When Blogs Do Bad

Blogs have toppled another semi-public figure:

Eason Jordan, a senior executive at CNN who was responsible for coordinating the cable network's Iraq coverage, resigned abruptly last night, citing a journalistic tempest he touched off during a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, late last month in which he appeared to suggest that United States troops had deliberately aimed at journalists, killing some.

I agree that one great function of blogs is to make the invisible visible, to shine a light on those issues, statements, actions, etc. that do not get enough attention in the mainstream media and popular discourse. However, this light-shining function can be a double-edged sword. Where's the line between a witch hunt and a critical, good faith inquiry into what's really going on? Did Eason really deserve this? Or did he just make an offhand comment at the wrong place and time that was blown out of proportion and twisted to suit the rabid radicals of the most jingoistic right? (Hey look, I can write just like the editors of the Hart and Wecsler's!) If you saw BSG last night (it's been renewed for another season!), you'll know it raised the same question of when healthy social inquiry might turn into egomaniacal power grab. L. (my personal guru in reading against the grain) noted astutely that BSG might have been making an argument that we shouldn't be questioning how Bush has handled post-9/11 security and foreign affairs. Apparently the show's creators have explicitly said they're trying to make the show parallel recent history to some extent, but it's hard to say what they were trying to communicate last night in that regard. Was Capt. Adama supposed to be George Bush, and the Independent Tribunal the 9/11 Commission? Remember, Bush at first tried to tell the 9/11 Commission that he was above their purview, and that's basically what Adama did last night with the tribunal. Then again, was the 9/11 Commission a witch hunt or power grab, which is how the Independent Tribunal was starting to look last night? Could the chief investigator have been Ashcroft trying to argue that all civil liberties should be swept aside in favor of “security,” while Adama was the voice of the reasonable civil libertarian upholding his and his officers' rights? See, it's hard to figure out. And really, these questions are L.'s, so if she comes up with any answers, perhaps she'll share. Anyway, BSG is only relevant to the extent that it shows that investigation can be a multi-edged sword. First it was Dan Rather (who may or may not have resigned b/c of the Bush national guard story), now it's Eason Jordan. Who's next? Are bloggers getting drunk with power and doing more harm than good in pursuit of their own agendas?

Posted 02:01 PM | Comments (2) | general politics meta-blogging tv land

Hey! You can't say that!

Ward Churchill: Discuss. Consider:

• “Some People Push Back,” Churchill's essay that started the brouhaha in 2001 (and many more links to the ongoing controversy on that page)
• “On the Injustice of Getting Smeared,” a response from Churchill to recent criticism.
• “Ward Churchill's Banality of Evil,” which defends Churchill's right to say what he likes, but argues that Churchill was “dead wrong.”
• What Ward Churchill Didn't Say, a brief list of polemic statements that may or may not have provoked the same level of outrage now attending Churchill's remarks.
• The recent survey showing 75% of high school students think flag burning is illegal and one third think the First Amendment “goes too far.”
• Native American Genocide
• Remarks from Professor Althouse: “I look askance at UC, not Churchill: Why did they hire and promote him? ”
• What else?

UPDATE: See also a lengthy post with many links and heated discussion in the comments at Three Years of Hell. I'm actually kind of surprised—although I don't know why I should be—to find AR come down as he does (I won't try to characterize his position since that will only be begging him to tell me I got him all wrong). Also, more from The Yin Blog, here, here, here, and here. UPDATE II: Thoughts from Carey and his readers, including links on the subject from Profs. Leiter, Bainbridge, and Volokh. Also Dahlia LIthwick's perspective on Slate. All of them appear to dismiss what Churchill has to say (Volokh calls it a “horrific screed” and Bainbridge says Churchill is an “ass”), yet seem to think they're taking the high road by saying that he shouldn't be fired just because he said some things that sound crazy. My original point in posting about this has been made fairly well: Rather than giving any serious consideration to the content of Churchill's words, people have occupied lots of energy and effort arguing about whether he should be allowed to say them at all. That's what passes for free speech and public discussion of what might be the most crucial topic in contemporary American history (by which I mean 9/11 and why it happened). Very very sad.

