« April 2007 | Main | June 2007 »
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 06:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
NewTeeVee profiles James Kotechki:
While Jon Stewart does it nightly with razor wit and Steven Colbert does it with truthiness, James Kotecki does political media revue with pencil puppets and a webcam. The Economist cites Kotecki, who posts as “EmergencyCheese” on YouTube, as “probably the world’s foremost expert on YouTube videos posted by presidential candidates.”
Mr. Kotecki, a 2007 Georgetown University graduate and former Congressional page, started posting at the start of this year. “The first few videos were just me parroting what the mainstream media was saying and it was pretty terrible in content, delivery, everything,” Kotecki admitted in a phone interview. “Then I realized that some of the candidates had their own [YouTube] channels and I saw a wide disparity in the content. I didn’t see anyone talking about this, so I thought I’d post a video response.”
Artfully positioning himself as a political media analyst, Kotecki, an international politics major, offers advice to candidates attempting to navigate the politically uncharted viral video waters. Commenting on everything from camera angels and backdrop decisions to conversational cadence and discussion point poignancy, Kotecki mixes Stephanopoulos topicality with Ze Frank delivery.
Read more here. And here are some of his videos (see here and here):
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 06:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 06:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Writing for CNET News.com, Michael Kanellos asks, how good are the censors in China?
If the experiment is any indication, the Great Firewall of China is more thorough than I thought. It keeps sensitive information off of the sites most residents will use. Meanwhile, it makes accommodations for foreigners.
Read more here.
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 05:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Wired wonders which ISPs are spying on you?
The few souls that attempt to read and understand website privacy policies know they are almost universally unintelligible and shot through with clever loopholes. But one of the most important policies to know is your internet service provider's -- the company that ferries all your traffic to and from the internet, from search queries to BitTorrent uploads, flirty IMs to porn.
Wired News, with help from some readers, attempted to get real answers from the largest United States-based ISPs about what information they gather on their customers' use of the internet, and how long they retain records like IP addresses, e-mail and real-time browsing activity. Most importantly, we asked what they require from law-enforcement agencies before coughing up the data, and whether they sell your data to marketers.
Read more here.
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 05:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
From The Courier Mail:
ANTI-smoking group Quit has launched a new television campaign so explicit that it's been banned from Australian screens in peak viewing times.
The shocking television campaign highlights how smoking can lead to a stroke, by featuring a surgical procedure that clears out blockages in the neck artery.
The ad has been given an M rating, making it the first quit smoking message in Australia to be banned at specific times because of its confronting nature.
The material could be screened only after 8.30pm and then only during programs with an M rating, a Quit spokeswoman said.
Quit acting director Suzie Stillman said the uncompromising scenes were reality television at its most powerful.
Read more here and watch the ad:
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 03:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Fans of Michael Cera (of Arrested Development and Clark and Michael fame) must watch this very clever and very funny piece of viral marketing for the upcoming film Knocked Up:
If you don't get it, Cinematical explains here.
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 02:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 01:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
According to this post today, the Australian blawg LawFont is back:
Although our frequency of posts has dropped off since the second half of 2006, things have been going on behind the scenes at LawFont.
Kim has recovered from her 2006 overload, and will be blogging primarily on Australian intellectual property issues. Sarah hopes to be back soon, and will be blogging again on a range of issues, mostly on developments outside of Australia.
Finally, we’d like to formally welcome our new blogger. Susanne is particularly interested in the regulation of communications and media content, counter-terrorism and national security regulation, and administrative law. We are very happy to have her with us!
Read it here. It will be good to have Kim blogging occasionally again and welcome to the blogosphere Susanne Lloyd-Jones.
While welcoming new Australian bloggers, check out these two newish blogs:
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 01:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
PC World presents The Ten Commandments of Blog and Wiki Etiquette:
Fueled in large part by the usercentric Web 2.0 trend, the Internet has evolved considerably as a communications platform, offering people innovative means for keeping in touch and sharing knowledge instantly with others across the globe. Blogs and wikis, which enable folks to broadcast their thoughts to the Web at large and to collaborate on documents, respectively, are the heavyweights of this movement. And though they are wonderful tools for bringing disparate people together and for accumulating knowledge, they can also quickly devolve into the online equivalent of grunting apes. And you don't want to be an unruly ape, do you? Of course not.
