Archives for May 2003

Holy crap

Thanks for visiting this blog for the first time. Check out the home page for the most recent posts, or the archives if you're looking for something in particular. Here are some of our favorite posts, which you might enjoy:

If you like what you see, we hope you'll consider subscribing to the RSS feed.

If you type in “Jesus Christ” into Google, the top result is a link to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints–the mormons. Nowhere in sight is the Catholic Church or the Baptists or whatnot. Could there be a divine message here? There’s also this.

May 31, 2003 | 2 Comments

The unsocractic method

The first law school grads to earn their degree completely online have just passed the California bar, according to the LAT. I’m all for this kind of advance, but would you hire these guys to represent you? Probably not if you could avoid it.

The school is called Concord Law School and holds class exclusively online through video, e-mail, and chat rooms. It is owned by Kaplan, which (I didn’t know this) is owned by the Washington Post. At $7,500 a year, the price is right and is filling a useful niche:

Unlike students at traditional law schools, many of Concord’s students — many of them doctors and accountants whose average age is 42 — are getting law degrees to enhance their skills at their current jobs, according to law school officials.

May 31, 2003 | 1 Comment

No regrets when it’s not your fault

It wasn't me. It wasn't me.Following in the footsteps of another disgraced plagiarist, Stephen Glass, New York Times black eye Jayson Blair is attempting to leverage his scandal by shopping around a book to publishers, according to The Washington Post. But unlike Glass, whose book is not ironically a work of fiction, Blair’s would be a tell-all about the NYT and his downfall, the thesis of which seems to be, “it’s not my fault.” Literary agents think he could get a six-figure advance.

In his book proposal, Blair compares himself to teenage sniper Lee Malvo and blames his actions on the inevitable rage of an oppressed young black man. Shameless excuses for his plagiarism include:

  • whites always told him he’d never succeed (so he proved them right?)
  • he was addicted to alcohol and drugs
  • he was depressed and unhappy with his workplace environment
  • deception was fun and he couldn’t control himself
  • the New York Times is racist
If Blair really believes he wasn’t responsible for his actions, then he can’t be apologetic–and he isn’t. Now he’ll likely be rewarded. It makes you wonder what’s the point of playing by the rules.

BONUS: Judge Posner weighs in on the Blair scandal and exposes himself as somewhat of an IP anarchist. Plagiarism is bad, and should be punished, but borrowing ideas without attribution is no big deal, Posner says.

It would be better if the term “plagiarism” were confined to literal copying, and moreover literal copying that is not merely unacknowledged but deceptive. Failing to give credit where credit is due should be regarded as a lesser, indeed usually merely venial, offense.

As a blogger, I would have to agree.

May 24, 2003 | Comment

Illegal revenge or delayed justice?

My father has always told me that the day the Castro regime falls in Cuba, a lot of blood will run as collaborators get their comeuppances. And not just government officials, but others–from communist artists to neighborhood watch snitches. Dad certainly remembers who jeered him and his family when they left the island. It looks like his prediction is coming tue in Iraq as the Ba’athists get their’s. According to the Washington Post:

The number of revenge killings against Baathists seems to be picking up as Iraqis are losing hope that the U.S. is really going to go after former party hacks. “Why can Americans kill anyone they want? Why can’t we?” said one man. “I will kill Baathists myself. This is my right.” Given the state of things in Iraq, the WP understandably doesn’t have hard numbers on the recent killings. But within the past few days, one well-known suck-up singer to Saddam was murdered as was the former head of Iraq’s official artists union.

May 20, 2003 | Comment

The good, the bad, and the FCC

The good news is the FCC decided yesterday to remove a ban on secondary market trading of spectrum. By no means will this allow full-on market allocation of spectrum rights, but it will allow license holders to lease out excess capacity to the highest bidder. A good first step towards a free market in spectrum. The bad news is “Republicans” John McCain and Ted Stevens are looking to head off the FCC at the pass by codifying media ownership restrictions and taking it out of the agency’s hands. This would be as bad as when Congress codified the Cuban travel ban, which had been an executive order. Still, Bush would have to sign the bill and I’m not sure he would.

