An indignant Israeli is suing a pet shop that he says sold him a dying parrot, reports the Ma’ariv newspaper. Itzik Simowitz of the southern city of Beersheba contends the shop cheated him because the Galerita-type cockatoo not only failed to utter a word when he got it home, but was also extremely ill. Mr. Simowitz adds that the shop owner assured him the parrot was not ill but merely needed time to adjust to its new environment.
[Via Marginal Revolution]
I’m sorry, but I can’t hop aboard the Dan Gillmor anti-Google train over their plan to add Autolink features (see this Search Engine Watch blog post for more)to their toolbar. Specifically, Autolink, if enabled (it’s disabled by default), would scour pages for certain types of information and add little icons if found. Addresses would be linked to Google Maps (or Yahoo or Mapquest if you change a setting). ISBNs would be linked to Amazon. Package tracking numbers to the appropriate delivery service. And VINs to CarFax. All of these searches are just extensions of Google’s specialized searches - only Autolink is new. Gillmor likens the Autolink to Microsoft’s Smart Tags, and gets all huffy. Dan Gillmor on Grassroots Journalism, Etc.: Google Emulates Microsoft, Uh Oh:
All of those caveats aside, it’s still a bad idea, and an unfortunate move by a company that is looking to continue its hypergrowth. With its enormous market share in search, Google is starting to act in ways that are reminiscent of our favorite monopolist. As Dave Winer observes, this is near enough to changing Web content as to be worrisome.
Gillmor has, of course, never seen a Microsoft move to praise, which I’ve always suspected was in part because they had the temerity to locate their HQ outside Silicon Valley. But he was wrong on Smart Tags and he’s wrong on this. Both features have to be enabled to be used, and both are quite useful. I often highlight addresses and right-click to search on Google for a map; this just saves me a step. And Smart Tags are also useful in MS Office. When I get an email or Word document with an address in it, I like to be able to go straight to my address book. Other Smart Tags are similarly useful. If you don’t like it, don’t use it. Stopping me from voluntarily using a product I find useful just because you hate the company that produces it is counterproductive and just a little bit offensive.
For those worked up into a lather over semi-pseudo journalist Jeff Gannon (nee James Zuckert), comes a nice counterpoint at NRO, where Tim Graham looks at one Clinton press conference and notes that softball questions didn’t raise much ire during the Clinton years. First some backstory. Some have made much hay of Zuckert’s apparent homosexuality and claimed that he may have been a gay escort (since embellished to gay prostitute, a very different claim). But most argument has centered on the means by which he acquired his day pass, the pseudonym under which he wrote, and the softballs he lobbed at the Press Secretary. For instance, Graham points to a piece at the Columbia Journalism Review blog, where Brian Montopoli argues that
Real journalists, the ones who belong in press conferences, know that access to a president is a rare gift, and they know enough not to squander it. Gannon threw away his opportunity in favor of self-aggrandizing partisan spectacle. He put himself and his agenda ahead of the public good, and he did it in a manner so egregious that he left little doubt of his intentions. If both sides of the debate, blinded by partisan zeal, don’t realize that’s the real reason he had to go, they’ve missed the point.
Graham notes five questions asked of Clinton in a March 19, 1999 press conference that make Gannon look like a hard-hitting investigative journalist. Here, for example, is Sarah McClendon’s contribution:
Sir, will you tell us why you think the people have been so mean to you? Is it a conspiracy? Is it a plan to treat you worse than they treated Abe Lincoln?
Or this hard hitting question from John Harris of the “real” newspaper Washington Post:
Sir, George Stephanopoulos has written a book that contain - contains some tough and fairly personal criticism of you. Earlier, Dick Morris had written a somewhat similar book. How much pain do these judgments by former aides cause you? And do you consider it a betrayal for people to write books on the history of your administration while you’re still in office?