As we demonstrated with " The Ten Commandments of cell phone etiquette," new modes of communication require new codes for behavior. Just keep these Ten Commandments of blogs and wikis in mind as you type, and you will rise above the fray -- and help facilitate fruitful, lively discussion.
Read the Commandments here.
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 12:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The Media Report on ABC Radio National this morning had an excellent discussion of Australia's Right To Know campaign:
The Australia's Right To Know campaign was launched earlier this month by a coalition of media organisations, including News limited, the ABC, Fairfax, the SBS, and AAP.
And the campaign's aim is to draw public attention to the tightening of restrictions on journalists and free speech in Australia.
Read the transcript or download a podcast of the show here.
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 12:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The second episode of Clark and Michael, a web-only documentary series about two young guys trying to pitch a TV series that stars Michael Cera (who was Jason Bateman's son i n Arrested Development) is now online here.
See my post about the first episode here.
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 11:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Thursday, 31 May 2007 at 07:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
CNET News.com is running dueling perspectives on Twitter. Caroline McCarthy defends Twitter:
The beauty of Twitter is that, unlike a full-out blog, there's no obligation to be philosophical, thought-provoking or grammatically sound. Because it doesn't require that kind of extra effort, it's great for people like me who want to jump on the social-media bandwagon but don't have the time to set up something elaborate on WordPress. And unlike social-networking profiles like those on Facebook and MySpace, it's free-form. Instead of filling in a text field to add "running" to a list of interests, I can announce on Twitter that I just ran 6 miles and am desperately seeking pizza. (Twitter tip No. 2: You can learn a lot from your own "tweets." Me, I learned that I post a lot about food.)
Read more here.
Elinor Mills thinks the service is a pointless waste of time:
For one, what is up with this obsession the Twitter generation has with expressing itself and monitoring each others' lives? I don't understand the need to spew out personal information and random thoughts to the world. And that's just what Twitter is designed for: to be a medium through which you can share stream-of-conscious babblings with your friends and with anyone who has time to lurk on the Web site and read inane musings of strangers.
Read more here.
Posted on Wednesday, 30 May 2007 at 10:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Check out Microsoft Surface. Very cool ...
Posted on Wednesday, 30 May 2007 at 10:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
P2PNet interviews the controversial Allofmp3.com. Read it here.
(Hat tip: Michael Geist.)
Posted on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 at 02:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Tim Dunlop at Blogocracy has started a trial aimed at generating some cross-blog conversations on specific questions. He’s posed the first one, and asked a number of different bloggers to post an answer on their own sites.
My first question is picking up on something said by both John Howard and Paul Keating, namely, that when the government changes, so does the country. Both made the comment at a time when it looked to them like they might be about to lose power and so there was, of course, a sense of warning in their observation. So that’s my question: Does the country really change when the government changes?
Read some of the answers from:
Posted on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 at 02:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Sorry today's links are a bit late ...
Posted on Tuesday, 29 May 2007 at 12:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Monday, 28 May 2007 at 08:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
There is a controversy growing at the university where I work, QUT. From The Australian:
A BITTER dispute at Brisbane's creative industries campus, home to tomorrow's filmmakers, has ended up, naturally enough, on YouTube.
Adrian Strong, a film student at the Queensland University of Technology, has uploaded the first clips of a freelance documentary about the debate over another contentious QUT film.
The furore began after a gathering of academics, meeting to approve students' PhD projects, was shown rushes of the first film -- Michael Noonan's reality TV style comedy Laughing at the disabled. This prompted two QUT academics to write an article in The Australian last month condemning the project as exploitation of its intellectually disabled stars. The creative industries faculty in Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, has since been arguing about ethics, academic freedom and whistleblowing.
After the article, by Gary MacLennan and John Hookham, QUT changed Mr Noonan's thesis film title to Laughing with the disabled. Mr Noonan and disability group Spectrum defended the project, but another disability organisation, Queensland Advocacy Incorporated, has questioned it.
The university laid misconduct charges against Dr Hookham and Dr MacLennan, allegedly because of lack of respect towards Mr Noonan and his academic supervisors. Mr Strong's 10-minute clip on YouTube features Dr Hookham and Dr MacLennan, who say they were offended by the Noonan project partly because they each have schizophrenics in their families.
Read it here.
