• "The best propaganda is the truth, with just one poison peanut thrown in the mix."

    yes - that is the key to good propaganda.  And knowing that is the key to avoiding its effects.

    Thanks for the comments.

  • a journalist, not with Miller and Woodward in the profession
  • comment on a post People - let's not get caught napping over 8 years ago

    Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada accused the White House of "a weak, spineless display of politics at a time of war" with its campaign against its Iraq-policy critics. source

  • great point.

    Read my disclosure statement.

  • Circumstances change, conditions change, the world changes.  It seems a bit tough a standard to require perfect allignment with the liberal wing of the party on all issues.
  • I think she's even smarter on policy then he is, so we'll get a great wonk if she's president.  But nobody beats him on charisma, which is a big part of the job.  Hillary's done an amazing job in New York connecting with voters, so perhaps there's something there that the rest of America will see and love when she runs a national campaign.

    Read my disclosure statement.

  • I think that this is really true, for liberals in general.  I support Hillary, and that has elicited comments on Kos like "did the old Tom get killed by the jerk writing this?"  No actually, this is the same Tom who supported Kerry, despite his lack of conviction on the issue.  Actually, I think that Hillary is doing a better job handling the politics of this than did Kerry, and that matters almost as much as allignment to my specific views.  I am one of the 10% of Americans who have opposed this war since day -180.  So I don't expect my politicians to always agree with me on everything - in fact I am surprised when they do.  Right now, I want someone who will respect the basic principles of democracy, and that is Hillary, for sure.
  • comment on a post What They Said over 8 years ago
    to war, it matters what he and his administration said.  Read these statements, and ask: Do they meet the high standard of truth for taking the nation into war?
  • comment on a post Iraq: Looking Back, Looking Forward over 8 years ago
    An issue as significant as a war of choice requires straight forward talk.  You meet that standard. Thank you.
  • comment on a post Indictment Party in Philly over 8 years ago
    The Indictment Party will be tonight, Friday, October 28, from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. at the Mirabeau Room, 529 Queen Anne Avenue North. Join us for drink specials, and special drinks.

    http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/Content?oid=23783

  • on a comment on Yellowcakegate: How to proceed over 8 years ago
    well, if brains only worked that way

    it's going to be plamegate, not cakegate and not yellowcakegate and not bad president fraud scandal, so there's not much point in really getting into this

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 8 years ago
    me too - good thing we don't have insights of a paid political specialist to influence our thinking on things
  • it was also a period of populism and labor unrest
  • I am not much of a bridge builder

    I think we need to call this launacy out - especially those of us on the farthest corners of the left

  • comment on a post Blogger Ethics 101 over 8 years ago
    is to let people find out what other factors may be entering into to your comments and posts.  It is not to discredit yourself at the outset.

    There was a time when I was being rumored to be paid by Kos and Booman to interject pro-life ideas into the liberal blogosphere.  My response was to create a disclosure page, and to either link to it from all comments on public blogs, or to put it on my profile page and to note that it was there on the sig (sometimes I don't have the space to directly link).  This seemed like a good approach, since it ended the talk about me as a paid hack.

    Here's the thing:  I am a full time political communications specialist.  I work for grassroots organizations, primarily those that work for worker and other economic human rights.  I do this because I believe in the cause.  I do what I can to make a living at it (which is not easy) so that I can contribute as much as possible.  And everything that I do within the political sphere is filtered through this work, as it would be regardless if I was making living at it or not.

    What was interesting about the rumors about me is that they were all derived from entries that I had made.  People essentially looked through my own entries and pieced together a cover up.  But that's not possible.  I can't publicity write about my beliefs and cover them up at once.  Moreover, all of the links and sites that the rumor spreaders sourced were my own sites.  They found them from links that I had provided.  It was a bit silly that they would source my disclosures as proof that I was hiding something.

    The point of a disclosure is to make it easy for people to know your context.  But the job of figuring this out is still on the reader - the writer must simply point the reader in the right direction.  Having a link on your profile, in my mind, suffices.  If someone wants to know about any blogger, the first place to go is the bio page on that blog, the profile.  There the person can keep checking things out.  

    Putting a disclosure statement on your bio page is not the same as continually pointing out all of your connections to anything that is related to anything you are writing.

    The title of this diary (Blogger Ethics 101) speaks to a need for some standardization of norms.  I suggest that we all have disclosure pages, and that sig lines include a section for disclosure.  I also suggest that every blogger, big and small, do this.  It is unfair to decide when someone is big enough to warrent a disclosure.  And it is also unfair that some must have the tag, while others not.

    Finally, I think that other aspects of blogger ethics matter just as much - such as:

    1. Tipping back to where you first found a link
    2. Linking back to your sources, and quoting instead of copying
    3. Not attacking the person, but instead discussing the ideas
    4. Remembering that people are behind the text on your screen
    5. Not deleting diaries or entries, noting major changes and either deleting entirely (and quickly) or leaving untouched comments
    6. Being honest about sources, information, rumors, etc.
    7. Making your biases known

    I think that this is a good thing for us to be discussing.  In term, we'll need a code of conduct and a professional body to help articulate it.  

Diaries

Advertise Blogads