Casey at the Bat

I certainly had no intention of writing anything about the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. His short and troubled tenure will simply be remembered as a sad anecdote to a failed Presidency.

But, as I did my usual morning surfing of the blogosphere I was awestruck at the rejoicing on the left for this "victory."

It seems that any arrow piercing the heart of the Bush team is a source for rejoicing. We got one. Hooray for our team!

And, in that limited sense, Bush was tragically correct in his short statement yesterday, "It's sad that we live in a time when a talented and honorable person like Alberto Gonzales is impeded from doing important work because his good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons."

Now lets face facts. Gonzales was in way over his head. His performance before Congress was an embarrassment. He needed to resign. In fact, Bush should have fired him.

On the other hand, the Democrats endless hearings on the perfectly legal replacement of the eight federal prosecutors was a sham from beginning to comic end. Gonzales should have hit that one out of the park. Instead he muffed the ball.

But, the absolute glee surrounding his departure is so absurd to be silly. You would think Kos had personally assassinated Attila the Hun. Or that Arianna Huffington had captured Osama Bin Laden using only ecologically friendly recycled paper clips.

I'm reminded of Garrison Keillor's brilliant parody of the (also very brilliant) Ernest Thayer's classic poem, written in 1888, Casey at the Bat. Keillor finally gave the opponents of the "Mudville Nine" a name, Dustburg. And he retold the story in biting satire from the opponents point of view.

To all too many of Bush's opponents this is simply a game. It's the ninth inning and Gonzales has struck out. And while Bush weeps in tiny Mudville for the lose of his team mate, there is great rejoicing throughout Dustburg.

And so I give you the final five stanza's of Keillor's great satire. You can read his entire poem here: Casey at the Bat (Road Trip Version).

He swung so hard his hair fell off and he toppled in disgrace And the Dustburg catcher held the ball and the crowd tore up the place, With Casey prostrate in the dirt amid the screams and jeers We threw wieners down at him and other souvenirs. We pounded on the dugout roof as they helped him to the bench, Then we ran out to the parking lot and got a monkey wrench And found the Mudville bus and took the lug nuts off the tires, And attached some firecrackers to the alternator wires. We rubbed the doors and windows with a special kind of cheese That smells like something died from an intestinal disease. Old Casey took his sweet time, but we were glad to wait And we showered him with garbage as the team came out the gate. So happy were the Dustburg fans that grand and glorious day, It took a dozen cops to help poor Casey away, But we grabbed hold of the bumpers and we rocked him to and fro And he cursed us from inside the bus, and gosh, we loved it so! Oh sometimes in America the sun is shining bright, Life is joyful sometimes, and all the world seems right, But there is no joy in Dustburg, no joy so pure and sweet As when the mighty Casey fell, demolished, at our feet.

Do You Feel Lucky?

It isn't easy being a liberal in a small town in the deep south. It's especially difficult being a religious liberal. My church, the Unitarian Church, sanctions religious gay marriages. I'm proud of our open, inclusive congregations.

My favorite Unitarian Minister is a woman. Another rather wonderful sign of progress and equality.

But I must drive a hour and a half to attend church. The closest thing we have to a liberal church here in our small town is a Methodist Church with a pastor who makes most Baptists look left wing.

Still I chose to live here in a town of only 8,000 and my wife and my family love it. There is actually a lot to be said for small town values, especially the friendship and mutual support in a tight knit community. If you have tragedy, a crisis or even a fallen limb off a tree, thee are twenty people who genuinely rush to your side. We can argue politics over our morning coffee and they will still stop to help if my car breaks down on the side of the road.

I feel lucky. This is a great community, a great state and a great country.

But my rights as an American citizen are really an accident of birth. Unless reincarnation is more of a reality than I've assumed, I did nothing to deserve this wonderful accident. And if reincarnation is a reality, I must have done something really good in a previous life to receive this much bounty now.

We can argue politics. We can officiate religious gay marriages. We can lobby our government and perhaps, someday, legal gay marriages will become a reality.

I can go to the local Baptist Church and witness my grandson be baptised as I did last Sunday. There is no restriction on religious freedom. I can be Unitarian one Sunday and Baptist the next (at least in spirit).