And here is the video, Freedom of Speech disabled at QUT:
Posted on Monday, 28 May 2007 at 07:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Kevin Rudd gets The Chaser treatment:
Posted on Sunday, 27 May 2007 at 06:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Sunday, 27 May 2007 at 11:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Sunday, 27 May 2007 at 08:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Jon Stewart interviewed Al Gore this week (see here and here):
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 05:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
WikiHow has a recipe for Open Cola:
While Pepsi and Coca-Cola (and others) closely guard their secrets to making cola beverages, several organizations have released their own recipes. Below is the recipe for homemade "OpenCola," an open-source cola beverage that invites makers to create and modify their recipe to achieve a better beverage. It is licensed under the GNU General Public License.
View the recipe here.
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 05:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The New York Times explains that user-generated advertisements are not all they cracked up to be:
Consumer brand companies have been busy introducing campaigns ... that rely on user-generated content, an approach that combines the populist appeal of reality television with the old-fashioned gimmick of a sweepstakes to select a new advertising jingle. Pepsi, Jeep, Dove and Sprint have all staged promotions of this sort, as has Doritos, which proudly publicized in February that the consumers who made one of its Super Bowl ad did so on a $12 budget.
But these companies have found that inviting consumers to create their advertising is often more stressful, costly and time-consuming than just rolling up their sleeves and doing the work themselves. Many entries are mediocre, if not downright bad, and sifting through them requires full-time attention. And even the most well-known brands often spend millions of dollars upfront to get the word out to consumers.
Read more here.
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 04:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Malaysia has some innovative methods to restrict movie piracy:
Malaysian cinemas have found a powerful weapon in their fight against movie pirates--military-style night vision goggles.
After showing people to their seats, trained ushers are strapping on the goggles and scanning darkened cinemas around the country to spot anyone trying to make illegal copies of movies with handheld video recorders or mobile phones.
...
Malaysia is on the U.S. watch list for movie and software piracy, but local authorities have launched a major crackdown on producers and retailers of illegal DVDs since the country began free-trade talks with the United States a year ago.
The association, which represents the big Hollywood studios, recently brought to Malaysia two dogs trained to sniff out DVDs--with stunning results. The two labradors, Lucky and Flo, have sniffed out more than a million DVDs and have broken a fake DVD ring.
They have been so successful that authorities believe that Malaysian pirates have put a bounty on the dogs' heads.
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 03:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
NewTeeVee has an interesting story from Croatia:
Croatia’s Social Democratic Party walked out of parliament after Interior Minister Ivica Kirin levied accusations of posting clips showing him in a poor light to YouTube. It’s not exactly the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, but it’s an indication of the impact YouTube is having on politics worldwide.
The news made it Stateside thanks to BoingBoing reader Mrak, who’s done all of the English reporting on the subject I can find so far.
Read more here.
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 03:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
From Techdirt:
Greg Beck writes "Public Citizen late yesterday filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit in Florida by two affiliated infomercial companies that are attempting to shut down negative reviews of their day trading software on the website InfomercialScams.com. They are claiming that running a website where consumers can post reviews of their products constitutes trademark infringement and a variety of other wrongs, and are seeking triple damages and attorneys' fees against the site's owner. In its motion to dismiss, Public Citizen argues that the Arizona-based website operator is not subject to jurisdiction in Florida, that the websites are protected by the First Amendment, that posting reviews is not trademark infringement, and that the Communications Decency Act protects a website owner from liability for what users post on the site." Once again, it looks like companies are trying to misuse intellectual property laws to prevent legal free speech.
Read it here.
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 02:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Saturday, 26 May 2007 at 08:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The final of the Australian National Schools Debating Championship will be held tomorrow in Melbourne. Congratulations and good luck to the two finalists - Victoria and Western Australia.
Congratulations also the Queensland team of Kaerlin McCormick, Anthony Brownlie-Smith, Emily Chalk and Sarida McLeod, who reached the semi-finals.
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 07:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Earlier this week I blogged about Hillary Clinton's quest for a campaign theme song (see here). Now, Hillary provides this video update:
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 07:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Media Guardian's Viral Video Chart this week doesn't really have anything worth embedding, and Jemima Kiss explains why:
I'm not sure if armies of the world's bloggers are linking to Paris Hilton clips to through pity, scorn or - God forbid - because they actually genuinely like her. But she accounts for a quarter of this week's viral video chart.
