In front of an audience of about 50 local social media junkies taking part in one of the station’s regular “bloginars,” new media director John Daenzer pulled back the kimono a project called The Wire. It’s an interactive timeline for news and events that allows users — journalists and citizen journalists alike — to follow and influence a story’s development in real time. It is, in fact, a way for news consumers to become news reporters; to see and participate in how the journalism sausage is made.
"We want to break down the wall that says we are the brokers of information," Daenzer says. "I think it’s time that we as the media admit that we don’t have all the answers."
While I totally support you in your disgust with Baio’s rhetoric, you’re going over the line when you post addresses for the purpose of harassment. When you bring it to that level, you’re just losing credibility for your side of the debate.
“The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a ‘mouse’. There is no evidence that people want to use these things. I dont want one of these new fangled devices.”—John C. Dvorak, Feb. 19 1984 (via davidkaneda)
Maybe I am getting old but the idea of spending a night at a bar doesn’t appeal to me quite as much as it used to. I hate yelling in order to try to have a conversation with someone. I hate dealing with the crowds. Sure, I don’t mind it once and awhile but certainly not three times a week or more like I used to.
I much prefer having dinner with a group of friends, it’s a lot more enjoyable.
“Is this the best we can do? Forcing people to buy private health insurance, guaranteeing at least $50 billion in new business for the insurance companies? Is this the best we can do? Government negotiates rates which will drive up insurance costs, but the government won’t negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies which will drive up pharmaceutical costs. Is this the best we can do? Only 3% of Americans will go to a new public plan, while currently 33% of Americans are either uninsured or underinsured? Is this the best we can do? Eliminating the state single payer option, while forcing most people to buy private insurance. If this is the best we can do, then our best isn’t good enough and we have to ask some hard questions about our political system: such as Health Care or Insurance Care? Government of the people or a government of the corporations.”—
God bless Kucinich. And the progressive caucus. I couldn’t be more grateful to them for pushing the conversation and the legislation from the left. I agree with this sentiment.
We have never been this close to health reform. Never ever ever.
At this stage in the process (getting both chambers to pass bills, combining those two, and getting each chamber to pass the combined version)… this thing has very little chance of getting more “liberal.” By all means, I hope amendments are offered in these directions, but… it ain’t gonna happen.
Getting this passed is an ENORMOUS step. But it’s just one step. We can build on it, improve it with further legislation, etc. For example, I can imagine changing eligibility for the the public plan if people start demanding it. The point is that holding out for our dream bills will leave us starting over from scratch again.
Now, we could be spending our time decrying the fact that Americans seem to have a strong preference for opinionated editorializing (be it Obermann or O’Reilly) over real solid news. Except of course that CNN hasn’t offered real solid news in a long time. Or we could bemoan the fact that a vitriolic ideologue like O’Really totals almost three times more viewers than the equally ideological but far less vitriolic and infinitely more sane Obermann.
But that would be missing the real story. Let me give you some othernumbers for comparison, so that we can put things in proper context. The total adult population of the United States is 231 million, which means that even O’Reilly is not actually followed by more than 0.4 percent of the population. The daily readership of the much dreaded (by O’Reilly) New York Times is about 1 million, the audienceship of the beleaguered (by Republican-led budget cuts) National Public Radio is a whopping 6.5 million daily. For crying out loud, even Jon Stewart’s Daily Show beats O’Reilly hands down, with an average viewership of over 2 million, and a peak performance of 3.6 million!
So the real question is: why do we give a damn, as a nation, about what O’Reilly, Obermann, Dobbs, and company say? Why do these people have the power to affect national debates about health care, wars, and the environment, while clearly more reasoned voices actually get much more attention, and when the overwhelming majority of Americans are paying no attention at all?
The latter, of course, is the answer. Yes, O’Reilly’s power derives in part from the dollars that advertisers “invest” on his programs, and in part from the fact that we live in a society where those who shout — even when they are a small minority — get to dictate the terms of the “discussion” to the rest of us (witness the inane spectacle of last summer’s “town hall meetings”).
But it is us who let them do it, largely through apathy. Progressives in this country could count on an overwhelming majority of votes if the majority of eligible voters bothered to vote. A few weeks ago, instead, even in New York City — where there are more political activists than in almost the entire rest of the country combined — a tiny fraction of voters turned out for a runoff primary that for all effective purposes decided the election of a crucial political post like that of City Comptroller.
Republicans know this and act accordingly. Years ago the Christian Coalition devised their “12.5% strategy” to control the country. They reckoned that less than 50% of Americans go to vote, and that the fraction is about half that at primaries, which means that a candidate only needs half again of that (i.e., slightly above 12.5% of the total) to win the primary, which often means winning the general election. It worked, until recently, when the Obama machine turned out unprecedented numbers of minorities and poor to vote during the last presidential election.
Now, Sen. Joe Lieberman, what exactly is your problem again? Cost? Your argument is invalid.
This is so incredibly wrong and inaccurate. Stop spreading false propaganda. Look at the newly updated information rather then the OLD inaccurate facts. Also, the “new” updated version of the Healthcare Reform bill came out today. Don’t worry, it’s only 1,990 pages long.
Actually you’re right. It’s a cost of $894 billion over 10 years with a net reduction of the federal deficit of $104 billion over the 2010-2019 period, $9 billion alone coming in 2019.
The person I originally heard this from must have confused the $104 billion in savings for the expanded coverage of over 30 million currently uninsured Americans.
“MSNBC wishes they were as good as Fox. They’re the Toledo Mud Hens to Fox’s Yankees. MSNBC doesn’t even realize their morning show is hosted by a conservative. Obama administration, do you even know your role in all this? Truth to power? What the fuck? You’re the White House. You’re the power. Here’s how it goes in the truth to power statement. It’s your job to fuck up power, it’s Fox’s job to fuck up the truth.”—Jon Stewart
“And the #1 Halloween threat: Sexy Costumes. I have no problem with women wearing sexy costumes on Halloween, but SpoiledRottenDoggys.com has debuted a new line of matching sexy costumes for dogs. Folks, this is terrible, because after a few drinks who knows which of these two you’re going to take home? I mean it starts out like any other hook up: a little heavy petting, plenty of panting, the next morning you roll over and realize you just had a one night stand with a real bitch. And folks you do not know the meaning of walk of shame until you’ve picked up your date’s poop with a plastic bag.”—Stephen Colbert
“The public wants term limits, and while it may be that the city council has the right to override them, deliberately saying to the public “we don’t care what you think” is, I would use the word disgraceful.”—
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, November 22, 2005
In August 21, 2002 he said “I believe it is simply inappropriate to seek to change those rules in a manner that may work to their own advantage.”
On October 2, 2008 he said “If the council passes it, I will sign it and I plan to run for re-election.”
“According to Fox, their weekday news programming runs from 9am to 4pm and 6pm to 8pm for a total of 9 newsy hours a day. Let me, help you, as an audience, out. The 3 hours in the morning you spend with Fox and Friends, not news! Your 4 o’clock to 5 o’clock post tea and crumpets Neil Cavuto break, not news! The 5 o’clock to 6 o’clock emotional whirlwind group therapy session that is Glenn Beck, mmmmmm not even close to news. O’Reilly, Hannity, Van Susteran, not news. This is according to Fox News. Those people, the ones featured in promos about how fair and balanced Fox News is, are not news. These people, otherwise known as the only people you think of when you think of Fox News, are not news. They’re Fox Opinutainment.”—Jon Stewart