Tragically both my boys have been married and divorced. One is remarried to a wonderful girl and we even gained a granddaughter in the process. Gone are the stigmas against divorce, remarriage and even sex outside of marriage.

Maybe that's not all good. Divorce rates are high and too many children are born out-of wedlock. Society is evolving and solutions sometimes come slowly. But freedom is a wonderful thing.

I am very lucky, indeed.

But what if I had been born in Iran instead? It's just a matter of luck. I didn't chose to be born here. Saeed Ghanbari didn't chose to be born in Iran. It was just a matter of luck.

From today's Daily Mail (United Kingdom) , story by David Williams

Rough justice: 80 lashes for 'immoral' Iranian who abused alcohol and had sex His face covered by a balaclava, an official brandishing a cane repeatedly lashes the back of a man found guilty of breaking Iran's morality laws. Two police officers hold the legs of 25-year-old Saeed Ghanbari and another his arms to ensure there is no escape from the punishment of 80 lashes handed down by a religious court. Traffic was brought to a halt in Qazvin, 90 miles west of the capital Tehran, as more than 1,000 men gathered behind barricades to watch the public flogging. Some took pictures on mobile telephones, others climbed traffic lights for a better vantage point as Ghanbari was marched to the centre of the square under the watch of blue-uniformed guards carrying machine guns. A four foot long metal bench was taken from a police van and the convicted man was made to lie on it on his stomach, his fawn checked shirt pulled-up to his shoulders to expose his back and waist. One police officer held his hands together beneath the bench, two others gripped his legs to ensure there was little movement. Two police officers stood-by, their faces covered with balaclavas - each to administer 40 lashes. The public lashings have been endorsed by the judiciary as a way of deterring alcohol abuse at a time when it is on the increase among young men but some religious leaders are said to be questioning their validity, fearing they have an adverse impact on the country's image abroad. Although men and women convicted of flouting public morals are routinely flogged in detention centres, public floggings are considered rare. Human Rights groups say there have been a marked rise in recent months in the number of people sentenced to executions and floggings in Iran.

This isn't funny, but I can't help but think about the movement here in the U.S.A.to teach abstinence. I'm guessing public flogging might just do the trick.

If a flogging like this took place at the hands of a fundamentalist Christian in small town Mississippi, the entire world would be outraged. This simply can't happen and won't be tolerated in the United States.

Amnesty International, which said it is "greatly concerned by continuing human rights abuses in Iran", has highlighted figures revealing 117 people were executed in 2006 with thousands facing floggings. They included a woman, who had been forced into prostitution as an eight-year-old, receiving 99 lashes because of "acts contrary to chastity." Earlier this year, a man was flogged after a copy of the Bible was found in his car.

If our misadventures in Iraq have taught us nothing else, it has proven our inability to force our morality upon other countries, especially Islamic countries. We cannot convert the world to democracy and religious freedom at the point of a gun.

Still, what should we do? A girl received 99 lashes for being raped as a eight year old.

As I send my check tonight to Amnesty International I just want to ask you one question: Do you feel lucky?

Power Corrupts, Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely

The full and correct quote is:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

It is fascinating that this quote is from 1887. It was first written by Lord Acton in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton.

The topic of today's short post goes back to my original intent for this journal: Discussions of the Internet and it's impact on the real world. And my subject today is Google. They have absolute power.

I'm not going to bore you with a lot of details, but one of my clients (in the real world) is having horrible problems with their placement in Google Search Results. This small company is a leader in their particular field and a company with great integrity. Suddenly and without any known cause their search placement results for ALL key terms virtually disappeared from all Google results last July 9th.

Technically they didn't disappear. Key search terms went from a consistent rank within the Top 10 to about 180 (eighteen pages down, where no one ever looks).

I'm not writing today to cry about this one incident. The problem, as it turns out, is it isn't just one incident. It happens a lot, to a lot of different companies, for a lot of different reasons.

There are legitimate reasons for such penalties from Google. Link Farming, or buying links on multiple , unrelated, websites is the most common prohibited activity. My client doesn't do any of the prohibited activities. They don't even employ an SEO (Search Engine Optimization) consultant.

