Om reported this a few days ago and I have been meaning to touch on it, because I think it’s very, very important.Mozilla is contemplating offering syncing services, which would allow profile data to be synced between various computers; third…

Well, very little, now that you’ve been called on it. Lots of others, including Glenn had lots to say about the moral depravity on display at Davos. Their big ding was indeed big.

When modes of human interaction is reduced to the usage of cool technology, then for those whose bell is dinged in this way, I have one name for you to ponder:

Leni Riefenstahl

Jeff, meet mirror. Sad.

Sorry, Jeff, but I believe it does. Content matters. The democratization of distribution has not eliminated the advantages the wealthy and powerful enjoy in terms of access to eyes and ears. Calling Bush a Nazi at Davos (with little attendant outrage, IIRC) is different from calling him a Nazi at an antiwar rally in Berkley.

If I understand your point, the Davosians are behind the curve on both the technology and the sociology of new media. They don’t understand how completely the barriers to unmediated content have fallen and they don’t understand its implications.

One of the implications is that idiotic and offensive content spreads very quickly and with almost no institutional controls. Apart from copyright and defamation claims, there is almost no disincentive to either intentional or negligent hatefulness. So, the question I hoped you would have addressed in light of Soros’ comment is, what will keep Gresham’s law from limiting the value of new media?

Again, I just heard the comments made by George Soros at Davos, that America needs to be de-nazi-fied.

As I reread your statement about the most important ding I am even more horrified by your lack of seriousness as a commenter and at your inability to be more than a simplistic poseur.

How could anyone take you seriously?

Let me get this straight … in the middle of some of the most evil, nefarious NGOs, surrounded by people like Iranian leaders and John “bash America” Kerry, this is what rang/dinged your bell the most?

Either you’ve become immune to the horror, or you’re part of it.

Waxing triumphant about the Internets and being so much -quicker- and -faster- than the “lamestream media” (democracy! whiskey! sexy!) isn’t very revolutionary. I thought this dizzying display of libertarian onanism would be at least tempered by the following:

- bloggers, with notable exceptions, merely comment about the news and do little actual journalism

- “netroots”-heavy political campaigns are still unproven paths to success (see Howard Dean, and the thus-far unimpressive polling numbers for Mitt Romney)

- you can wall yourself from uncomfortable reality very, very easily (look at what the right-of-center blogosphere was pedaling last November, and if you want to go back farther, at the left-of-center in 2004).

Then again, I don’t have that hip new communication down as well as the rest.

But I do think a *wee* bit of humility helps for those of you out on the front lines in the Army of Davids.

DU

Its easy to get a self-important “media critic” to cover you obsessively by treating him as if he is as important as he thinks he is — and you pay his way, of course.

You can even get him to ignore the truly “revolutionary” inter-tubez thing that is happening at the same time — the liveblogging of the Scooter Libby trial, and the interplay between the bloggers and the corporate media covering the trial.

I mean, big freaking whoop — Davos caught up with the interwebs finally — and held a bunch of the same basic panel discussions that you’ve been attending/organizing/participating-in/commenting-on for years. Just because a few people with more money than God on the dais doesn’t make it more significant.

But what is happening in the Prettyman Building in Washington DC is truly revolutionary—(oh, and the revolution is also being “televised” on PoliticsTV via YouTube). Too bad your have been too busy patting yourself on the back to notice it….

The simple reason is not in the fact that the Intenet is about individualism or communication.
The simple reason is that the people (mostly young people and among them I include us, members of the “boom generation”) spend many hours a day on the Internet.
And the Market follows the people, doesn’t it?

http://davenet.scripting.com/2000/01/29/twoDaysAtDavos

http://davenet.scripting.com/2000/02/04/howToMakeMoneyOnTheInternet

Really, Jeff, you’re so tiresome.

Translated to mean, we’ve lost control of our monoply, our product and are losing our control of setting the cultural and political agendas that we’ve rammed down the public’s throat for decades. And worse, the Great Unwashed have an alternative, a voice and are publically exposing our entrenched flaws.

Tough times for veteran editors. The anarchy of it all. No tears shed here. I’m sure that to the journo elite this must be a very frightening time. One good thing about democratic people is that they will organize themselves in an orderly manner which is exactly what the internet is doing.

Watch these people, veteran editor and his ilk would love to muzzle the internet.