Graham concludes
[t]hat’s just one press conference. We could lengthen this sorry list considerably with other examples on other dates. But by the current standards of liberal media critics, at the very least CNN, the Washington Post, U.S. News, and NPR didn’t have “actual journalists” at the White House. The man named “Gannon” is an embarrassment, but that’s no reason to shut out opinion journalists - conservative journalists (even partisans) have every bit as much right to sit in those chairs and ask their own questions as the everyday liberal partisans do.
I’d tend to concur - there’s a lot to be embarrassed about in issuing the day pass to “Gannon” but it’s not a scandal unless you buy into the Rovian conspiracy theory that the White House set up Talon News for the sole purpose of placing a shill in the press corps. And if you think the “real” scandal relates somehow to Valerie Plame, read this post at JustOneMinute and then get back to me.
For those worked up into a lather over semi-pseudo journalist Jeff Gannon (nee James Zuckert), comes a nice counterpoint at NRO, where Tim Graham looks at one Clinton press conference and notes that softball questions didn’t raise much ire during the Clinton years. First some backstory. Some have made much hay of Zuckert’s apparent homosexuality and claimed that he may have been a gay escort (since embellished to gay prostitute, a very different claim). But most argument has centered on the means by which he acquired his day pass, the pseudonym under which he wrote, and the softballs he lobbed at the Press Secretary. For instance, Graham points to a piece at the Columbia Journalism Review blog, where Brian Montopoli argues that
Real journalists, the ones who belong in press conferences, know that access to a president is a rare gift, and they know enough not to squander it. Gannon threw away his opportunity in favor of self-aggrandizing partisan spectacle. He put himself and his agenda ahead of the public good, and he did it in a manner so egregious that he left little doubt of his intentions. If both sides of the debate, blinded by partisan zeal, don’t realize that’s the real reason he had to go, they’ve missed the point.
Graham notes five questions asked of Clinton in a March 19, 1999 press conference that make Gannon look like a hard-hitting investigative journalist. Here, for example, is Sarah McClendon’s contribution:
Sir, will you tell us why you think the people have been so mean to you? Is it a conspiracy? Is it a plan to treat you worse than they treated Abe Lincoln?
Or this hard hitting question from John Harris of the “real” newspaper Washington Post:
Sir, George Stephanopoulos has written a book that contain - contains some tough and fairly personal criticism of you. Earlier, Dick Morris had written a somewhat similar book. How much pain do these judgments by former aides cause you? And do you consider it a betrayal for people to write books on the history of your administration while you’re still in office?
Graham concludes
[t]hat’s just one press conference. We could lengthen this sorry list considerably with other examples on other dates. But by the current standards of liberal media critics, at the very least CNN, the Washington Post, U.S. News, and NPR didn’t have “actual journalists” at the White House. The man named “Gannon” is an embarrassment, but that’s no reason to shut out opinion journalists - conservative journalists (even partisans) have every bit as much right to sit in those chairs and ask their own questions as the everyday liberal partisans do.
I’d tend to concur - there’s a lot to be embarrassed about in issuing the day pass to “Gannon” but it’s not a scandal unless you buy into the Rovian conspiracy theory that the White House set up Talon News for the sole purpose of placing a shill in the press corps. And if you think the “real” scandal relates somehow to Valerie Plame, read this post at JustOneMinute and then get back to me.
I am thinking about developing a master database/directory/aggregator for Kentucky bloggers. I know of several lists of blogs that include the Louisville and Lexington regions, but what I’d ideally like to put together is a directory and clickable map similar to the ones that exist for New York City, Paris and Washington, DC. Those efforts are a little easier because they have public transit maps to work around, but I’m sure we can figure it out.
I’ve registered the domain kyblogs.com and plan to put some content up in the near future, including a simple web form for submitting your own blog. In the meantime, if you have any interest, send an email to kyblogs at gmail dot com, and include the name of your weblog, your cyberspace address (URL), a short description of your blog, and your meatspace (real-life) location. If you’re in a smallish town, the name of the town. If in one of our larger cities, try to pin it down a little more - say, with the closest interstate exit or the like. You can also comment on this post or send a trackback with the same sort of information.