But a gigantic industry has sprung up just to assist companies who have been delisted or punished by Google. If you have a few moments and the technical stamina to read a terrifying article on just one specific problem, link over to Google Proxy Hacking: How A Third Party Can Remove Your Site From Google SERPs by web guru Dan Thies

Now we don't think my client has this problem, but they might. This is only one of dozens of possible problems, many of them malicious. This little company believes the Google delisting could cost them one million dollars $1,000,000.00 this year alone.

There is no functional appeal process at Google. Contact Google and someone might or might not listen. They will never respond directly. You simply have to watch your search results to see if anything changes.

Google claims that such distance and formality and silence is required to maintain the integrity of their search engine process. They rule from on high like the Greek Gods.

And petitioning Google is like petitioning the Greek Gods. Pray. Make Sacrifices. Burnt Offerings. But expect no response.

Google, you see, has over 80% of the entire search engine business. They power AOL Search and perhaps a hundred or more other engines behind the scenes. Yahoo is number two and everyone else is a very minor player.

They can destroy a company with the single stroke of the keyboard. Go to any of the SEO Forums and the stories are legion. My little client is just one story out of hundreds.

My client has about fifteen key search terms. Type in any of these terms on Yahoo, MSN, Alta Vista, Ask or Alexa and they are always in the top 5, frequently number one.

But not on Google. Google ranks them at about 180, eighteen pages into the search. Since my client only has a dozen or so competitors, they show up after nonsensical sites with totally unrelated products or services. Chinese Laundries without any relationship to the search terms queried show up before my client. I'm not joking. Have you ever looks at results around 90 in Google?

This is a huge windfall for my client's competitors. Imagine if you operated a little store in a small town and suddenly, overnight, without warning, Walmart or Target or Dillards or Kohls simply disappeared entirely!! Building gone! Parking lot gone! Your business might increase a hundred fold overnight.

On the other hand, as a customer you might be distraught. You would be deprived of dealing with the industry leader and forced to deal with someone who has higher prices or lower quality or both.

Would a competitor pay to have his competition disappear?

Perhaps my client is the victim of competitors underhanded programming. Perhaps they merely offended the Google Gods. Perhaps someone on the Google staff took a disliking to them.

The key is that Google has ABSOLUTE POWER. They answer to no one.

What if just one small employee takes money to bury a few sites? What if it became institutionalized? Surely Google works to prevent this. Or do they?

All I know for sure is on July 8th my client was consistently ranked in the top ten for every applicable search term. On July 9th, they disappeared without a trace.

Enough about this relatively small issue. This isn't the war in Iraq. Or genocide in Darfur.

But it has taught me one practical thing. I've tested out the other search engines and I find that the new Alexa Search Engine is simply the best for most searches.

I encourage you to download and use the Alexa Toolbar. If you are in the Internet Business it also has some tools you'll find invaluable. If you're not, the search results are the most targeted and accurate I've found.

And yes, you'll notice it includes a really slick direct link to Wizard Radio and and another directly to Amazon (they own Alexa) right on the toolbar. Check it out. It will uninstall easily if you don't love it.

People Worth Reading

When I'm looking for a really good rant here in the blogosphere I usually check out Mary over at Freedom Eden. When Mary is on a roll, you're in for the ride of your life!

But (relatively conservative) Mary has her equal on the more liberal side of the ledger with Not Your Mama over on Coyote Angry.

If you don't read another thing today, link on over to Not Your Mama's essay, Just Spit It Out Already. I have to agree with everything she said!

Here's a little teaser:

"Is Obama Black enough? Are we ready for a female president? If you're voting on race or gender you have issues I can't help you with. Christ on a bicycle, are we EVER going to get to the point that race, gender, sexual preference or the size of a persons waistband don't define every other thing about them? Thousands of years of known history and this is the best we can do? Look, I can't stand Mitt Romney but it's because of his views on policy, I don't care if he's Mormon or worships the Flying Spaghetti Monster."

It only gets better! Check it out!

A Message from Senators Brownback and Wyden

It looks like Congress has caught on to SoundExchange's bait and switch negotiating strategy. Just how long does the RIAA think they can continue to mislead Congress without penalty. Probably as long as they keep the big donation checks flowing.

Luckily two Senators are acting in rare bipartisan unity to bring the big label record industry back to the negotiating table.

Below I present to you the statement issued by U.S. Senators Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) regarding efforts to save Internet radio. The emphasis is mine.

