« November 03, 2003 | Main
| November 05, 2003 »

November 04, 2003

Some good guys get rich
: A guy you probably never heard of named Tom Evslin is responsible for much of the growth of the Internet. For it was Tom who decided when he headed AT&T WorldNet to switch from per-minute billing for Internet access to flat, all-you-can eat access for $19.95 per month. AOL and everybody else soon had to follow and the market exploded. And the old ways of the old phone companies -- ruled by time -- gave way to the new ways of the new communications companies -- ruled by access and bandwidth instead. The clock succumbed to the click.
Tom left AT&T (wisely) and started a company to broker voice services over the Internet (now acronymed VOIP). And today, VC Fred Wilson tells us that Tom's company was sold to create the third-largest long-distance phone company. Couldn't happen to a smarter guy.win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (2)

Terrorism, defined
: My post below on the definition of terrorism led to a useful link in the comments to quite useful definitions of terrorism from, yes, the U.N. It fits Iraq like an explosive belt.win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (1)

Reaganistes
: Terry Teachout sees ominous signs in CBS' decision to cancel The Reagan miniseries under public pressure. So do I (and I'll tell you why in a minute). So does tomorrow's New York Times editorial (though it's hard to tell exactly what this wobbly bit of writing is trying to say). So does Dan Gillmor (though he sees in this a sign of the sins of media consolidation -- a kneejerk response, a real stretch, and a mistake). Terry's take is the savviest:

I’ve been following Big Media’s coverage of the flap over The Reagans, and just two days ago I noted with interest and amusement a wire story claiming that CBS would be pleased by the controversy, since it would inevitably increase the series’ ratings. That is soooooo last year. Those of us who blog, whatever our political persuasions, know better. Boycotts of Big Media have always been feasible in theory. (Newspapers, in case you didn't know, take cancel-my-subscription-you-bastards letters very seriously—if they get enough of them.) In practice, though, they rarely worked, because it was too difficult to mobilize large-scale support quickly enough. No more. Fox News, talk radio, and the conservative-libertarian sector of the blogosphere have combined to create a giant megaphone through which disaffected right-wing consumers who have a bone to pick with Big Media can now make themselves heard.

Hold your cheers, blog mob. This is bad news. I'll get to the reasons why in another minute. First, Terry sees more import in CBS' decision to cancel the miniseries and move it to Showtime:

...CBS has publicly acknowledged, albeit implicitly, the growing weakness of Big Media. Now that the common culture is a thing of the past, lowest-common-denominator programming is harder and harder to pull off, as is lowest-common-denominator editing. To do it, you have to keep lowering the denominator further and further. When your overhead is as high as it is at CBS, you can’t afford to give offense, nor can you afford to be sophisticated. Above all, you don't dare try to lead the culture anywhere it doesn't care to go—not if your job is to keep your numbers in the black.
The new media impact on Big Media in two ways. The first is the megaphone effect I spoke about a moment ago. The second, which is of at least equal importance, is that they compete with Big Media. If you’re reading these words, you’re not watching CBS...
Five years ago, opponents of The Reagans would have failed to sway CBS because of their inability to make enough noise. The network would have taken the "high road" and stared them down, and been praised for its courage by other Big Media outlets. And if it were only a matter of noise, CBS would have done the same thing today…but it isn’t. Today, CBS is fighting for its corporate life. So are NBC, ABC, Time, TV Guide, the Reader’s Digest, and all the film studios and record labels. They can’t afford to ignore the noise anymore, no matter which side of the political fence it comes from. And they won’t.

Stifle the gloating again, blog mob. For you may think this is good news -- ding, dong, the big media witch is dead... it's melting, it's melting! Or at least: The big guys are listening at last!
But it's not good news. It's bad for media, old and new. It's bad for the republic.
For the real problem here is that we're turning ourselves into a nation of media sheep, namby-pamby, thin-skinned, coddled, babied consumers who are protected from offense and opinion.
Offense is the cardinal sin of the age. If anybody is ever offended then something must be done; punishment must be met; mouths must be shut. A Mafia movie about Italians? Can't do that! Shut them up! A Reagan movie that's less than flattering? Heavens to Betsy! Off with their airtime! We must protect the people from offense.
We might as well live under the protection of the media watchdogs of East Berlin before the fall of the Wall (that Wall that Reagan himself wanted down).
This takes the ethos of political correctness and spreads it to the right: It is now politically incorrect to criticize the Reagans.
Well, tyranny of thought is tyranny of thought no matter which side is complaining and which side is silenced.
And since when did we become so damned afraid of opinion and offense? Since when did we become so afraid of a two-bit TV movie starring James Brolin from the producers of Cinderella, ferchrissake?
Rather than shying away from controversy we should be running toward it! That is the lesson of online and of the era of opinionated news: We live for controversy. We should welcome it precisely because we're smart enough to watch any opinion and decide for ourselves what we think; we don't need Big Brother or Big Mother deciding what we should and shouldn't hear or see or read.
So, you see, weak media is a bad thing (Dan). Cancelling The Reagans -- no matter how bad it may be -- is a bad thing (especially when that is done under pressure from people who haven't even seen it). Media mob rule is a dangerous thing.
If the movie was bad, CBS should have never made it. If it was bad and CBS still made it and aired it, then thanks to online, everybody's a critic and everybody has a megaphone; everybody could criticize it. But killing it? That's downright undemocratic. It's unAmerican.
Ronald Reagan himself would be ashamed.
win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (79)