And be sure to mention the idea to any Kentucky blogging friends who might be interested.
Gizmodo points to the impeding release of the successor to the Canon Digital Rebel, the Canon Rebel XT, an 8 MP digital SLR:
The new sibling model to the original Digital Rebel is now smaller
and faster than its cousin, able to shoot 3 frames per second in 14
frame bursts. The XT will be known as the EOS 350D Digital in Europe
and the EOS Kill Digital 2e in Japan, so if you see those names bandied
about today, it’s all the same shooter.Of course the best news is the price: under $1,000. That means the
original Rebel will be even cheaper once the XT launches (although
Canon still hasn’t set a date).
This addresses a couple of my concerns with the original - 8 MP is actually a material improvement over my several year old Canon G2 (4 MP), and the increased write-to-disk speed makes it a viable camera for semi-action shots. My stash of EOS lenses would be useful again, another plus. Of course, the IRS has more pressing claims on my disposable income between now and April 15.
Fifty more Gmail invites showed up for my account, which probably means the beta process is nearing an end. If you haven’t yet joined the Google collective and want to, send an email to fochsenhirt-at-gmail-dot-com. It really is the best of the webmail systems out there. You need a working email address to receive and respond to the invite.
China Mieville, a socialist writer whose work was actually readable and enjoyable before he loaded it down with such an amount of pro-collectivist and anti-individualist claptrap (compare Perdido Street Station to Iron Council to see for yourself) as to make it a ponderous bore, has been kind enough to produce a list of fantasy and SF not to read. That he refers to Atlas Shrugged as “vile” should be a clue. A Scanner Darkly is worthwhile even if Mieville recommends it, however. For the curious, it’s Fantastic Metropolis - Fifty Fantasy & Science Fiction Works That Socialists Should Read
Adding my hundred cents to the meme Michele stole from Johnny Bacardi, here are my 100 Things I Love About Comics. Some are comics, some are things that in my opinion would not exist but for comics. I’ll add links as I get to it.
UPDATE: Now with more linky goodness.