We're sinking to new lows. Shades and over-sized handbags to the ready: it's the top twenty celebrity viral videos.
Read more and view the chart here.
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 06:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The New York Times reports on Facebook's expansion:
With an ambitious strategy for expansion, Facebook is getting in MySpace’s face.
Facebook, the Internet’s second-largest social network, was originally popular on college campuses, but over the last year it has opened its dorm-room doors to all, and its membership rolls have exploded at triple-digit growth rates.
Now Facebook, based in Palo Alto, Calif., is inviting thousands of technology companies and programmers to contribute features to its service. They can even make money from the site’s users by doing so, and, at least for now, Facebook will not take a cut.
Some of the new features, demonstrated by software developers at a Facebook event here on Thursday, will allow members to recommend and listen to music, insert Amazon book reviews onto their pages, play games and join charity drives, all without leaving the site.
Read more here. Also, Mashable has more details here.
Another new feature for Facebook is video. Once again, from Mashable:
There’s a huge announcement buried under all the Facebook Platform buzz today: Facebook is launching a video service to compete with all the major video sharing sites. So not only should MySpace be shaking in its boots, but YouTube also has cause for concern.
The service, which isn’t yet live (we assume today or within the next week), will support video uploading as well as direct webcam recording. The Flash Recorder application also lets you record and send video messages to friends instantly through their Facebook inbox. It supports cellphones, too - send a clip to video@facebook.com to post it to your Facebook profile.
...
But we’re surprised to hear that unlike other video properties, Facebook Video won’t let you embed videos elsewhere - linking, yes, but no embedding. If this is the case, it’s probably the first move by Facebook that we actually disagree with.
Read more here.
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 05:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Google Watch's Steve Bryant on Google's acquisition of Feedburner:
The news yesterday evening: Google will buy RSS publisher Feedburner for $100 million. What to call it? Googburner? Feedboogle? Fondleburger?
Whatever. Let's just call the Internet Google and get it over with. That's only half a joke: Google buys or invests in growth trends online. Whatever technology has the potential of bringing more people online (mobile ads, video) or manages their online experience (blogs, iGoogle, maps) is a target for acquisition.
...
Of course here's ye olde note of caution: The Internet is quickly becoming Google's company town. And here's ye olde dose of reality: Not much you can do about that.
Read more here.
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 05:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
i'm is a new initiative from Windows Live Messenger so that every time you start a conversation using i'm, Microsoft will share a portion of the program's advertising revenue to whichever charity you select. The charities are:
Also, check out these two ads for i'm:
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 02:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Check out Clark and Michael, a web-only documentary series about two young guys trying to pitch a TV series that stars Michael Cera (who was Jason Bateman's son i n Arrested Development) - it is a very clever and funny behind the scenes look at Hollywood. You can watch the first episode here.
Here is the series trailer:
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 12:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The latest Big Brother controversy surrounding the death of Emma's father and the decision not to notify Emma of her loss, has attracted quite a bif of media attention over the last 24 hours or so. Emma's brother has written a response that has been posted on the Big Brother website:
Emma was aware of the possibility that our dads impending death may occur whilst she was in the Big Brother production. Our dad had been ill for a considerable amount of time and wasn’t taken from us suddenly; the family did have time to prepare themselves.We reassured Emma that, in the event that this did happen, grieving our dad’s death when she was released from Big Brother would be no less meaningful or significant than when he actually passed away.
I personally spent the last week of dad's life by his side and one thing he was absolutely certain about was the fact that he didn't want his death to impose either negatively or positively on Emma's Big Brother experience.
He made us promise him that no-one would notify Emma of his death. He was adamant and clear in expressing this request. He also requested that his death remain private from the Big Brother ‘hype’ but unfortunately due to the indecency of the person who leaked the information to the media we have been unable to honor this wish.
Emma and I have maintained a close friendship for many years. We have previously and recently in 'lock down', discussed the possibility of dad’s death thoroughly. I can confirm with absolute confidence that Emma has prepared herself and her views have been considered in the family’s decision-making process.
People may cast their own views and opinions but these people are not privy to Emma and dad’s relationship. We as a family wouldn’t want to interfere with anyone else’s family affairs especially in their time of sadness so we’re stunned by the reaction of so many that have based their opinions on a total lack of knowledge of our family’s internal workings. As Emma’s family we know her very well and are confident we have made the right decision.
