way to navigate through the posts. No RSS feeds. No seaarchability within a blog. Waaay overly NASCARed advertising/branding on the pages, etc… Please, grab a copy of WordPress (or WordPress MultiUser, or Drupal, or Movabletype, or anything) and give the reporters some decent tools so they can do a better job of blogging (and we can follow along – and maybe respond).
That “Big Magazine” I mentioned recently will be publishing a small snippet from the phone interview I gave. Pick up the next Business Week, and check out the “Gearworld” section, for an article/sidebar written by Elizabeth Woyke and Peter Burrows. I don’t come off sounding like either a raving lunatic, nor a drooling fanboy, so it’s not too bad. It’s a much shorter article than I was thinking it was, based on the information Elizabeth was asking (and suggesting that she had already interviewed several others).
One thing I hadn’t given much thought to was the sheer number of iPods that must be in (or nearly in) the same condition mine is in – they cite a Piper Jaffray analyst who claims 2.2 million iPods will need replacement batteries this year. That would only increase, with the exponential increase of iPod sales.Good time to be in the third-party battery business…
By the way, apparently CostCo carries replacement iPod batteries in the states – no sign of them in the Canadian CostCo stores (or online), but I’ve got a query in to their feedback centre to see wtf.
Ah, hell… Here’s the mini-article. If they send the lawyerbots, I’ll take it down. If you like BW, buy a copy of the mag.
Does Your iPod Lack Stamina?
The clock is ticking for millions of owners of older iPods. The problem: Apple Computer’s (AAPL ) iPods run on rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. Newer models are more efficient, but batteries for older models start degrading after 100 to 200 charges and need replacing after a year or two, says Gene Munster, a Piper Jaffray analyst. That means up to 2.2 million iPods sold from fall ’03 to fall ’04 may soon need new juice. Some owners are covered by a standard one-year warranty, while others have filed claims tied to a class-action suit. But many — like software developer D’Arcy Norman, who says his iPod fell from six hours of power on a full charge to just one after 16 months of daily use — have to pay to keep the tunes cranking. For $59, Apple offers an extended warranty or a replacement. Norman says he’ll probably buy a third-party battery kit selling online for as little as $30. Meanwhile, Apple had its hands full last week handling complaints about broken or scratched screens on its newest iPod, the nano. Apple said a “vendor quality” problem caused screens to break in fewer than 0.1% of units sold. Customers with a defective screen can contact Apple for a free replacement.
By Elizabeth Woyke and Peter Burrows
That “Big Magazine” I mentioned recently will be publishing a small snippet from the phone interview I gave. Pick up the next Business Week, and check out the “Gearworld” section, for an article/sidebar written by Elizabeth Woyke and Peter Burrows. I don’t come off sounding like either a raving lunatic, nor a drooling fanboy, so it’s not too bad. It’s a much shorter article than I was thinking it was, based on the information Elizabeth was asking (and suggesting that she had already interviewed several others).
One thing I hadn’t given much thought to was the sheer number of iPods that must be in (or nearly in) the same condition mine is in – they cite a Piper Jaffray analyst who claims 2.2 million iPods will need replacement batteries this year. That would only increase, with the exponential increase of iPod sales.Good time to be in the third-party battery business…
By the way, apparently CostCo carries replacement iPod batteries in the states – no sign of them in the Canadian CostCo stores (or online), but I’ve got a query in to their feedback centre to see wtf.
Ah, hell… Here’s the mini-article. If they send the lawyerbots, I’ll take it down. If you like BW, buy a copy of the mag.
Does Your iPod Lack Stamina?
The clock is ticking for millions of owners of older iPods. The problem: Apple Computer’s (AAPL ) iPods run on rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. Newer models are more efficient, but batteries for older models start degrading after 100 to 200 charges and need replacing after a year or two, says Gene Munster, a Piper Jaffray analyst. That means up to 2.2 million iPods sold from fall ’03 to fall ’04 may soon need new juice. Some owners are covered by a standard one-year warranty, while others have filed claims tied to a class-action suit. But many — like software developer D’Arcy Norman, who says his iPod fell from six hours of power on a full charge to just one after 16 months of daily use — have to pay to keep the tunes cranking. For $59, Apple offers an extended warranty or a replacement. Norman says he’ll probably buy a third-party battery kit selling online for as little as $30. Meanwhile, Apple had its hands full last week handling complaints about broken or scratched screens on its newest iPod, the nano. Apple said a “vendor quality” problem caused screens to break in fewer than 0.1% of units sold. Customers with a defective screen can contact Apple for a free replacement.