1. The Sandman
2. Death: The High Cost of Living
3. Neil Gaiman’s fiction, which I never would have read but for Sandman.
4. Neil Gaiman’s blog (ditto).
5. Transmetropolitan
6. Planetary
7. The Authority
8. Warren Ellis‘ web presence(s)
9. Warren Ellis’ mailing list, particularly when he gets pissed (in both the emotional and intoxicated senses)
10. Preacher
11. Vertigo and Wildstorm
12. V for Vendetta
13. Watchmen
14. Alan Moore’s run on Swamp Thing
15. Doom Patrol
16. From Hell
17. Sin City
18. Webcomics that don’t suck.
19. Comics-inspired movies that don’t suck.
20. Joss Whedon’s Astonishing X-Men
21. Batman: The Dark Knight Returns
22. Bloom County
23. The Far Side
24. Calvin and Hobbes
25. Trade Paperbacks
26. The sensory experience of opening the mylar on a comic you haven’t read in a while
27. The cover art of Alex Ross, before he went off the deep end into loony-leftie-land
28. Darkness
29. John Cassaday - especially things like the cover for Planetary #10
30. Well-done crossovers
31. Alternate universes
32. Global Frequency
33. Kavalier and Clay
34. Smallville
35. Alias, which is really just a comic on TV. But not Alias the comic.
36. The Animatrix
37. Alan Moore
38. Warren Ellis
39. Garth Ennis
40. Frank Miller
41. Orbiter
42. Ultimate Fantastic Four (#7-#20)
43. Trailers for comic book movies that looked like they wouldn’t suck, even though they turn out to suck.
44. Ghost World
45. Too Much Coffee Man
46. Todd McFarlane, but only for a month or two in the early 1990s
47. Wednesdays
48. Free Comic Book Day
49. Comic Book Guy
50. Hitman
51. 100 Bullets
52. Gotham by Gaslight: A Tale of the Batman
53. Sandman Mystery Theater
54. Mike Mignola
55. Arkham Asylum
56. Birds of Prey
57. Mark Texiera
58. Will Eisner
59. WWII propaganda
60. The Wonder Twins
61. Justice League on Saturday mornings
62. Tim Burton’s Batman movies
63. The opening credits to Spiderman 2
64. Y-The Last Man
65. Animal Man
66. The Invisibles
67. Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the TV series
68. Grant Morrison
69. The Comics Cubicle in Williamsburg, VA
70. Marvel 1602
71. The Ultimates
72. Mark Millar
73. The Incredibles
74. Beast
75. Adamantium
76. Victor Von Doom
77. Spider Jerusalem
78. Elijah Snow
79. John Constantine
80. The Smiler
81. Letters Pages in 1970s comics
82. Comic book advertisements
83. Scott McCloud
84. Blankets
85. The Batmobile
86. The Fortress of Solitude
87. All the types of kryptonite other than green
88. The Batcave
89. Wonder Woman’s invisible plane
90. Fantagraphics
91. Dark Horse
92. The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund
93. Black Orchid
94. The Books of Magic
95. Meeting Neil Gaiman at a comics shop in Springfield, Virginia
96. Scarecrow
97. Tiger Shark (from Detective Comics #147, 1949)
98. Karmak the Living Beast Bomb
99. Arm-Fall-Off-Boy
100. Silly Putty and Sunday afternoons
I deliberately stayed out of the Eason Jordan affair because, frankly, others were doing it better. Also because it’s long since been established that Mr. Jordan was a loose cannon of suspect journalistic integrity, as his revelation that CNN killed stories critical of the Hussein regime in order to ensure CNN’s continuing presence in Baghdad should have made abundantly clear. So when he stepped in it among the power elites in Davos, I figured he’d backtrack from his comments, apologize (again), and we’d all move on, allowing Jordan to continue as CNN ambassador abroad and further solidifying the worldview of both CNN detractors and defenders. Then, inexplicably, Jordan resigned or was pushed out (not really inexplicably, as the continuing ratings slide at CNN meant some heads were going to roll eventually, but I digress).
Following so closely the events over at Black Rock involving forged memos and network stonewalling, it was therefore inevitable that the media and its defenders would lash out at the bloggers they deemed responsible for first Rather’s and then Jordan’s respective downfalls. The Wall Street Journal decries the rise of "certain pundits chirping delightedly." The New York Times says that bloggers are "news media trophy hunters" and quotes Steve Lovelady’s critique that "[t]he salivating morons who make up the lynch mob prevail."
That was bad enough, but then comes Mike Moran at MSNBC, who starts off by comparing bloggers to the Taliban and the Gang of Four, and then takes the gloves off:
But should Eason Jordan lose his job for this? Or, to mine the deeper shaft here, was it wise for CNN to provide the enemies of free expression, critical thinking and The First Amendment with a victory on this count? Are they so lost as a network that they abandon basic principles? Is the main stream really now just a trickling tributary that can be diverted with just a few well thrown stones?
But did the citizen journalists of the blogs really want Jordan to be fired? Certainly some did, at least eventually. Captain Ed, for example, concluded that
[Joe Scarborough] calls on Jonathan Klein, CNN’s president, to force Jordan to produce his evidence or can him, in order to protect CNN’s integrity. That may already be too late, and at any rate Jordan isn’t the only problem executive with a similar track record of unsubstantiated allegations. Both Jordan and Chris Cramer need to get the boot before Klein can hope for a renaissance of CNN’s credibility.
But when the story first broke, Captain Ed really wanted (1) verification of what Jordan actually said at Davos and (2) evidence to back up the claim. Only if this was not forthcoming should Jordan get the boot:
Jordan needs to come clean about his statements in Davos, and David Gergen should either confirm Jordan’s accusations or clear the record. If indeed Forumblog reported this honestly, then Jordan needs to either produce the evidence for such charges or resign in disgrace, with his last action an apology to the US military aired in CNN’s prime-time news show. If not, CNN’s entire news organization loses all credibility as long as he remains in it.