Our dad was extremely proud of Emma’s achievements so far on Big Brother. He would watch her each night proudly from his hospital bed heckling rivals and laughing at Emma’s wicked attitude and antics. Without you guys and this Big Brother experience he wouldn’t otherwise have had this opportunity and insight into his daughter’s life, thank you.
Rest assured that the family has made arrangements to postpone dad’s final service until Emma departs the house to ensure Emma is still given the opportunity to participate. As you are aware the funeral has already taken place however the family will reconvene with Emma to lay dads ashes to rest.
On behalf of Emma’s family including Tim [her partner], we sincerely thank the Big Brother production team for supporting and respecting our family’s decision. Our family is not familiar with all this media attention and we are extremely grateful and appreciative of Big Brother's discretion and tact in dealing with this issue.
Regards
Matt (Emma’s brother)
I have bolded what I think is the most important paragraph in this letter. This was a family decision and we should respect that decision. And this should be the end of the matter.
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 10:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
From Brisbane Times:
Security personnel at Cairo international airport became suspicious of the hissing and the movement emerging from a large case being checked in by an Egyptian flying to Riyadh.
Witnesses said the shock was complete when the case was opened - to reveal 700 live snakes, including a cobra, which had been pressed in there.
The would-be passenger, who reportedly intended selling the snakes in Saudi Arabia, was being prosecuted, officials said.
Read it here.
(Hat tip: David Starkoff.)
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 09:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
It's not often I get to scoop David Starkoff, but here is an amusing moment in the High Court from oral argument in Santos Limited v Chaffey:
MR BENNETT: We would submit that that is simply something that is so far from the concept of acquisition of property, even though that may be its apparent affect on a particular person, that it is outside the prohibition. To argue to the contrary and to say that one looks only at the effect on the particular person, is to pick up – there is only one case I know which picks up that argument and that of course is The Castle where it was argued that the nature of one’s home was such that it was something the acquisition of which was in a different category because of its significance to the owner. The argument succeeded in that case, but the case is not generally regarded as authoritative for that proposition. Those, your Honours, are the submissions for the Attorney-General.
GLEESON CJ: Thank you, Mr Solicitor. Yes, Mr Walker?
(Hat tip: Ryan.)
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 09:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (1)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Posted on Friday, 25 May 2007 at 07:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
This discussion may help inform the political debate in Australia about broadband speeds and competition:
There has been an interesting discussion this week on Dave Farber's IP List comparing broadband speeds and linking that to the competitive environment. The discussion, which references congressional testimony and an ITIF study, notes how much faster, cheaper, and more competitive broadband services are in countries such as Japan and South Korea (the comparison is with the U.S., though the same holds true for Canada, particularly given recent price increases for both cable and DSL broadband).
(Hat tip: Michael Geist.)
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 09:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The American Journalism Review wonders if the mainstream media can learn something from Jon Stewart:
Whether lampooning President Bush's disastrous Iraq policies or mocking "real" reporters for their credulity, Stewart and his team often seem to steer closer to the truth than traditional journalists. The "Daily Show" satirizes spin, punctures pretense and belittles bombast. When a video clip reveals a politician's backpedaling, verbal contortions or mindless prattle, Stewart can state the obvious--ridiculing such blather as it deserves to be ridiculed--or remain silent but speak volumes merely by arching an eyebrow.
Stewart and his fake correspondents are freed from the media's preoccupation with balance, the fixation with fairness. They have no obligation to deliver the day's most important news, if that news is too depressing, too complicated or too boring. Their sole allegiance is to comedy.
Or, as "The Daily's Show's" Web site puts it: "One anchor, five correspondents, zero credibility. If you're tired of the stodginess of the evening newscasts, if you can't bear to sit through the spinmeisters and shills on the 24-hour cable news networks, don't miss The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, a nightly half-hour series unburdened by objectivity, journalistic integrity or even accuracy."
That's funny. And obvious. But does that simple, facetious statement capture a larger truth--one that may contain some lessons for newspapers and networks struggling to hold on to fleeing readers, viewers and advertisers in a tumultuous era of transition for old media?
Has our slavish devotion to journalism fundamentals--particularly our obsession with "objectivity"--so restricted news organizations that a comedian can tell the public what's going on more effectively than a reporter? Has Stewart, whose mission is to be funny, sliced through the daily obfuscation more effectively than his media counterparts, whose mission is to inform?
