So that we might say that the earth has a spirit of growth; that its flesh is the soil, its bones the arrangement and connection of the rocks of which the mountains are composed, its cartilage the tufa, and its blood the springs of water. The pool of blood which lies round the heart is the ocean, and its breathing, and the increase and decrease of the blood in the pulses, is represented in the earth by the flow and ebb of the sea; and the heat of the spirit of the world is the fire which pervades the earth, and the seat of the vegetative soul is in the fires, which in many parts of the earth find vent in baths and mines of sulphur, and in volcanoes, as at Mount Aetna in Sicily, and in many other places.

-- The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci

Six Apart announces more changes to Movable Type license

With the release of Movable Type 3.0014d, users will pay as they blog on a per-word basis (billing will be handled through the increasingly versatile TypeKey service). As a result, the license no longer penalizes those users who choose to maintain multiple blogs or host blogs with multiple authors. Instead, all users pay equally based on how much they use Movable Type.

Of course, we recognize that not all words are created equally. Therefore, the new pricing structure breaks down as follows:

Prices:

Prepositions, conjunctions, articles (definite and indefinite), interjections: 1¢ per word

Pronouns: 2¢ per word

Nouns (common): 4¢ per word

Nouns (proper): 6¢ per word

Verbs (passive): 5¢ per word

Verbs (action): 7¢ per word

Adjectives and adverbs: 8¢ per word

Proper nouns comprising names of other blogging software (i.e. "WordPress" or "Expression Engine"): 30¢ per word

Gerunds: TBA

Naturally, punctuation and HTML markup will remain absolutely free. Furthermore, hyphenated words will count as a single word for billing purposes (if the hyphenated form is the preferred usage according to the Oxford English Dictionary).

First noted by: Apropos of Something

JOHN BATTELLE'S INSIGHTFUL ARTICLE Toward the Endemic: What's missing in PPC/Behavioral/Contextual Ad Nets has a lot to say about why advertisers and blogs just don't understand each other.

Something is lost when advertisers don't buy based on the publication. I'm not arguing that buying based on context or content isn't valuable, it certainly is. But in the long run, not considering the publisher's role devalues both the publication *and* the advertiser in the minds of the publishers' audience.

So what, you might be saying. Most major publications utilize both network-based and more traditional "display" advertising - look at the NYT or CNET or CBS Marketwatch. True enough - Martin mentioned yesterday that his "display" advertising at NYT.com is up dramatically and starting to show real traction. (And, by they way, the NYT is steering clear of AdSense image, for obvious reasons....) But the real problem is with smaller sites, sites that can't afford to be understood or purchased any other way but through a network. Sites where there is simply too much transactional friction to make the advertising purchase worthwhile. Sites like....blogs, for example.

Advertisers can't grok all the blogs which might be potential fits for their marketing dollar. Besides the tedium of finding and evaluating them, blogs have no standardized marketing or advertising practices, so working with each is a handrolled labor of love.

Essential reading if you'd like to find a way to have an enduring relationship with advertising. Still, it led me to wonder if we are going to see it anytime soon without the creation of a whole new kind of salesman. As I remarked in the comments to this article:

I found this to be a valuable article with a number of insightful points. At the same time, the push towards "conversational" advertising leads me to wonder who there will be to bell the cat.

In my experience, ads appear in magazines not merely because there is a mystical conversation going on between the reader and the magazine, but because there has been a real converstation between an ad salesman for that magazine and a media buyer. And not just a conversation, but a relationship that has been built up from many meetings and conversations.

To whip out and old chainsaw, you can have the best product and the best ideas in the world but nothing happens until someone sells something. Who are going to be the salesmen for these micro-accounts? Good media salesmen can make well into the six figures every year. Who is going to actually do the legwork and make the phone calls and send the emails and present the numbers and demographics to make microadvertising work? Where's the living to be made?

It seems to me that if you can solve that you can solve the other. Perhaps it is some sort of media-buyer to media-placer situation that has to evolve. One person with the ability to place ads across a spectrum of small outlets with a "conversational" understanding of all of them and has gained the trust of a media-buyer to do this effectively. A kind of ubersalesman who has put together a big sheaf of like minded blogs/minipublications and sells the package. It seems to me that that sort of scaling is required.

Perhaps what we need is a new class of salesman: The BlogRep.

Quit Being a Chump and Start Being Effective: Here's How to Make Your Views Matter to the Mass Media

EDITORS LOVE IT when you write outraged letters to them, but not for the reasons you might think.