This was a consistent theme - bloggers wanted Davos to release the videotape and/or transcript of the session, and wanted Jordan to substantiate his allegations. Only when Davos stonewalled requests for the tape and when Jordan backpedaled and revised, but did not offer proof for, his statements did any calls for his scalp ensue. Even then, more vitriol was directed at the media for not covering the story than at Jordan for making unsubstantiated allegations about the US military.
So why did Jordan resign/get fired? One possible explanation is that CNN got tired of fixing his messes, and he does have quite a history of messes needing cleaning. In March 1999, Jordan credited Fidel Castro with the creation of CNN International:
Let me also thank Fidel Castro. In the earliest days of CNN, when CNN was meant to be seen only in the United States, the enterprising Fidel Castro was pirating and watching CNN in Cuba. Fidel was intrigued by CNN. He wanted to meet the person responsible. So Ted Turner, who at that point had never traveled to a Communist country or knowingly met a Communist, [went to Havana]. It was big deal for Ted and during the discussions Castro suggested that CNN be made available to the entire world. In fact it was that seed, that idea that grew into CNN International, which is now seen in every country and territory on the planet.
On October 10, 2002 in Slovenia, Jordan said that
The Israelis say they’re actually trying to restrict our access to these areas and they say it’s too dangerous for you to be there and my response to that is that it wouldn’t be nearly as dangerous if you didn’t shoot at us when we’re clearly labeled as CNN crews and journalists. And so this must stop, this targeting of the news media both literally and figuratively must come to an end immediately.
In a NY Times op-ed on April 11, 2003, he admitted that
Over the last dozen years I made 13 trips to Baghdad to lobby the government to keep CNN’s Baghdad bureau open and to arrange interviews with Iraqi leaders. Each time I visited, I became more distressed by what I saw and heard — awful things that could not be reported because doing so would have jeopardized the lives of Iraqis, particularly those on our Baghdad staff. …
A 31-year-old Kuwaiti woman, Asrar Qabandi, was captured by Iraqi secret police occupying her country in 1990 for "crimes," one of which included speaking with CNN on the phone. They beat her daily for two months, forcing her father to watch. In January 1991, on the eve of the American-led offensive, they smashed her skull and tore her body apart limb by limb. A plastic bag containing her body parts was left on the doorstep of her family’s home.
I felt awful having these stories bottled up inside me. Now that Saddam Hussein’s regime is gone, I suspect we will hear many, many more gut-wrenching tales from Iraqis about the decades of torment. At last, these stories can be told freely.
In November 2004 in Portugal, Jordan said that
[A]ctions speak louder than words. And you talk about dignity and respect for un-embedded journalists and journalists in general but the reality is that at least 8, maybe 10, maybe more journalists in Iraq have been killed by the US military. There are reports that I believe to be true that journalists have been arrested and tortured by US forces. One case that was not talked about here: an Al-Jazeera journalist put in Abu Ghraib and physically and emotionally abused, called a Jazeera boy and forced to eat his shoe and other things. Even now there’s an Al-Arabiya journalist in Fallujah who’s been in captivity now for a week. The US military has said that he is not guilty of anything and he’ll be freed, but we’re now 6 or 7 days into his captivity. It’s just these actions and the fact that no-one in the US military has been punished or reprimanded for any of these things would indicate that the US military really does not have respect for the journalistic corps in Iraq.
Now he travels to Switzerland and accuses the military of targeting journalists. At some point, even CNN had to grow tired of this, and recognize that Jordan’s penchant for making his comments in overseas fora where he thought he wouldn’t be called on what he said was going to hurt its already Sisyphean task of supplanting Fox News atop the ratings.
[hat tips to Captain’s Quarters, Powerline, Jeff Jarvis and Michelle Malkin for most of the links and quotes above]