Read more here. As for the conclusion?
The mainstream media can not, should not and never will be "The Daily Show." The major news of our time is grimly serious, and only real news organizations will provide the time, commitment and professionalism necessary to ferret out stories such as the Washington Post's exposé of neglected veterans at Walter Reed or the New York Times' disclosures of secret, warrantless wiretapping by the federal government.
But in the midst of a transition, our industry is flailing. Our credibility suffers mightily. The public thinks we're biased despite our reluctance to speak plainly. Our daily newspapers often seem stale. Perhaps "The Daily Show" can teach us little, but remind us of a lot: Don't underestimate your audience. Be relevant. And be bold.
Read the whole piece here. It is a must-read.
(Hat tip: Creative Economy.)
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 09:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Trevor Cook blogged today about survey of Australian federal parliamentarians that was conducted a year ago by a Canberra company, Client Solutions with some interesting findings:
Only 25% expect the Internet to have a major role in the forthcoming election; only 9% expect blogging to have a major role in future advocacy programs; but, most amazing of all only 55% said they hosted their own website.
Read more here.
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 09:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
In an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal, Wendy Kaminer argues that the ACLU is becoming very selective about what it considers "free" speech:
"ACLU Defends Nazi's Right to Burn Down ACLU Headquarters," the humor magazine The Onion announced in 1999. Those of us who loved the ACLU, and celebrated its willingness to defend the rights of Nazis and others who had no regard for our rights, considered the joke a compliment. Today it's more like a reproach. Once the nation's leading civil liberties group and a reliable defender of everyone's speech rights, the ACLU is being transformed into just another liberal human-rights group that reliably defends the rights of liberal speakers.
This transformation is gradual, unacknowledged and not readily apparent, since evidence of it lies mainly in cases the ACLU does not take. It's naturally easier to know what an organization is doing (and advertising) than what it is not doing. But a review of recent free-speech press releases turns up only a handful of cases in which ACLU state affiliates defended the rights of conservative, antigay or otherwise politically incorrect speakers. And lately the national organization has been remarkably quiet in several important free-speech cases and controversies.
One of the clearest indications of a retreat from defending all speech regardless of content is the ACLU's virtual silence in Harper v. Poway, an important federal case involving a high-school student's right to wear a T-shirt condemning homosexuality.
Read more here.
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 09:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
The first seminar in
the education.au series, Challenging How Knowledge is Created, featured
Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia. His presentation in Melbourne is
available online here (it has been edited into 12 parts to assist with
accessibility). (Hat tip: Creative Economy.)
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 09:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Writing for FindLaw's Writ, Anita Ramasastry asks, it is a crime to prescribe medicine in cyberspace?
Congress is currently considering new legislation that would crack down on online pharmacies that provide prescription medications without patients having to visit a physician.
Meanwhile, a California court recent cracked down in its own way -- holding that a Colorado physician, lacking a California license, could be prosecuted for prescribing medication online to a California resident whom he had never met, and who subsequently died.
In this column, I'll discuss the California holding -- which, while in my view correct; probably will not have far-reaching consequences. In addition, I'll describe some of the proposals Congress is deciding whether to enact into law.
Read it here.
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 09:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Professor Jonathan Zittrain proposes a theory about what lies around the corner for the Internet, how to avoid it, and how to study and affect the future of the internet using the distributed power of the network itself, using privacy as a signal example. Watch Zittrain's lecture here.
(Hat tip: Creative Economy.)
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 08:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
We can't take an all or nothing approach to online expression, argues Bill Thompson:
The idea that the internet is an unregulated space where free expression is the guiding principle and we can all talk openly took another blow last week with the latest report on net filtering from the Open Net Initiative.
...
My colleague, Chinese journalist and blogger Michael Anti, pointed out that although political expression is tightly controlled in China the government is not really interested in other aspects of people's lives, while here in the UK we can talk about democracy but other forms of speech are restricted for legal and commercial reasons.
He has a point. The ONI report only looked at official, state-sanctioned filtering, and it did not consider the situation in the UK or US where most controls are imposed by companies trying to protect their reputation or achieve competitive advantage.
Posted on Thursday, 24 May 2007 at 08:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Digg This
| Save to del.icio.us
|
|
Recent Comments