Comments on A Swift Blow to the Head: Alex Goodall's Blog: Maureen Dowd: “bla blah bler bleurgh”

Maureen Dowd wrote to me some years ago because s...

2009-05-11T17:20:00.000+01:00

Maureen Dowd wrote to me some years ago because she agreed with what I wrote in 1989 about an "IMAGE PRESIDENCY." SHE CALLED IT "GOOD STUFF ON THE IMAGE PRESIDENCY". Now she IS an image herself along with most journalists. In order to be HUMANLY REPRESENTATIVE we need writers who can risk being vulnerable to even demonization and villification instead of the image representatives who want to be celebrity journalists. Its OK to be a celebrity, but be a celebrity to yourself otherwise instead of being ON the "red carpet" the "red carpet" is on you. In other words unless a journalist is passionate about a HUMAN COMMUNICATION AGENDA. their agenda has them. The internet allows authentic communication (I hope this appearS, although some blogging may be "gate-kept-from-universal-view/"dissapeared", etc.)I have been "ousted" from the Justic Studies Association for "...making too many people uncomfortable". In a case that is similar to the Ward Churchill demonization, and the continuing villification of Bill Ayers who was "ousted" from Canada very recently, even the ACLU (at least the ACLU in Newark NJ) considers demonization and ousting OK if you happen to be a formerly homeless prostitute (23 years ago) who has written a book and producing a play entitled "From Prostitute to Professor" (all proceeds to go to charity).

The real problem is that it is hard for the New Yo...

2009-04-17T00:55:00.000+01:00

The real problem is that it is hard for the New York Times to complain since the New York Times itself gives away its own content for free on the internet, and hasn't figured out a way to raise enough money from advertising to cover its costs. Yet I still sympathize with the traditional journalists because we must find a way to support the generation of the content that we all crave and use and link to and comment upon.

I worked in the newspaper field for many years. An...

2009-04-16T02:01:00.000+01:00

I worked in the newspaper field for many years. And, while there is great truth in what you say, I see some areas in which newspapers and the newspaper structure has an advantage -- most prominently in the area of communications law.

Newspapers have employed crews of copy editors who do more than correct spelling and punctuation in articles. They double-check facts and stand as a safeguard against libelous statements.

I'll admit, it doesn't work 100% of the time, but, in my experience, it is always smart to have at least one extra pair of (typically neutral) eyes reading something before it is released to the public.

How many sets of eyes are looking at the articles being written and posted on websites and blogs today?