I really should be going to bed, but I'll do a quick recap of this fun Thursday evening before I forget entirely.

The usual Thursday blog meeting was colocated today with a talk by Shorenstein Center Fellow Rebecca MacKinnon, who runs NKZone. Rebecca is a fascinating person who has been CNN bureau chief in China and Japan, and is currently devoting significant effort to covering North Korea. On NKZone, she takes on a very tough subject—there is virtually no journalist access into DPRK—by engaging any available sources on the net and digesting reports from China and South Korea. Her talk touched on a lot of interesting points, such as the role of weblogs in journalism, the atmosphere of secrecy and fear in DPRK, and the ways weblogs can engage a community.

But what really makes Rebecca interesting is that she's very unusual for a journalist: she has resigned from CNN to take a detour into exploring what she sees as a new kind of news medium. (I was delighted to hear that although her year at Shorenstein is nearly up, Rebecca will be staying at Harvard for another year thanks to the Berkman Center.) I no longer find it acceptable to consume news that doesn't include links that discuss, vet, and provide supplemental material for each story. As a generation of world citizens grows up used to these possibilities, the CNN demographic will continue to age and shrink.

Of course, this does not imply that blogs written by amateurs will overtake professional reporting. I strongly believe both postions will learn from each other in the next few years, and we will have a better world for it.

The talk included pizza, drinks, and cookies. I stupidly went to a spicy Asian all-you-can-eat buffet for lunch so I wasn't able to sufficiently take advantage of this opportunity. Though actually, Harvard's pizza wasn't very good.

After the talk we stayed in the room and had our "Berkman" meeting. This one was quite different than usual: a much smaller group and in a different space. Sun, Jessica, Rebecca, Dave, Rick, Tom Griffin, and I were in attendance. We talked a bit about the future of our meetings in the anno-Daveini era. Then Dave and Rebecca schemed a bit about how to kill Google. They both see it as too powerful.

In my opinion, they are overreacting to a couple of small fringe services Google has only dabbled in. I hope Google does well not only because they provide vast good in the universe but also because they could be a valuable counterbalance to Microsoft. Microsoft also provides vast good but has a history of and inclination toward causing severe damage by killing whole market segments in willful, cold calculation. I'd waaaaay rather Tim O'Reilly, dirty rotten bastard though he may be, get rich off Google's success than give Microsoft more cash so they can strangle another innovator while DOJ Antitrust Division sleeps.

The other topic of discussion was the Iraq war. Oddly, I was the only person speaking who might conceivably have been pro-war. Dave thought we should high-tail it out of there ASAP. Rebecca didn't disclose as much opinion but seemed clearly anti-war. Rick initially supported the war but only due to the danger of WMD. I don't think I clearly articulated this at the meeting, but I am actually a supporter of the Iraq invasion and occupation regardless of WMDs. Iraq is an opportunity to shape part of our military into a long-term security force that can enter a dangerously disconnected place like Saddam's Iraq and leave behind safety and economic links to the rest of the world. The middle east will need this kind of intervention time and time again if the US and emerging superpowers (China, India, Russia) are to expand their energy imports without a corresponding increase in terrorism imports. We had better get started, and notwithstanding my favorite sarcastic Bush campaign slogan—Don't switch horses in mid-apocalypse—we'd better stay in Iraq until it's well on the way to becoming a sunny vacation destination.

I should add that, although I am pro-war in this case, I am anti-Bush. A better president would have gathered the support of his countrymen and allies, rather than giving us all a fat old middle finger.

After the Berkman meeting ended, Sun, Jessica, and I went to get some ice cream and hang out outside. I gave them a tour of my frassle to-do list (no kidding, they actually asked), which resulted in at least 10 new feature requests. I could talk all about that now, but it's really, really time for me to sleep. Goodnight, friends.

link

link

A high-ranking military officer reveals how Defense Department extremists suppressed information and twisted the truth to drive the country to war.

I've only skimmed the beginning, but this seems like a must-read.

link

As I sat pondering the President's motives one day, it suddenly dawned on me that it is entirely likely our Commander in Chief has never played a single video game in his life. "Of course!" I exclaimed, startling my girlfriend, who was driving at the time. "Without the catharsis that video games provide, Bush has no way of fulfilling his militaristic fantasies other than actually fighting wars."

link

In his annual State of the Union address, Mr Bush called on Congress to exercise spending restraint and promised to freeze increases in non-defence spending and limit the overall budget increase to 4% annually.

Excuse me while I vomit…

link

Bush just doesn't get it with regular people!

Okay, we cut taxes for the rich and so we have to cut services for the poor. Presumably there is some right-wing justification along the lines that helping poor people just makes them more dependent or something. If there were a rationale Bush could express, it would be one thing, but to watch him not see, not make the connection, is another thing entirely. Welfare, Medicare, Social Security, food stamps — horrors, they breed dependency. Whereas inheriting millions of dollars and having your whole life handed to you on a platter is good for the grit in your immortal soul? What we're dealing with here is a man in such serious denial it would be pathetic if it weren't damaging so many lives.

link

British Airways: "president say what?"

link

Those now in charge of the federal government are upper-crust C-students who know no history or geography, plus not-so-closeted white supremacists, aka 'Christians', and plus, most frighteningly, psychopathic personalities, or 'PPs.' To say somebody is a PP is to make a perfectly respectable medical diagnosis, like saying he or she has appendicitis or athlete's foot. The classic medical text on PPs is "The Mask of Sanity" by Dr. Hervey Cleckley. Read it! PPs are presentable, they know full well the suffering their actions may cause others, but they do not care. And what syndrome better describes so many executives at Enron and WorldCom and on and on, who have enriched themselves while ruining their employees and investors and country, and who still feel as pure as the driven snow, no matter what anybody may say to or about them? And so many of these heartless PPs now hold big jobs in our federal government, as though they were leaders instead of sick. What has allowed so many PPs to rise so high in corporations, and now in government, is that they are so decisive. Unlike normal people, they are never filled with doubts, for the simple reason that they cannot care what happens next. Simply can't. Do this! Do that! Mobilize the reserves! Privatize the public schools! Attack Iraq! Cut health care! Tap everybody's telephone! Cut taxes on the rich! Build a trillion-dollar missile shield! Fuck habeas corpus and the Sierra Club and In These Times…

link

An abomination by his own standards?

In Bush's first three years, nondefense discretionary spending — which fell by 13.5 percent under Ronald Reagan — has soared by 20.8 percent. His more libertarian-minded voters are taken aback to discover that "compassionate conservatism" turned out to mean social conservatism — a stepped-up drug war, restrictions on medical research, antigay policies, federal subsidies for marriage and religion — and big-spending liberalism justified as "compassion."

link