Editors love your outraged letters because it tells they you're reading them. They love your letters, even when you scold them, because it shows you care.

Editors love printing your letter that takes them to task because it shows they are pleased to balance a large chunk of airtime or copy with a few seconds or inches of dissent.

But the dirty little secret beneath the editors' love for your outraged letter is that means, almost all of the time, that you didn't send that letter to one of the editors' advertisers.

Editors hate it when people write to the advertisers. If enough people write, editors have to have a conversation with their advertising director. Not that anything will come of it, but they hate the casual watercooler conversation that begins, "We're getting some heat from Nike about that dingbat Robert Scheer, can't you get him to..."

"Now, now, you know there's a wall between news and advertising."

"Sure, but I just want you to know that Nike is..."

If you don't think conversations like that happen, you just don't know the "media business."

If enough letters get written not to editors but to advertisers, the editor then gets to have a conversation he really hates -- a conversation with the publisher.

"When the advertisers get nervous, the publisher gets nervous."

The publisher of a newspaper, or director of a radio or television network, looks at the business of the operation. He is responsible to the owners or the stockholders. The owners or stockholders care first and foremost about the health of the business. When the advertisers get nervous, the publisher gets nervous.

That's why if you want to make your feelings felt about the way the news is handled by an element of the mass media you are wasting energy, cycles and stamps writing to the editor or producers. They just enjoy it and use it to further their agendas.

If you want to have an effect larger than a letter of complaint, put your energy on the akido point of today's media, advertising.

There is no newspaper in the land that can survive without advertising. Their entire business model is built on the revenue from advertisers. Whether or not you buy a copy or cancel a subscription means less than nothing to them -- even when it happens in the thousands -- unless it annoys or chills their advertisers.

Today, the mass media is still struggling back from the severe ad slump generated by the dotcom implosion, 9/11, and the resulting recession. For the first time in a number of years, the forecast is looking good for advertising across the board. But it is still shaky and advertisers -- through the advertising agencies -- still make critical decisions on where billions of dollars in paid advertising will flow.

In the main, this money follows demographics and circulation/ratings, but not always. Since many publications and shows have similar demographics and equivalent circulations, many shows compete for the same advertising dollar. And any little thing can cause those dollars to move.

While editors and producers tend to live within a carefully circumscribed bubble of like-minded folk within their newsrooms, publishers and media advertising salespeople have to confront the business edge daily. If the corporate client of one of the advertising agencies that is currently buying space or time from the media outlet in question is unhappy, the business end of that media operation feels it very quickly.

"In the great mass media food chain, the advertiser is the big supermarket at the top and he reserves the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason."

That's because the advertising agency that creates the corporate client's advertising and places it in a program of media buys is subject, at any moment, to be fired by that corporation if the corporation doesn't think the advertising is "effective." Read the advertising trade publications and you'll find that the biggest news beat is always who has fired what agency over what issue and who is going to what agency as a result.

In the great mass media food chain, the advertiser is the big supermarket at the top and he reserves the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason. He is very sensitive and very touchy and very cranky. Nobody below him on the chain likes to make him the least bit upset.

That's why, if you don't like the agenda of a media organization, you need to upset the advertiser. If that happens enough, you'll see some changes made.

"How can you write to an advertiser if you see something you don't like in a major media outlet? It is simplicity itself especially for national media."

So if you see a story or a trend that you don't like as an individual, it is your right and your duty to complain to the people who make it possible, the advertisers. You'll recall a number of times in the past couple of decades when the media have run stories on this or that consumer boycott or letter writing campaign aimed at this or that bit of corporate behavior or advertising campaign. You'll find some follow up stories on how effective this tactic proved to be, but few. You'll not find still fewer stories praising this tactic unless it advanced "victims' rights." That's understandable since this tactic threatens to break the rice bowl of the media reporting the story. It's not that they consciously slant it, but that they don't see the need to emphasize stories about a tactic that, carried far enough, could threaten the mortgage payments of the editors and reporters in the newsroom.

And make no mistake, carried far enough that's just what complaining to advertisers can do.

How can you write to an advertiser if you see something you don't like in a major media outlet? It is simplicity itself especially for national media.

First you note which advertiser is closest to the offending newspaper, magazine, radio, or television story. Position is something that is a factor in an advertising buy and it often indicates that a specific advertiser has chosen that slot because something has convinced him that his ad will be most effective there. This isn't always the case, but it will narrow down the target.