“We sponsored the Internet Radio Equality Act because the Copyright Royalty Board’s decision to dramatically increase royalties and apply what we see as unfounded minimum rates threatens to devastate the Internet radio industry. The fact is online radio services do not have enough revenue to support what will amount to unprecedented royalties. The $500 per channel minimum fee alone will deliver an over $1 billion annual windfall to record companies, a windfall that is not justified by any business or equity considerations."

“Now we are hearing that the recording industry is attempting to use this aspect of the CRB decision to force webcasters to adopt recording restrictions far in excess of the controls that have governed broadcast content for decades. While we strongly support a negotiated solution, we will not allow the minimum fee issue to be used to force an agreement that mandates DRM technology and fails to respect the established principles of fair use and consumer rights."

“After the July 15 deadline came and went we were pleased to learn that SoundExchange was negotiating with webcasters, and we expected to avoid pushing forward with this legislation. But, as Congress heads into its August recess, we are troubled by the lack of negotiating progress being reported. Broadcasters report that their June 6 offer to SoundExchange has yet to warrant a response, and webcasters report that negotiating meetings with SoundExchange are proving difficult to schedule."

“Internet radio is crucial to many segments of business and culture – to small and large webcasters building sustainable businesses; to independent artists trying to make it in a crowded industry; and to millions of music fans searching for new diverse music that corporate radio generally does not offer. Innovation and creativity are the winners if Internet radio flourishes, and are the losers if Internet radio stagnates."

“If great progress toward a fair solution for webcasters is not made by Congress’s return to Washington after Labor Day, then we plan to take expeditious steps toward passage of the Internet Radio Equality Act. We feel the Senate must take action, and we will make every effort move the Internet Radio Equality Act to the floor.”

Brownback and Wyden are the Senate sponsors of the Internet Radio Equality Act.

TECHNORATI TAGS: HR 2060 RADIO INTERNET RADIO RON WYDEN SAM BROWNBACK FREE SPEECH

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

A Tip O' the Cap to Keith Olbermann

A very quick journal entry.

I've been exceedingly tough on Keith Olbermann in this journal and that is very likely to continue. Keith is often unfair to the point of deception in his presentation of the news and opinion.

But....

Let me compliment Keith Olbermann on his excellent moderation of the AFL-CIO Democrat Debate tonight. Keith moved the debate along and kept the candidates on track. It was Keith who made the debate work!

Sparks fkew! And this was the best debate so far.

And isn't Dennis Kucinich a great debater? Democrats ought to start to take him more seriously.

Finally, as long as I'm dreaming, I'd love to see Olbermann moderate a Republican debate!

Of course I also would like to see Brit Hume moderate a future Democrat debate.

TECHNORATI TAGS: KEITH OLBERMANN MSNBC DEBATE BRIT HUME FOX NEWS DENNIS KUCINICH

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

The Agony of Victory

This past week a relatively minor report from two policy wonks at the Brookings Institute ignited an interesting and, in my opinion, rather disturbing debate in the blogosphere and political circles. Michael E. O’Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack made appearances on the cable political television broadcasts and wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times, A War We Might Just Win.

O’Hanlon is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and Pollack is the director of Middle Eastern research at the same institute.

I wish I could tell you that the firestorm that erupted in the wake of their article was a shocking surprise, but, alas, it was totally predictable.

The left, primarily "progressive," wing of the political spectrum ripped the report and the two analysts to shreds.

O’Hanlon and Pollack had visited Iraq and compiled a detailed, honest and rather even handed assessment of the progress of the first few weeks of President Bush's surge strategy. They reported that our troops were upbeat and moral was quite good. They reported some progress had been made on the ground.

But they also were highly critical. For example they reported that the Iraqi political structure was still a disaster, the parliment was deadlocked and impotent and that the road to stability was still blocked by factional and sectarian roadblocks.

However, the progressives seem to reject even a hint that Bush's strategy might have merit!

Air America, the liberal talk show network, erupted into real sectarian violence. O’Hanlon and Pollack were vilified and condemned. One moment they were Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the next they were Benedict Arnold and John Wilkes Booth. And the next they were the hapless Laurel and Hardy. Certainly they were monsters and traitors and buffoons all rolled up into one. I thought my friend Randi Rhodes was going to have an aneurysm.