The state of Iraq
: Again, I can't quote from the Foursquare conference but I will report this: Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations (and a former adviser to Colin Powell) and Richard Holbrooke (former member of Clinton's cabinet and ambassador to the U.N.) talked about Iraq and when they finished, the guy in front of me turned around and moand, "Boy, that was depressing." Yes, I said, what was most depressing was that these two guys from different administrations -- engaging in smart conversation based on considerable knowledge and experience -- agreed about so much and had so few solutions. Iraq is hard. win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (4)

4Square
: I'm lucky enough to be attending the second annual Foursquare conference put on by the Quadrangle Group. But it's all off-the-record and so I can't quote the interesting things being said there. In fact, they announced to the 250 privileged that there are no reporters in the room. A-ha, but there is a blogger in their midst! But this blogger is no fool. It's not often that you get to hear moguls -- Barry Diller, Michael Eisner, Carly Fiorina today -- while noshing on sushi and oysters. So I won't ruin a good thing by taking this gag out of my mouth (except to stuff some more shrimp in).
I can give you my own thoughts today and tomorrow, for what they are worth. But I'm no mogul.win rar free with serial

: These events tend to be stone-skippers and the real value is the abstracted daydreaming you do while the big guys speak. I get back to basics. And the most basic of basics is that I am in the content business. We all are. That could not be more terribly obvious but daydream for a minute: This is where our opportunity lies. We can use these incredibly cheap and easy tools and this incredibly powerful distribution to create new forms of content and, if we succeed -- if we create something truly new and if it clicks with even our small audiences -- then any big boy with half a brain will beat a path to our door. For the big boys desperately need new kinds of content, they need to reinvent their media and it's not going to happen from within.
So we need to look at this as more than just a fun and interactive new medium. We need to get serious about creating serious content.
If we're creating punditry here, then what should we do to create better punditry than anybody in print or on TV? Let's be tough on ourselves: Are we being smart enough and persuasive enough; do we have our facts in line; is our presentation the most effective it could be; does the conversation we engage in here have a point and an end?
Or we could create new kinds of radio. I have some ideas (I'm keeping to myself until I try them out).
Or we could create new forms of video.
Or we could use the interactivity of our medium to capture the buzz of what we the people think in new and amazing ways.
I am convinced that we can use this new medium to create new forms of content that will work not only online but in print and on radio and on TV -- or at least inspire new kinds of content there. All we have to do is set our minds and talents and tools to it.win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (1)

And the lion and the lamb lay down their subpoenas
: Peace in the kingdom. No Atrios/Luskin suits or countersuits. Civility reigns. Bravo.win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (1)

At the Foursquare confab... No wifi.... Off the record.... Blogging later.....win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (1)

Blogs, armed and ready: The Department of Defense is set to blog ... sort of. It announced that it selected Traction Software -- a groupware, blogware application -- to:

... identify technologies that accelerate net centricity by supporting the advancement of Internet-focused tenets and transformational processes, deploy select business case-driven proof of concept pilot projects and select the technologies that are capable of generating proven results...

Whatever. [via Thomas Burg]win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (3)

Let my people go
: Reza Pahlavi (the junior shah) writes in today's Wall Street Journal:

In Iran's immediate neighborhood, in one of the least technologically advanced regimes, the Taliban's allies demonstrated that all they need is box cutters to use the free world's own resources against it. Yet nuclear-armed Pakistan is frequently praised as an ally in the war against terror. So it is the character of the regime, rather than the technology it possesses, that constitutes the greater part of the threat.
Then why doesn't the international community come together on the greater part of its fear, and declare its unambiguous opposition to a terrorist regime in such a strategic region? Why doesn't it unite with Iran's people, whose loudly demonstrated wish is to be rid of the only regime in the world whose theocratic constitution specifically rejects popular sovereignty? ...
But the world need not live in fear of a nuclear terrorist regime: I have no doubt that if it unites in support of democracy in Iran, it will unleash a popular force that will overwhelm the theocrats and sweep away their terrorist regime.

win rar free with serial

LINK | Comments (2)