Browsing "media"

And the Lights Went Out, All Over the ‘Net.

This is fiction. Maybe:

“This morning, people around the world are waking up to a new internet.  A different internet. An internet where we at last can reap the benefits of the diligence, expertise, and forethought of our benevolent leaders who, guided by the selfless work of the great media engine and those in power over it, saw with crystal clarity the need for a strong response to the insipid cancer that is intellectual property piracy. No longer will the hard-working creatives who produce the great works of art and information be trodden underfoot by the lowlife, belly-crawling, bottom-feeding thieving scum that are everywhere, into everything, and beholding to nobody. Today, we take back what is rightfully ours. A clean internet. A pure internet. A safe internet…”

Read more »

Things that make you go "WTF?"

There was a little buzz among bloggers, kicked off this week by Podnosh (and picked up by Bad Science) around a report published by the Charity Commission stating that (to paraphrase) “wikis and blogs have no educational value”.  I’m not going to go into a detailed stance here (I’ll let the discussion on Podnosh and Bad Science do that for me, they’re doing a wonderful job), but I am going to make one observation:  What does this mean for the BBC? Let me explain.

If you take a look at who makes up the Charity Commission, you’ll find Sharmila Nebhrajani is one of the commissioners.  Sharmila is also COO of BBC Future Media & Technology, and this is where I get confused.  The commission has a member who runs the BBC department that handles its digital content, website, and (I would assume) blogs and podcasts.  The commission doesn’t see blogs as educational, yet the BBC continues to support Sharmila’s department in spite of a £36 million overspend.

Did I forget to mention that Sharmila also has a Facebook account?

Does this strike anyone as mildly … well … odd?

Aug 28, 2007 - media, mpaa, riaa, stupidity    No Comments

"What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander."

At least, that’s the way the adage goes.

Apparently, the contemporary equivalent is “If it worked for the RIAA and they didn’t get busted for extortion, then it should work for the MPAA with the same level of criminal immunity.” I think I’m going to be sick.

Can we at least turn the tables? Can we demand that they stop paying Hollywood actors incredible sums of money for crap movies and we promise to still go see them from time to time?

Apr 13, 2007 - media, observations, politics, tv    No Comments

Don Imus Leaves the Airwaves. So?

I must say, I’m a bit ambivalent.  MSNBC dropped their simulcast, CBS fired him, the media’s “analysts” can’t stop talking about it, Al Sharpton claims a victory, Rutgers accepts his apology … and I can’t help but think:

“Are we going to consistently treat everyone who uses racially improper speech with an equal amount of vitriol and retribution?” 

If so, then good.  If not, then how many of those loudly screaming now will be silent the next time?

I really hate jumping in on major public brawls like this.  Everybody who’s anybody (and plenty of people who aren’t) have already opened (and will continue to open) their mouths.  But there’s another issue here that’s being marginalized:  “What happens the next time?”

Whether Imus went too far or not isn’t the issue moving forward, consistency of response is.

Pages:123»