Posted 06:36 AM | Comments (3) | general politics

Bright Eyes

I'm not sure why, but I'm just addicted to Bright Eyes recently. Maybe it's because “Conor Oberst” is such a cool name, or maybe it's because I've mostly missed all the hype surrounding him so all the music sounds fresh and new and real to me. Or maybe it's just the plain greatness of lyrics like this:

No one ever plans to sleep out in the gutter. Sometimes that's just the most comfortable place. . . . So when you're asked to fight a war that's over nothing, it's best to join the side that's gonna win. And no one's sure just how all this got started, but we'll make 'em goddamned certain how it's gonna end! Oh yeah we will. Oh yeah we will!

— “Road to Joy” from I'm Wide Awake It's Morning, courtesy of Super D., the bestest friend ever. I hope Mr. Oberst is right.

Posted 05:15 AM | Comments (3) | ai music

Guest Post: Life Sans Blogging—A response to some ??s by Mr. Imbroglio

Ed. Note: Today's Imbroglio is brought to by DG, formerly of Ditzy Genius, who generously agreed to share w/us the following update on life in DG-land after I pestered her with questions about what life might be like sans-blog. Thanks, DG! To get the full effect, imagine this post topped by a bright orange banner of flowers. Quote of the Day - Almost Everyday: “You haven't posted to your blog yet.” - KD, who doesn't necessarily want to read my ramblings but likes making the quote of the day. I'm enjoying life without blogging. It had become part of my daily routine and when I first stopped it was actually kind of weird. I would see a funny article or hear a funny quote and think, ha, I have to put that on my blog but alas there was no more blog. I do miss it sometimes and I think to myself: I should start up my blog again. I even went as far as to tell a friend that I would restart it. Now he mentions it every time we chat online (see above quote). It's only because he misses being the quote of the day every once in a while. :-) I find that in place of blogging I play more games online. I've gotten fantastic at Bejeweled! Woo, that game is addictive. I don't think blogging or the lack thereof has had any effect on my performance or enjoyment of law school. That being said, I have some policies in place that I'm not sure if I blogged about before but have greatly added to my enjoyment of law school. The first of which is I stopped checking my grades after the 1st semester of 1L. I think grades are useless so I decided it wasn't worth the 30 seconds it takes to look. I've decided that I will look at them in May 2006. This always brings up a slew of questions so let me answer them for you:

1. What do you do about employers/your resume? Well, at my school you can look at your GPA and class rank on a totally different screen than the one that shows all of your actual grades. I put my percentile on my resume and no employer ever asks about my specific grades. The only people that ask are classmates (the ones that are wonks). Answering them gives me the opportunity to be incredibly smug sometimes. Rest assured, I always take the opportunity. Answers to this range from I don't know, I didn't check to I don't know but I'm sure I got an A.
2. Well, don't you ever have to get your transcript? Yup, and I always get an official one that's sealed in an envelope.
3. Aren't you curious? Uh, not really. It's just letters on a piece of paper. My GPA has changed .02 since my 1st semester and I am in the exact same percentile with the exact same rank as I was before. I'm sure if my percentile dropped dramatically I'd look. At this point it hasn't come up.
4. So you don't know any of your grades since 1L? Well, that's not true. My policy has been ruined twice by professors. So I know two of my grades. And anyway, I could probably guess what they are.
5. So why don't you look, really? I find that I enjoy classes a lot more because I'm just there to learn rather than to excel. I suggest that people try it. I actually know one other person who does not check. I'm sure it was pretty obvious from my blog before that I just didn't care about them but now it's at the next level. In addition, it bothers me to see how they change people's attitudes. Some people become incredibly depressed over them, others become incredibly prickish. I'm starting a movement to deemphasize them. Yale has got it right - pass/fail is the way to go. Everyone else should join my movement.