By Elizabeth Woyke and Peter Burrows
I won’t say the name of the mag, in case it doesn’t get published – no need to add pressure to the writer – but I was just interviewed out of the blue by a writer for a Big Magazine (you know the one). She is researching an article on the iPod battery life issue, and found my blog entry on it. In the interest of not being used out of context, what I basically said was:
- Love my iPod
- It never got the full 8-10 hours of battery life (started out around 6, fell to 4 rather quickly, then down to about 1 this summer)
- Got my 3G 20GB iPod in April 2004
- I still haven’t picked up a replacement battery yet, but am planning to use the newly announced Canadian iPod Levy Refund to pay for most of a new battery (seems fair)
- I’ll go for the third party battery (it’s cheaper, and higher capacity than Apple’s iPod battery), and install it myself. (even though I’m a touch nervous about that – there’s no way I’m shipping it away for someone else to maul)
- I’ll totally buy another iPod in the future. Battery issues aside, there’s just nothing else that comes close to an iPod. The integration with iTunes rocks (smart playlists, etc…) and the scroll wheel has no equal.
I think that’s it. I didn’t take notes or anything, but wanted to record the basics of the conversation, in case I’m made out as some kind of drooling/ranting iPod hater or anything 🙂
I won’t say the name of the mag, in case it doesn’t get published – no need to add pressure to the writer – but I was just interviewed out of the blue by a writer for a Big Magazine (you know the one). She is researching an article on the iPod battery life issue, and found my blog entry on it. In the interest of not being used out of context, what I basically said was:
- Love my iPod
- It never got the full 8-10 hours of battery life (started out around 6, fell to 4 rather quickly, then down to about 1 this summer)
- Got my 3G 20GB iPod in April 2004
- I still haven’t picked up a replacement battery yet, but am planning to use the newly announced Canadian iPod Levy Refund to pay for most of a new battery (seems fair)
- I’ll go for the third party battery (it’s cheaper, and higher capacity than Apple’s iPod battery), and install it myself. (even though I’m a touch nervous about that – there’s no way I’m shipping it away for someone else to maul)
- I’ll totally buy another iPod in the future. Battery issues aside, there’s just nothing else that comes close to an iPod. The integration with iTunes rocks (smart playlists, etc…) and the scroll wheel has no equal.
I think that’s it. I didn’t take notes or anything, but wanted to record the basics of the conversation, in case I’m made out as some kind of drooling/ranting iPod hater or anything 🙂
I was just reading the newspaper while eating lunch. I never read the newspaper. Perhaps this is why…
On page 8 of the first section, was an article titled “US warns allies over arms sales to China” (several articles in today’s paper start with X Warns Y over Z). Normally not a big thing. Didn’t even plan on reading the article. But, a huge photo above the article piqued my interest. It had been obviously manipulated to remove information that was part of the context of the photograph. It is a photo of some protesters, who are showing signs/placards/banners denouncing Condi’s visit to Seoul.
But, the biggest banner, front and centre in the photo, had a fake white box edited into it. Directly over top of the URL of the protestor’s organization. How is that not part of the message? It’s ok to post the photo of the banner, as long as the readers of the paper can’t find the information to fill in the backstory?
The URL they blocked out is http://alltogether.or.kr – I can’t read Korean, so I can’t verify the content. The content doesn’t matter.
This is exactly why I prefer to get my news from multiple sources.
I do realize that the photo was likely not touched up by the Herald, but somewhere between the photographer and the Associated Press food chain. The end result is the same – my local newspaper is censored.
I was just reading the newspaper while eating lunch. I never read the newspaper. Perhaps this is why…
On page 8 of the first section, was an article titled “US warns allies over arms sales to China” (several articles in today’s paper start with X Warns Y over Z). Normally not a big thing. Didn’t even plan on reading the article. But, a huge photo above the article piqued my interest. It had been obviously manipulated to remove information that was part of the context of the photograph. It is a photo of some protesters, who are showing signs/placards/banners denouncing Condi’s visit to Seoul.
But, the biggest banner, front and centre in the photo, had a fake white box edited into it. Directly over top of the URL of the protestor’s organization. How is that not part of the message? It’s ok to post the photo of the banner, as long as the readers of the paper can’t find the information to fill in the backstory?
The URL they blocked out is http://alltogether.or.kr – I can’t read Korean, so I can’t verify the content. The content doesn’t matter.
This is exactly why I prefer to get my news from multiple sources.
I do realize that the photo was likely not touched up by the Herald, but somewhere between the photographer and the Associated Press food chain. The end result is the same – my local newspaper is censored.
