Letters to the Editor
bystander
Published Letters: 1240
-
Peanut Gallery musings
[Read the article: The Noxious Fruits of Hate Speech laws]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is it Bebop's computer that is problematic or his internet connection speed? I have the impression (which could be absolutely dead wrong) that Bebop has a dial up.
-
gherstein
[Read the article: The Noxious Fruits of Hate Speech laws]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Internet is making us stupid
Legal sage Cass Sunstein says democracy is the first casualty of political discourse in the digital age.; By Ben Van Heuvelen
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/11/07/sunstein/index.html
Generally speaking, it's not a new concern. However, the internet age moving discourse from a single action to a semi-automatic is an interesting way to look at it. I admit I'd not thought of it in those terms. While I'm following the argument, I don't have any well formulated thoughts about it.
One unrefined idea I have goes along the lines of, "It could be too soon to tell." Like any technology, and the cultural context that grows up around it, and in response to it, a certain amount of time must pass before you understand it. I tend to agree with your idea that the effects are not automatically benign. Douglas Hofstadter has disabused me of the notion. But, I also don't think pornography is benign, nor do I think blood and gore computer games are benign. In all, I still think it's my responsibility to accept, "I am what I eat."
Another unrefined thought I have is to hold off making a judgment until I watch this election play out. Certainly, we have swung pretty far to the right. The Overton window moved. Can we self-correct? Is this political environment reflexive? And/or where would we be if the internet had not provided an alternative source of information as the Bush administration eroded many of our taken-for-granted civil liberties? And, will the internet assist in that self-reflection? Don't have the answers to those questions either.
I think it's wise to ask them. And, I think it behooves us to try to answer them. But, I think we should also recognize that the genie is already out of the bottle. I suspect there were those who felt the same way about the printing press.
-
Nequals1
[Read the article: The Kucinich court decision and "judicial activism"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm barely skimming today, so apologies if I misunderstood your question, or if someone else has already answered it.
One of the profoundly disorienting events since Reagan is the way the labels and meanings have been distorted when applied to the categories of conservative and liberal. It's as unfortunate as it has been effective. And, something that has been utterly lost is the fact that once upon a time there was a group of people who constituted a liberal arm of the conservative wing.
I would recommend the book Political Economy: A comparative approach written by Barry Clark. Any honest discussion of the labels really has to reach back to the original thinkers and their philosophies. The discussion I've recommended uses a four-square categorical approach: Radicals, Modern Liberals, Classical Liberals (who used to be America's conservative group), and Conservatives. Neo-cons barely rated 4 - 5 paragraphs in the copy I have (c. 1991). Of course, even some of the neocon theorists have disowned what neo-conservatism has become.
This particular discussion examines the political philosophical orientations of the various groups through an economic lens. That framework may turn out to be useful as our economy buckles under this mess variably referred to as the Sub-prime mortgage disaster, or the Big Shitpile (h/t Atrios).
Again, apologies if I misunderstood/misdirected.
-
More (?) on Harold Bloom
[Read the article: The Kucinich court decision and "judicial activism"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Magnificent Contrarian
No Comment; Scott Horton; January 14, 2008
http://harpers.org/archive/2008/01/hbc-90002137
In Germany they call Marcel Reich-Ranicki the “Literaturpapst” — “the Pope of Literature.” And in America that title could only credibly be claimed by one person: Yale Literature professor Harold Bloom. His judgments about great literature and the sham wannabes are close to perfection (or at least to my own). And to boot, he is a continuously entertaining person to read. His treatment of Bush as Macbeth (“Macbush”) is a contemporary classic, and it seems obviously to have influenced the current outstanding Macbeth performance in London.
Now Bloom delivers up a vivid and very telling assessment of America during the reign of George W. Bush in an interview with Eva Sohlman of the Swedish program Världen i Fokus (World in Focus). In the best single passage, Bloom demonstrates that he just doesn’t get it–we are all supposed to be reciting the mantra “the surge is working, everything is fine, the Iraq War is a wonderful success.” continues
Has a lengthy quote and an embedded link to the referenced interview.
-
yeah, yeah (h/t Paul Dirks)
[Read the article: CNN's John King responds]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Twenty years of experience, or a single experience repeated for twenty years?
Clearly, John King doesn't ordinarily read you, Glenn, or he'd know what happens next. Now, John King and Colonel Boylan have a shared experience. They can have a male-bonding experience should their paths cross, and salve their respective egos. The rest of us can simply shake our heads and chuckle.
Let the brave John King, intrepid-hard-hitting newsman, be tough enough to read you column today, and the comments which follow.
-
totoro
[Read the article: CNN's John King responds]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The problem is in the word profession or professional. Every profession I've come into contact with requires an advanced degree, or at the *very* least, a code of ethics. Every code of ethics I have ever read, or been held accountable to, requires the professional to confront the possibility that the interests of the professional may conflict or collide with the interests of the client.
Who is John King's client? The corporation that pays his salary, or the viewers who watch him? And, if you argue both, my question is, would an engineering firm and the project engineers be held accountable if a bridge they built collapses?
If there is no accountability, if it's all free market driven, if the whole premise is, we'll give you pap because it's all you will buy, then there is no professionalism involved, and let's not even speak of journalistic standards. You can't claim to be a professional if you excuse yourself with, the editor/corporate owners made me do it.