I'm still amazed that people still read my blog. Most people still have it linked so someone new will stumble on it and send me an email or an IM. I enjoy that a lot. I still read blogs, but only my favorites. I still talk to other bloggers online which I really enjoy. My run-ins with random hilarious people have become fewer and far between - this might be the suckiest part of law school. You asked about summer jobs. I ran the OCI marathon back in the fall for some stupid reason and got offers but only from firms. I think I've said this a million times but I don't want to work at a firm. There's nothing wrong with it and I enjoyed my experience this summer, but criminal law is where I want to be. I want to be either a prosecutor or a public defender (probably the latter not the former). Those two things seem radically different, but I don't think they are. So, I rejected all offers and have just begun the process of sending out my resume to prosecutors and pd offices. If that fails, my summer employer told me that if I change my mind, I should give them a call. Lest you think everything is all sunshine and roses, it ain't. I still hate the midwest, probably more than before. It's not a bad place really. I think it's just my own crappy attitude. I alternate between being ok with this and having a somewhat bad disposition. Anyway, what am I doing now? I'm still going to classes and I'm enjoying them. I'm taking Crim Pro/Evidence/Professional Responsibility/Pre-Trial 2. Crim Pro is my favorite. I succeeded in scheduling my classes on only Monday and Wednesday. This sounds more relaxing than it is. It seems like I always have something to do on Thurday and Friday. I do get all of my reading done for the week on the weekends and that's nifty. I still clerk at the tax court. Who knows why? I like it most of the time, at other times it's boring. I'm still on law review, which doesn't suck nearly as much as it did in the beginning. The law review office has become my new study place (what with the big leather chairs and the tv and food) and I've made some buddies on there. I'm even thinking about running for the board. I've deciced to write my comment on decriminalizing prostitution. My faculty reader is totally against my assertion that it should decriminalized (on moral grounds, not necessarily legal) and this has led to some interesting conversations and what is turning out to be a pretty decent comment, (in my opinion, of course). If you've never had a discussion with one of your professors about the differences between prostitution and the actors in hardcore pornography, I suggest you try it. It will make life that much more interesting. ha! It also freaks people out who are walking by the office but that's what they get for being nosey. I still go to a lot of movies. I have not been watching as much T.V. as I would like. :-) 24 is back on but I have a night class this semester so I tape it. Married with Children comes on at 1 A.M. Update on the Enemies: I have added AT&T wireless to my enemy's list. I know that they have been taken over by Cingular and are basically dead, but they are still an enemy. I wondered how the evil squirrels were communicating and now I know. Last but not least, will my blog be coming back? Maybe. Everytime I think about restarting it, I get busy and forget. So I guess that's a maybe. It's also a maybe not. Anyway, I've rambled long enough. We now return you to your regularly scheduled Ambimb goodness....Toodles!

Posted 03:13 PM | Comments (7) | guests

Stay Tuned...

I've got to prepare for class (reading Hart and Wechsler's!) so no time for a real post, but come back later today for a special treat—a guest post from a legendary blawgger! Oh, and on the Hart & Wechsler's, I feel compelled to clarify that I understand many of the questions are not intended in the least to be anything other than questions. Much of the material the book covers involves legal issues to which there really are no “correct” answers, so the book is attempting to raise the issues and get readers to think for themselves. That said, I still think it's a crap approach b/c the authors certainly have opinions about the issues they raise. I'd prefer they state their positions, then discuss competing views as thoroughly and fairly as they can. The pretend neutrality they attempt to achieve through the questions is disingenuous and a little bit condescending, as if the authors thought readers would just blindly follow their positions on these issues if they (the authors) were more honest and straightforward about what those positions were. Wait, didn't I say I had reading to do? More later....

