Over on my blog, I have a request for applications in the following areas: (yes, I'm also googling for these, searching Sourceforge, etc., but if anyone has recommendations I'm interesting in hearing them)

I've figured out the problem I've been having with comments on my /. journal. /. exists to provide a forum for commenting on content published elsewhere, not realy as a vehicle for publishing original content. So, I've gotten an actual blog, and new content will go there. I may (probably will) post links to items there here, when they're important enough --- that's an appropriate use of the

From PressThink, talking about James W. Carey:

Carey thinks we should "value the press in the precise degree that it sustains public life, that it helps keep the conversation going among us." We should "devalue the press" in the degree that it seeks only to inform us or, worse, "turn us into silent spectators."

PoliPundit has, on the left-hand side of its site, the following blurb:

Elections and politics with a Conservative bent. If you're a political junkie, get your fix here!

Every once in a while, I'll come across something online I feel a compulsion to share or comment on. Every once in a while, I'll come across a thought I feel a compulsion to share. Sometimes I do that by posting a journal entry. Sometimes I do that in some other way.

I think the idea journalists have been defending when they talk about ``objective [sic] journalism'' is what I am tentatively calling ``factoid journalism''. That is, they simply want us to know the events, the facts, etc. This does not square with ``speaking truth to power''; I leave resolving that discrepancy as an exercise for the reader.

The basic difference between myself and those who deny media bias (in any form) is: I believe power corrupts. I simply do not believe that any human being who is used to being taken on faith and believed will be able to withstand the temptation to skimp a little on the facts, to `adjust' things so they'll work out for the greater good. No matter what professional standards he may believe in. I'm not denying that the MSM believes in their

It strikes me that the difference between Stolen Honor and Rathergate is: the controversy about Rathergate wasn't over whether CBS should air that kind of program, but over whether their documents were authentic. The controversy over Stolen Honor isn't over whether the film is accurate, but over whether Sinclair should air that kind of program. CBS got whacked for relying on bad sources; for all Sinclair's opponents are saying, it is getting whacked for relying on good sources.

Jay Rosen thinks this rant is revealing about Sinclair. It is much more revealing about him and his journalistic friends.

Deep down, the executives want themselves and their convictions on the air.

Can anybody really read the interview here(1), and maintain that Stephanopolous is trying to discover Dr. Rice's opinion, trying to get her side of the story, and not trying to debate with her and put forward what he believes happened?

(1) Hat tip: Dr. Sanity

Glenn Reynolds asks, ``Is it just me, or are people making a bigger deal out of Halloween than they used to?'' He reports that many people think they are, and I suspect they're correct. I think it's a side-effect of decreasing Christianization. What Christianity offers is (correctly or incorrectly) a feeling of certainty about death: death as a known thing, death as something you can live through. With a decrease in Christianity, de

From Talking Points Memo, quoting former FCC chairman Reed Hunt:

But its role instead is to make sure that broadcast television promote democracy by conveying reasonably accurate reflections of where the candidates stand and what they are like. ...