Predictably the blogosphere was even worse. Clearly there is one opinion you must not ever utter: "We might just win in Iraq."

And Keith Olbermann? I could write an entire essay about the bombastic and convoluted comments from this buffoon. But I'd just end up being named the "worst person in the world."

Besides, that's not my point. My point is "Why must the left demand defeat?" I just don't get it.

Barack Obama made it clear that even genocide was no reason to remain in Iraq. But does that mean we must have genocide in Iraq to prove our political point?

I know we want the troops to come home. But wouldn't it be OK if Iraq was stable? Can't we actually have a working democracy in the Middle East? How bad would it be if the surge worked?

Hey look.... it's early yet. Maybe that won't happen. Maybe Iraq will disintegrate into civil war. Maybe al-Qaeda will take over Iraq and turn it into the world's most powerful terrorist state. Maybe Iran and Turkey and Syria will divide the country into three puppet states.

Things might still change. We could lose. O’Hanlon and Pollack's report was very preliminary.

But why does the left seem to condemn anyone who would forecast stability? Or hint at progress?

President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and Bush's team were wrong to invade Iraq. And they compounded that error at every turn. They have totally botched the occupation (so far). The mistakes and misjudgements Bush made were huge and tragic.

Bush's political opponents have all the ammunition they need to even go so far as to impeach the President if they have the will to do so.

So why must we also demand defeat in Iraq? Why can't we condemn Bush while simultaneously working for a fair, just and stable solution to this Middle Eastern crisis?

Why condemn O’Hanlon and Pollack for filing a report? Were they wrong to even offer a glimmer of hope.

In today's bizarre political climate, a modern retelling of the story of Peter Pan would have the left so hating Captain Hook that they would be praying that Tinkerbell dies.

We do not need Iraq to die to prove President Bush and the neo-cons were wrong.

TECHNORATI TAGS: BARACK OBAMA WAR IN IRAQ MICHAEL E O'HANLON AL QAEDA GEORGE BUSH BROOKINGS INSTITUTION POLITICS KENNETH POLLACK DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS FAILURE PROGRESSIVE RANDI RHODES

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

Why I Read the Daily KOS Everyday, Why Bill O'Reilly is Wrong, and Why the Presidential Candidates are Even Wronger!

With the Annual KOS Convention just days away, the Daily Kos is getting lots of attention from the very envious traditional press. The Daily Kos has become powerful and influential. While the Democrat presidential candidates felt comfortable in stiffing the once powerful Democrat Leadership Committee (DLC) convention, everyone but Joe Biden will be speaking to the Daily Kos attendees.

Such is the power of the Internet and the real leadership KOS has shown in tackling key Democrat positions, especially the Iraq Invasion and Occupation.

So while Bill O'Reilly and many, many conservative bloggers and television commentators are vilifying the Daily Kos, the reality is Kos speaks to and for a very large portion of the American public.

So, yes Bill, you are right, there are some whacko's posting and commenting there. And there is satire and dark humor and even outright hate speech mingled in with the often insightful analysis and accurate and on-the-scene reporting. But this is absolutely true of any blogging website with multiple contributors and open forums for comments.

Given a magnifying glass and history files, one can find hatred and foul language and excessive hate in almost any blog with reasonable traffic. And the Daily Kos has heavy, heavy traffic and readership.

As I write this essay, the Alexa Rank for Daily Kos is an amazing 4,878 with an astonishing reach of .02985% of all Internet Traffic compared to Bill O'Reilly's Alexa Rank of 83,723 and reach of only .0016%.

In fairness, O'Reilly's rank is extremely high, but the Daily Kos rank is spectacular! Not that this is a contest of readership. After all there are dozens of porn sites that dwarf them both!

But, the key is that Kos is read by many people who appreciate their point of view and their insight and perspective. If you don't read the Daily Kos regularly you are missing important facts, opinions and news that, at the very least, help explain the views of millions of Americans, who generally agree with Kos' liberal, Democrat (with a capital "D") philosophy.

So why is the WIZARD attacking the presidential candidates is his lengthy, grammatically incorrect and misspelled headline?

Well, certainly not for speaking at the Kos convention. They are doing the right thing there.

The Democrat candidates mistake (and it's a HUGE mistake) is failing to appear on FOX NEWS and appear at the FOX News's sponsored debates!