Posted 07:50 AM | Comments (3) | 2L law school

Reading Hart and Wechsler's

If you're in law school and you take a course with a name like “Federal Courts” or “Federal Jurisdiction,” chances are probably 100% you'll either use or hear a lot of references to a text that was originally written by Henry Hart and Herbert Wechsler and first published in 1953 (at least that's the earliest publication date listed in my 5th edition). Many people find this book maddening, because it asks as many questions as it answers. However, after reading several hundred pages, I've learned a trick: If you read most of the questions as statements instead of questions, then it's really much more clear. For example, H&W will often write something like: “Haven't courts recognized a power to enforce executive compliance with statutory duties since Marbury v. Madison?” That looks like a question, but it's not. What that really says is: “Courts have recognized a power to enforce executive compliance with statutory duties since Marbury v. Madison! (Duh.)” Do you think most of the questions are really statements? Would you be likely to enjoy reading a book written like this? Is writing in questions a sign of intelligence or a good way to teach, or is it just really, really asinine?

Posted 07:11 AM | Comments (6) | 2L law school meta-blogging

Picture Worth Thousands and Thousands of Words

Once again I thank everyone who has sent paintings in response to my request the other day. The gallery is getting rather large and I'll definitely be making a special display page for all your masterpieces just as soon as I can. Meanwhile, because the paintings are disappearing from the “front” page here, I just wanted to make sure you see this one in action: Lawrah with “Law Student View” (action!) If you go to GW you'll know that Lawrah has almost precisely captured the experience of sitting in most large lectures there. I have a funny feeling the picture is not too different at many other law schools around the country. Absolutely frakkin' priceless (nodding to BSG for the otherworldly adjective). Painting is therapy, and come on, you know you could use some of that. If you haven't painted a picture on ArtPad yet and sent me a link, um, why not? ;-)

Posted 09:36 PM | Comments (1) | law school life generally

Scripting News Brunch

I just got back from the “Geek Brunch” with Dave Winer of Scripting News. In attendance were:

• Dave Winer, of course (see his thoughts on the brunch)
• Ray Daly of ABCEDmindedness (see Ray's notes)
• David Welker
• Marcus of Kmax Blog Links
• Andy Williams Affleck of Webcrumbs (see Andy's photo of the brunch)
• Lou Josephs of Medianetwork (see quick comments from Lou)
• Roger Strickland of Slapcast.com
• Greg Gershman of Blogdigger (see Greg's notes)

You can see from that list a lot of what we talked about—blog link aggregators (Kmax), blog search (Blogdigger) and podcasting by phone (Slapcast). Below the fold: Some highlights from the conversation, including Channel Z, desktop blogging clients, and making the invisible visible. Of the “new” technologies we discussed, I think the podcasting by phone was most interesting to me. One of the major drawbacks to podcasting is it seems to take too much equipment and time to create an mp3 for people to download, but being able to just call a number, say what you want to say, and have the resulting conversation/monologue converted to mp3 and posted online (even directly to your blog) is pretty awesome. It doesn't get much simpler than that. One obvious great thing it would be good for—reporters (both “professional” and non) covering demonstrations, strikes, and other breaking news. Pretty cool. Blogdigger also looks like it has a lot of potential. If it's true that AskJeeves just bought Bloglines, it might be time to look elsewhere for online RSS aggregation, and Blogdigger's groups could be a good place to look. I'll have to check it out. Winer also talked a little about “Channel Z,” the outliner he uses to create and update Scripting News. As I mentioned last month, I've long admired the way Scripting News smoothly integrates both short and long posts into one smooth flow of daily content w/a permalink for each item. Plus, I love outliners (my current favorite is NoteTaker), so using an outliner to update my blog(s) would be great. Winer said he maybe might possibly who knows? release his cool tool someday, maybe in stages. He's waiting for the right moment, and I for one hope it comes soon. He also mentioned I should look at Manilla, but for $1100, I think, um, probably not. While I was fascinated by the tech talk, I could only participate in a limited way since I'm not a programmer/developer. My only sort of contribution to the tech conversation was when I mentioned that even though Movable Type is clunky (Winer said it was “too modal,” I think b/c the controls you need the most are too scattered an hard to reach), that doesn't bother me b/c I use a desktop blogging client (ecto) so I almost never have to log into MT itself (except to delete comment spam, but that's easy w/Blacklist). This was, in fact, one of the reasons I switched away from my old Radio blog—I didn't like being so tied to the browser and having to do so many things through the browser itself. Winer seemed surprised to hear that desktop clients were popular, and wondered aloud how many people use them to post to MT and other blogs. If a lot of people are doing it, then the blogging platform you use almost becomes irrelevant; what counts is how well your desktop blogging tool works. That's true, of course. I could do just about everything I want a blog to do with WordPress or probably w/a number of other things, but my day-to-day workflow wouldn't change so long as the blog software was open to ecto. In addition to talking about technology, we talked a little about the media and why it doesn't seem to work. See Winer's recent posts on this here and here. For example, Winer asked, “why are they [meaning Republicans, I assume] trying to convince us there's a crisis in social security?” We tossed out possible responses, but his point was not to arrive at an answer, but to point out the fact that the media just aren't talking about the question. It's invisible. The only thing the media talk about is what Bush is proposing and whether it's feasible and what might be cut here, added there, etc. That's necessary, of course, but why are so few people investigating the reasons behind this whole agenda? The question is just not on the radar, which, according to Winer, is where blogs come in:

