Two random observations on the Egyptian revolution

Politics, , , ,

1) Did anyone else notice that essentially no pro-government attackers in Tahrir Square posted on Twitter, which was dominated entirely by anti-Mubarak sentiment? And that, furthermore, this seems to have been the case in Tehran in 2009 as well? Is one of the prerequisites for supporting a repressive regime that you can’t have the slightest idea how to use social networking?

2) As violent and disturbing as these clashes were, it’s a bit ironic to imagine what the American version would look like. Those Egyptians didn’t have access to guns. Now picture Times Square awash with New Yorkers, Californians, Texans, and Alaskans all vying for space and using guns, not stones, to mark their territory. ‘Twould be an ugly sight.

Al Jazeera and real journalism

Media, Politics

A little addendum to my earlier post on Bill Keller, The New York Times, and real journalism: for a prime example of real media courage, Keller would do well to look to Al Jazeera, which not only was the first major network to cover the Tunisian protests and lend the movement instant worldwide credibility, but has also continued to broadcast in Egypt, despite all attempts to shut it down, block it, and revoke its press credentials.

Hard to believe, but the NYT hates being upstaged by Julian Assange

Media, Politics, , ,

Bill Keller is the executive editor of The New York Times. On Wednesday, January 26, his article for the Magazine, “Dealing with Assange and the WikiLeaks Secrets,” was published, detailing the behind-the-scenes process of his newspaper’s collaboration and eventual falling-out with the enigmatic vigilante journalist.

Keller’s implicit message, however, was impossible to miss: Julian Assange is a reckless, harmful individual whose self-delusion and visions of grandeur belied his inability to produce real journalism — a task which, of course, is ostensibly exactly what The New York Times does on a regular basis.

Except for when it doesn’t. As I read Keller’s piece, I was often astonished at his utter lack of introspection — from both a personal and professional perspective — as well as his defense of some very questionable decisions made by him and his staff. Here, below, are a few of my thoughts, in no particular order: Continue reading Hard to believe, but the NYT hates being upstaged by Julian Assange →

Home sweet security state

Politics, Technology, , , ,

The Republican Party, in an effort to reduce the size of government and return civil liberties to the American people, has proposed recording users’ online browsing history and IP addresses.

Wait, what? Not only does that stand in stark contrast to their stated values, it also happens to directly contradict their opposition to data aggregation by online behavioral targeting firms, who essentially do the same thing but with more restrictions against using personally identifiable information. Apparently, only the U.S. government is above the law (something I suppose we should’ve learned already from the Bush years).

Bombing seafaring activists is OK, but try to avoid canine collateral casualties

Media, Sports, , , , ,

Tucker Carlson is back in the news again. (Weird, considering he is normally completely uninvolved with real news.) This time, it’s for stating that Philadelphia Eagles QB Michael Vick “should have been executed” for the crime of killing dogs.

A bit harsh? It would seem so, although dogs have been known to inspire fierce loyalty, so Carlson cannot be completely blamed on this front.

That is, of course, except for the fact that he condoned the 1985 bombing of a Greenpeace ship.

On the other hand, like so many good right-wing firebrands these days, at least he knows how to wield the term “terrorism” like the ambiguous free-for-all word that it is (or should I say, has become). I’m assuming, of course, that Carlson is just as outraged over the twice-investigated Pittsburgh Steelers QB Ben Roethlisberger, for his alleged sexual assaults (the latter of which appears more likely to have actually taken place as described by the victim), as he is about Michael Vick and his dog-fighting.

Right?

(Incidentally, I believe this post somewhat self-deprecatingly — yet in a self-serving way — vindicates my prior post’s point about the detritus clogging so many online news and blog sites. Guilty as charged.)

The reverse Al Franken

Humor, Politics, ,

If a former comedian can become a member of Congress, why can’t a current representative become a comedian? At least give Barney Frank credit for trying:

I called Barney Frank, assuming the gay pioneer would be optimistic. He wasn’t. “It’s one thing to have a gay person in the abstract,” he said. “It’s another to see that person as part of a living, breathing couple. How would a gay presidential candidate have a celebratory kiss with his partner after winning the New Hampshire primary? The sight of two women kissing has not been as distressful to people as the sight of two men kissing.”

Because of the Defense of Marriage Act, he added, “it’s not clear that a gay president could use federal funds to buy his husband dinner. Would his partner have to pay rent in the White House? There would be no Secret Service protection for the paramour.”

Frank noted that we’ve “clearly had one gay president already, James Buchanan. If I had to pick one, it wouldn’t be him.” (The Atlantic blogger Andrew Sullivan aims higher, citing Abe Lincoln, who sometimes bundled with his military bodyguard in bed when his wife was away.)

Frank said that although most Republicans now acknowledge that sexual orientation is not a choice, they still can’t handle their pols’ coming out. “There are Republicans here who are gay,” he said of Congress, “but as long as they don’t acknowledge it, it’s O.K. Republicans only tolerate you being gay as long as you don’t seem proud of it. You’ve got to be apologetic.”

Transparency: For best results, use only on others

Politics, ,

As per today’s New York Times, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had this to say about allegations of sexual wrongdoing: “On Friday, he told the BBC that the case presented in the London courts was ‘a smear attempt,’ and that the impending publication of the Swedish police documents amounted to ‘another smear attempt.'”

This is a bit odd. Julian Assange thinks the publication of, well, something is actually negative. And yet, thanks to him, we are now privy to such pertinent information as the fact that Colonel Muammar al-Qaddafi’s ever-present personal nurse is a “voluptuous blonde.” I mean, someone’s got to report on this stuff.

And speaking of odd…um, Joe Lieberman appears to have located his long-lost set of morals. This has been a strange last few days.