Just as the Daily Kos rightfully reflects the viewpoints of perhaps as many as 25% of the American public, FOX NEWS reflects the views of nearly 50% of the American Public. And Fox News sure as hell isn't as rough, hateful and prejudiced as many of the Kos articles and photographs so gleefully pointed out by Bill O'Reilly.

And, just as any objective and intelligent student of American politics and opinion MUST read the Daily Kos, any intelligent and objective and reasonable student MUST carefully consider the views and opinions broadcast on Fox.

But even that isn't the main issue I have with the candidates! Barack Obama said just this week he wants to be a "uniter, not a divider" (I do wish he'd chosen a different phrase). That is ONLY POSSIBLE when you actually speak to and listen to the other 50% of the deeply divided American Public!!

By thumbing their noses at the Fox News sponsored debates, the Democrats (with the exception of Joe Biden and Dennis Kucinich) are saying they really only want to be President of the "Blue States of America!"

This is, by the way, exactly the same criticism I leveled at the Republicans who failed (and failed miserably) to show up for the NAACP Convention (with the noble exception of Tom Tancredo).

I, for one, will not accept this divisive stand any longer. We must DEMAND our candidates speak to the entire United States, left and right, north and south, east and west, liberal and conservative.

TECHNORATI TAGS: DAILY KOS 2008 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN TOM TRANCREDO REPUBLICAN DEMOCRAT DEMOCRAT LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE BARACK OBAMA BILL O'REILLY FOX NEWS

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

National Association of Broadcasters Backs the Internet Radio Equality Act

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) can't quite seem to negotiate in good faith with anyone, not even the powerful National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) with represents virtually the all AM and FM over the air radio stations in the United States.

"We are disappointed by SoundExchange's continued reluctance to respond to the good-faith reasonable offer put forth by NAB nearly two months ago," said NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton. "NAB will now turn our attention to aggressively advocating in support of Rep. Inslee's legislation to ensure that local radio broadcasters who stream content online are treated fairly."

The RIAA seems determined to force Congress to act. The recording organization seems pathologically incapable of negotiating in good faith.

Certainly all small Internet Radio Station operators appreciate the support of the money rich and well connected National Association of Broadcasters.


INTERNET RADIO SUPPORTS AND PROMOTES INDEPENDENT ARTISTS

The RIAA's position on Internet Radio seems so bizarre many people cannot believe there are not other issues preventing a reasonable settlement with Internet Radio.

"Why," a reasonable and intelligent person would ask, "would the RIAA want to kill an entire industry that serves millions of music lovers?"

I've been saying for the last several years, the issue isn't money and it isn't royalties and it sure as hell isn't providing payment to the artists and musicians. It's all about control. Once all competing Internet Radio Stations are gone the ONLY broadcasters left will be the big record companies themselves. The big four music labels, Sony-BMG, Warner, EMI and Universal are effectively exempt from all rules and all royalties (i.e., they pay the legally mandated royalties to themselves; their net cost is zero).

The key is that when all competition is eliminated, they will play only artists who are signed with the big recording labels. You'll hear Kelly Clarkson, but never again hear Irene Jackson (a Canadian independent who is a favorite on Wizard Radio).

Well, a new study, released last week, proves my point. Mark Lam, the CEO of Live365 (the network that broadcasts all three Wizard Radio Stations), released the following data:

"Only 10-13% of AM/FM music is from independent artists and labels, so we spin four times as much indie music as AM/FM. Our 10,000 DJ's are opening up the diverse spectrum of musical genres and artists while AM/FM program formats narrow it. I see this statistic as a genuine reflection of what music DJ's will play when the choice is driven by what people like rather than profits."

Live 365's broadcast mix is shown on the LEFT and AM/FM Radio is shown on the right.

Both of the above stories are covered in depth in the July 26th issue of Radio and Internet News RAIN (click here).

TECHNORATI TAGS: RIAA SAVE NET RADIO HR 2060 RADIO KURT HANSON RAIN RADIO AND INTERNET NEWS INTERNET RADIO WIZARD RADIO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS NAB

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

Steven Spielberg Pressures Chinese Over Darfur

Unlike the disgraced Warren Buffett, Steven Spielberg isn't afraid to place principle above profits in the fight to provide aid and security to the people of Darfur.