May 16, 2003 | Comment

Vote community standards off the island

Viacom president Mel Karmazin and others testified before a Senate committee today on loosening media ownership rules, something the FCC is currently considering. Here’s a novel argument for strict property control:

James Goodmon, president of Capitol Broadcasting Co., which owns and operates five TV stations in North Carolina and South Carolina, told lawmakers that raising the cap [of stations a network can own] will allow networks to gobble up more smaller broadcasters. He said network-owned stations would lack the local control that allowed his company to refuse to run several reality programs, including Fox’s “Married By America.”

“We said we’re going to stop at demeaning marriage and the family,” he said. “There’s never been a network-owned station that pre-empted a network station for content reasons.”

Owning five stations in two states doesn’t seem that small to me. I also don’t understand why small broadcasters will be “gobbled up”. Is anyone going to put a gun to their head to make them sell? Or do they consider a very big cash offer a form of force? I’ll tell you who does have gun to their heads right now: media companies who are forbidden from making the offer.

But more importantly, doesn’t the ultimate control reside with the viewer? Can’t he turn off “Married by America” if he finds it demeaning? Or better yet, switch to one of the other 500 channels? Or best of all, vote to pair Billie Jean with Kevin? Or are Goodmon’s customers so stupid that he has to make those choices for them?

Go Clay! You’re standing up for all us skinny, effete types!

May 13, 2003 | 3 Comments

Short finally resigns

The top story in the UK today isn’t getting much play over here: Clare Short resigned from her cabinet post in protest over Iraq. I admire her for her conviction, but it’s a shame she didn’t resign when she threatened to before the war. Her officially stated reason for leaving is now that the UN isn’t being given a big enough role in the reconstruction. It would have been much better if she had resigned over the war’s illegality.

BONUS QUESTIONS: Don’t you think one regime change a month in Iraq should be enough for the White House? And has the revolution begun in Saudi?

May 12, 2003 | Comment

Not enough TV channels or Web sites?

A screed over at Boing Boing today (apparently suggested by Lawrence Lessig) hyperventilates over the FCC’s planned easing of media ownership restrictions. If deregulation goes through, the argument goes, we’ll only have a few tightly-controlled outlets from which to get our news. But the writer, Cory Doctorow, doesn’t stop to realize that he’s making his point on Boing Boing, a highly trafficked and influential independent media outlet with no corporate control. As Homer Simpson would say, “Think of the irony.”

May 12, 2003 | Comment

So close, yet so foreign

Great short op-ed by Rep. Jeff Flake of Arizona in the New York Times today on how to really hurt Castro: lift the travel ban. His main point is that the federal government must think Americans are too stupid to distinguish a good trip from a bad trip to Cuba, and therefore impose Soviet-style restrictions on where otherwise free citizens can travel. He writes:

To be sure, lifting the ban is not without its risks. Some American travelers will go to Cuba and buy the Cuban government canard about the three “successes” of the Cuban revolution — education, health care and science. But far more Americans will notice the Cuban revolution’s three most obvious failures — breakfast, lunch and dinner.

May 12, 2003 | Comment

Wow! He flies jet fighters after the war!

Hail to the chiefs

If they absolutely have to turn to movies for ideas on scripting and choreographing W, why of all the choices pick Bill Pullman as the president in Independence Day? I’d personally prefer Alan Alda in Canadian Bacon or Jack Nicholson in Mars Attacks, but those presidents were probably not heroic enough for the spinsters down the street. So why not just go for the ultimate and do Harrison Ford in Air Force One? Whoever they pick, it astounding Americans really seem to be impressed by this ram-it-down-your-throat propaganda.

May 2, 2003 | Comment

  •  
  •