When things are invisible, it's the job of bloggers to make them visible.

It's a somewhat utopian notion—that blogs are going to be able to shine a light into the dark corners of society and thereby make a positive difference. Whether it's true or not, it's a worthwhile goal for bloggers to strive toward, it seems to me. Other “invisible” questions we discussed: Why did the media replay the dean scream a million times? On this question the media covered the scream, but didn't cover the fact that it didn't sound insane if you were actually in the room, nor their own role in replaying it again and again, etc. Those questions were overlooked at the time, invisible; they've been considered somewhat since then, but on a comparative basis they're still invisible. Also: Why are Ward Churchill's ideas so repugnant that some people want to throw out the first amendment as far as he's concerned? On this topic all we get from the media are “wow, those are some crazy ideas” and “lots of people are furious and they want Churchill's head.” Why no consideration of the ideas themselves, or the reasons behind the fury? Those questions are invisible. Why don't bloggers raise them? I could go on; with two hours of fast-paced conversation, we covered a lot of ground. Overall the brunch was a great time, featuring excellent conversation, great to meet so many fascinating and talented people. If there's ever a Scripting News meal in your area and you're sort of a tech/blog geek, I highly recommend it. NOTE: This post has been updated to add links to the brunch attendees who commented on the event.

Posted 02:39 PM | Comments (9) | meta-blogging

Ambivalent Art

Thanks to those of you who sent links to your ArtPad Paintings, a small gallery of Ambivalent Art is beginning to take shape. Click the “action!” links beside each thumbnail below to watch masterpieces in the making from: Divine Angst with “untitled” on a vacation theme (action!) Energy Spatula with an “abstract homage to Miami Vice” (action!) Second Person Singular with “untitled” (action!) Ashley with “untitled” (action!) Anonymous “Beret” (action!) Anonymous “Monkey” (action!) Anonymous “Moon” (action!) Why Law with “untitled” (action!) E. McPan with “E. Takes A Holiday” (action!) Screaming Bean with “Enter the Bean” (action!) Bamber with “dog” (action!) Res Ipsa Loquitur with “untitled” (action!) kmsqrd with “Keep Droning, I'm Not Done Yet” (action!) Lawrah with “Law Student View” (action!) Spycygrl with “self-portrait/portrait of a law student” (action!) Idlegrasshopper with “los pantalones” (action!) Idlegrasshopper with “any questions?” (action!) Sui Generis with “nothing inside” (action!) Aren't they fun? Thanks again for sending paintings—more are always welcome! (Note: This post will update as I learn about new paintings. If we get enough, I'll create a more proper gallery. Thanks!)

Posted 09:23 AM | Comments (5) | life generally