ABC News reports this evening:

Steven Spielberg, under pressure from Darfur activists, may quit his post as artistic adviser to the 2008 Beijing Olympics, unless China takes a harder line against Sudan, a representative of the film director told ABC News. China, Sudan's largest oil customer and perennial defender, has come under renewed scrutiny in the lead up to the Olympics, as the country juggles its need for cheap energy with its desire to host a trouble-free games. As celebrities-cum-activists increasingly link the ongoing genocide with China's patronage, some — most notably and vocally, the actress Mia Farrow — have accused Spielberg of complicity, by not using his prominence and position to pressure the Chinese government to change course. "Is Mr. Spielberg, who in 1994 founded the Shoah Foundation to record the testimony of survivors of the holocaust, aware that China is bankrolling Darfur's genocide?" Farrow and her son Ronan wrote in a March Wall Street Journal editorial. In that same piece, "The Genocide Olympics," Farrow compared Spielberg to the Nazi director Leni Riefenstahl whose film "Olympia" was a paean to the 1936 Berlin Games. "Does Mr. Spielberg really want to go down in history as the Leni Riefenstahl of the Beijing Games," Farrow wrote. Days after Farrow's editorial, Spielberg wrote an open letter to Hu Jintao, president of China. "I am writing this letter to you, not as one of the overseas artistic advisors to the Olympic Ceremonies, but as a private citizen who has made a personal commitment to do all I can to oppose genocide. … Accordingly, I add my voice to those who ask that China change its policy toward Sudan and pressure the Sudanese government to accept the entrance of United Nations peacekeepers to protect the victims of genocide in Darfur," Spielberg wrote. Excluding that letter, Spielberg and his representatives have, until now, been tight-lipped on what additional action the director might take. "Steven will make a determination in the next few weeks regarding his work with the Chinese. Our main interest is ending the genocide. No one is clear on the best way to do this," Spielberg's spokesman Andy Spahn told ABCNEWS.com.

Unlike Warren Buffett, who made it crystal clear that he would look aside and not consider the plight of the people of Darfur in his stock investment decisions, Spielberg has made it known he is considering his options concerning continuing involvement with the Chinese.

No doubt Spielberg hope just the mention of his possible departure will bring some movement to the Chinese government. Virtually all Darfur activists believe the Chinese could force Sudan to accept UN peacekeepers in a matter of days.

I hope Steven Spielberg will continue his efforts on behalf of the people of Darfur.


TECHNORATI TAGS: SAVE DARFUR STEVEN SPIELBERG SUDAN WOMEN'S RIGHTS CHINA 2008 OLYMPICS HUMAN RIGHTS DARFUR UNITED NATIONS WARREN BUFFETT BERKSHIRE-HATHAWAY

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

Death By a Thousand Cuts

The ongoing battle between the fledgling Internet Radio industry and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)continues at a snail's pace. I try to keep those of you who stop by this journal updated on the most recent developments.

But the RIAA is incredibly clever. They realize, correctly I fear, that if they drag this out long enough, the public will simply lose interest. The pressure on Congress will decrease and bigger issues will eclipse the plight of a few thousand broadcasters and a few million listeners.

Congress has twice been ready to act. House Bill 2060 has over 130 co-sponsors. And the Senate Bill has powerful backers. As each of the two previous deadlines approached Sound Exchange, the royalty collection arm of the RIAA, promised huge concessions in front of Congressional Committees only to pull them back and attach bizarre conditions to any settlement.

Many Members of Congress are aware of this bate and switch. But the process drags on into the fall and Internet Radio may finally breath its last, to be replaced by an RIAA controlled pay-per-listen model limited to the comparatively few artists and musicians signed with RCA, Columbia, Sony and the other big players. And even these artists will receive nothing for their performances.

Today I ask you follow these links and read two excellent and impartial articles about the current battle. First is Sounds of silence: Internet radio hangs on from The Seattle Times and the second is Webcasting Royalties: A Modest Proposal from WIRED Magazine.

Please drop a note, letter email or phone call to your Congressperson and your two Senators. Otherwise Internet Radio will die a slow and agonizing death.

