Apparently, John McCain doesn't know how to use a computer. Matthew Yglesias finds this odd, contending that it reflects a profound ignorance about the driving force behind the world economy.
Naturally, the McCain campaign has leaped to his defense with eloquence. "You don’t necessarily have to use a computer to understand, you know, how it shapes the country," says Mark SooHoo, McCain's deputy e-campaign manager. "John McCain is aware of the Internet."
I have know idea what this means. I can be aware of the existence of things but not, you know, understand them, and I know of many people who know about computers but can't, you know, use them or understand what they're for. In fact, I have known many such people. Of course, some of these people are indeed quite competent, but they all share one defining characteristic: They are all old.
This little story may have little to say about McCain's character, knowledge of the world, or personal competence as president, but it says much about his age. In a time in which the nation is looking for someone to carry them into the future, a candidate who constantly shows his ties to the past is seriously weakened.
If McCain wants to win, he needs to stop this bleeding, you know, now.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Pro Publica
Last night, The News Hour on PBS did a story on ProPublica, a non-profit news organization that provides pro bono investigative journalism to newspapers and other new media outlets that have had to lay off their reporting staffs because of budget cuts. News outlets, particularly newspapers, are struggling to meet their bottom lines, and so they are increasingly turning toward cheaper forms of news, like opinion journalism, that are much cheaper to produce than hiring a staff to do actual reporting. ProPublica is attempting to offer a higher-quality alternative.
In a way, ProPublica is attempting to fill a void that has often been filled by public relations organizations, who in their role as press agents have created, pitched, and placed news stories for years, often anonymously. In the 1980s, video news releases produced by public relations and advertising firms provided packaged stories to television news programs, and in recent years, governmental agencies have taken up the practice as well.
VNRs are a controversial practice. The stories may sometimes be good, but they typically offer a distinctly biased version of events. When they are placed in newscasts—often with neither unediting nor comment—viewers are often unable to tell the difference between slanted coverage and actual journalism. As a result, the increasingly widespread integration of news organizations and public relations firms often makes things easier for news providers but more difficult for news audiences.
Where does ProPublica fit in? When it debuted in 2007, the New York Times reported that while the staff was top-notch, it was created and supported by philanthropists with liberal connections. In addition, its mission announces a distinctly democratic—perhaps liberal—bias:
In a way, ProPublica is attempting to fill a void that has often been filled by public relations organizations, who in their role as press agents have created, pitched, and placed news stories for years, often anonymously. In the 1980s, video news releases produced by public relations and advertising firms provided packaged stories to television news programs, and in recent years, governmental agencies have taken up the practice as well.
VNRs are a controversial practice. The stories may sometimes be good, but they typically offer a distinctly biased version of events. When they are placed in newscasts—often with neither unediting nor comment—viewers are often unable to tell the difference between slanted coverage and actual journalism. As a result, the increasingly widespread integration of news organizations and public relations firms often makes things easier for news providers but more difficult for news audiences.
Where does ProPublica fit in? When it debuted in 2007, the New York Times reported that while the staff was top-notch, it was created and supported by philanthropists with liberal connections. In addition, its mission announces a distinctly democratic—perhaps liberal—bias:
ProPublica is an independent, non-profit newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. We strive to foster change through exposing exploitation of the weak by the strong and the failures of those with power to vindicate the trust placed in them.Bias, of course, isn't a problem, since everyone has a bias. The problem is unannounced bias, in which biased coverage purports to be completely neutral. ProPublica will have to be careful in how it announces the investigative coverage it produces, not only for the sake of its own reputation but also for the industry as a whole. In a media landscape in which public relations firms, advertising agencies, activist groups, corporate communicators, and non-profit reporting organizations will increasingly compete with traditional news providers, perhaps ProPublica's greatest service will be to show how quality coverage should occur in a decentralized, chaotic, virtual world.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Pew Survey
Yesterday, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life released its latest Religious Landscape Survey. The survey, the New York Times reports, finds that Americans are deeply spiritual—that is, they report that they believe in God, pray regularly, and may even attend church—but are also inclusive and heterodox in their religious beliefs.
The rubber particularly meets the road when it comes to salvation. Americans, the survey suggests, are far more likely to believe in universal salvation instead of restricting salvation to their fellow believers. The Times reports:
In many ways, such findings are not new. American religion, despite its conservative undercurrents, has often been amorphous and inclusive. Bill Herberg, writing in the 1950s, observed that the religious divisions between Americans were eroding and merging into a single, corporate faith under the heading of the "Judeo-Christian tradition."
Of course, many religious people—particularly Jews—found Herberg's description of American religious life bland and amorphously syncretistic, but its assesment of the religious sentiment of American culture was remarkably accurate. Nevertheless, when Todd Johnson, director of the Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, suggests that the survey suggests "that people are not very well educated and they are not expressing mature theological points of view," he is not describing a new phenomenon but a much longer trend within American society.
The difference, perhaps, is that American religious life is moving away from the Judeo-Christian tradition into a much more complex synthesis, in which Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam are part of the equation. What this will mean—and how traditionalist Christians will deal with it—is yet to be determined.
The rubber particularly meets the road when it comes to salvation. Americans, the survey suggests, are far more likely to believe in universal salvation instead of restricting salvation to their fellow believers. The Times reports:
The most significant contradictory belief the survey reveals has to do with salvation. Previous surveys have shown that Americans think a majority of their countrymen and women will go to heaven, and that the circle is wide, embracing minorities like Jews, Muslims and atheists. But the Pew survey goes further, showing that such views are held by those within major branches of Christianity and minority faiths, too.
In many ways, such findings are not new. American religion, despite its conservative undercurrents, has often been amorphous and inclusive. Bill Herberg, writing in the 1950s, observed that the religious divisions between Americans were eroding and merging into a single, corporate faith under the heading of the "Judeo-Christian tradition."
Of course, many religious people—particularly Jews—found Herberg's description of American religious life bland and amorphously syncretistic, but its assesment of the religious sentiment of American culture was remarkably accurate. Nevertheless, when Todd Johnson, director of the Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, suggests that the survey suggests "that people are not very well educated and they are not expressing mature theological points of view," he is not describing a new phenomenon but a much longer trend within American society.
The difference, perhaps, is that American religious life is moving away from the Judeo-Christian tradition into a much more complex synthesis, in which Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam are part of the equation. What this will mean—and how traditionalist Christians will deal with it—is yet to be determined.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