TECHNORATI TAGS: RIAA SAVE NET RADIO HR 2060 RADIO KURT HANSON RAIN RADIO AND INTERNET NEWS INTERNET RADIO WIZARD RADIO THE SEATTLE TIMES WIRED MAGAZINE

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us

Darkness

There is a real depression settling over those of us who have long worked to help the beleaguered people of Darfur. Senator Barack Obama was viewed by many of us as the hope for a new America. An America that cared. An America that helped those in need. An America that would put principle above politics. An America that would stand strong against oppression at home and abroad.

I've receive a dozen emails in the last few hours from my friends and allies in the Save Darfur movement. We all hope and pray Barack Obama misspoke. We all hope and pray Barack was misquoted.

Alas, it seems the news reports are correct. His words did speak intelligently about diplomacy and international cooperation.

But those effort by the French and, much more recently the Americans have failed the people of Darfur. The SAVE DARFUR Coalition is now correctly DEMANDING UN INTERVENTION.

Obama certainly didn't help.

So below I'm reprinting the impassioned attack on Obama by (of all people) Scott Malensek over at Flopping Aces. Obama deserves these harsh words and a lot worse.

Wow, say goodbye to the Greatest Generation, and hello to the weakest generation. Senator Obama (D) has echoed the Democrats' view on war: genocide isn't worth fighting against. It's why American troops don't get sent to Sudan. It's why American soldiers don't go to Congo, and it's why Americans should leave Iraq. Apparently President Clinton was right to ignore the machete massacre of millions in Rwanda, and President Roosevelt (D) was wrong to wage war against an enemy that never attacked the US, and had no operational or cooperational ties with the Japanese who did. Genocide is permitted and accepted by Democrats. Yep. That's the face of the new Democratic Party. "Well, look, if that's the criteria by which we are making decisions on the deployment of U.S. forces, then by that argument you would have 300,000 troops in the Congo right now — where millions have been slaughtered as a consequence of ethnic strife — which we haven't done," Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We would be deploying unilaterally and occupying the Sudan, which we haven't done. Those of us who care about Darfur don't think it would be a good idea," he said. Perhaps the "Progressives" (often in love with nuanced reasoning) would only support action against a genocide if it the action were supported and called for by the UN? Nope. Sorry, but that rules out Rwanda, Sudan, Congo, and Iraq. All four had UN resolutions calling for intervention to prevent genocide. Even the Iraq War (referring to the post-Saddam occupation here) is authorized-even compelled-by a series of UN resolutions that essentially demand that the US and others who invaded must stay in Iraq until it is secure and stable enough to stand on its own. Senator Obama either is ignorant of the myriad of UN resolutions that have called for intervention against genocide, or he's taken the same position often accused of President Bush: he's ignoring the will of the international community; thumbing his nose at the UN. Perhaps Senator Obama and others believe that problems which are far away-like genocides in Rwanda, Sudan, Congo, Iraq-are not American problems. They're so far away as to be irrelevant. It's not like they're happening in Mexico or Canada where our completely undefended, unprotected, and ill guarded borders would protect us. History bears them correct, right? The US had no business trying to stabilize a civil war in Lebanon in the 1980's, so US Marines left, and the only effect was to turn Osama Bin Laden from rich playboy to Jihadi bent on holy war with the west-including the US. The US was right in ending support for Afghanistan after the Russians left, and the ensuing anarchy which brought about the Taliban and Al Queda was their-fault not America's, and people in Afghanistan as well as Holy Warriors everywhere understand that. The US was right in running from anarchy in Somalia as the only effect was to prove Osama and other holy warriors' idea that the US is a paper tiger that will run rather than fight. The US was right not to respond to the USS Cole attack as the only effect was to create an Al Queda recruiting video. Really, one wonders if regressive "progressives" learned anything from World War II, Pearl Harbor, and 911? If genocide isn't worth fighting to end, then is anything, and if deliberately, purposefully letting millions of people be slaughtered in genocides isn't the greatest human sin of omission, then what is greater?

Malensek may be a tad too bombastic and a little too partisan. He wrongly claims Obama is the face of all Democrats. But Obama is dead wrong in his comments and, much worse, he is wrong in his principles.

TECHNORATI TAGS: BARACK OBAMA GENOCIDE DARFUR SUDAN

DIGG THIS

SAVE THIS PAGE TO del.icio.us