The next step is to determine the corporation behind the ad. In the case of national brand names, this is not all that difficult, but in the case of conglomerates it might take a little more digging. In either case, it is merely a matter of following your Goggle.

"All companies have an internal metric by which they measure customer displeasure."

All public corporations are listed on the major stock exchanges. All listings have links to the corporation's home page. Each corporate home page has the name and address of the CEO of that corporation. Sometimes there's even an email address for the CEO. This person is the one to whom you will address your complaint. You can send an email or a real letter as you prefer, but know that a real letter is given more weight in the company simply because it took you more trouble. In either case, all companies have an internal metric by which they measure customer displeasure. One letter may factor to 10 or 100 or 1000 displeased customers. It all depends, but in any case one letter has a lot more weight to a company than it does to a newsroom. In a newsroom, you letter is just another bit of entertainment. In a company, it is cause for alarm.

I hasten to add that the chances your letter will actually be seen or read by the CEO of Disney, Nike, General Motors, etc. is slim to none, but that's not the point. If enough letters on a subject are received by a corporation what the CEO will see is a number on a report. If that number is large enough, the CEO will ask what is going on with the advertising buys at this or that media outlet. He will expect an answer. If it is an answer that threatens enough of the company's revenue stream, the advertising will be pulled and the advertising agency either fired or put on notice. This will have a chilling effect felt all the way down the media food chain. If the chill becomes deep enough, it will cause frostbite and the loss of toes in the newsroom.

"You could write hundreds of letters about [Robert Scheers] quisling screeds to the editor and they would just join the tens of thousands of others in the circular file."

To see what this form of letter-writing can do, imagine for a moment the situation of Los Angeles Times columnist Robert Scheer. While Scheer's talents may be meager, his bias large and transparent, and his anti-Americanism a career path of long standing, his position as a pet of the left at the Los Angeles Times seems unassailable. They would have to be graphic video tapes of his long-ago commune nights available to even begin to cause him trouble. You could write hundreds of letters about his quisling screeds to the editor and they would just join the tens of thousands of others in the circular file. They are all just "good for a laugh" over an expense account lunch. You could cancel your subscription as tens of thousands of others have done. The Times would just, as it has done, mount a campaign to give you home delivery of the paper for a dollar a week in order to replace them. Letters to the Editor and subscription cancellations will have no effect. Scheer will be back peddling his bile the very next week with no end in sight.

But imagine if a concerted campaign were mounted asking the companies advertising in the Los Angeles Times why they continue to spend good money supporting this quisling. Imagine if those letters contained choice quotations from Scheer and asked if the company agreed with him since it would seem, by where they were spending their money, they might. Imagine if the letters were to arrive at these companies in such numbers that they would prompt a "review" of advertising priorities. This can and does happen.

"A withdrawal of one major advertiser from a major newspaper means the loss of many millions of dollars to that paper. Worse still, it makes other major advertisers consider the same action."

Imagine that in the wake of these reviews, one or two major companies decided to pull their advertising from the Los Angeles Times and place it elsewhere in community papers or on local television channels. A withdrawal of one major advertiser from a major newspaper means the loss of many millions of dollars to that paper. Worse still, it makes other major advertisers consider the same action.

The result is that the position of Robert Scheer at the Los Angeles Times ceases to be just a concern of the newsroom and a subject for idle conversation over lunch. It becomes an item in a cost/benefit analysis.

The CEO of the company that owns the Los Angeles Times will call the Publisher of the Los Angeles Times. He will ask what the Publisher is doing about their multi-million dollar liability. There will be a pro-forma exchange of views about the "wall" between advertising and editorial, and then they will both return to "working the numbers." Following that call, and the Publisher will have a meeting with the Vice-President of Advertising which the Editor will be required to attend. The VP of Advertising will be in a very bad mood since his bonus and the commissions of his salespeople will have been chopped. The Editor will blather a bit about the "wall" between advertising and editorial. The Publisher will make comforting and understanding noises, but will then return to "working the numbers." The meeting will then focus on "what we are going to do about Robert Scheer and what's the best way to do it."

And all because you finally got fed up with writing a letter to the editor and decided to write a letter to the advertiser instead. Of course, you don't have to give this up completely. "Letters to the Editor" are why God made the "cc:" field.

Via PWOT

IN "RETRO-COLONIZATION" History's End takes a close look at what might happen to stop the de-facto demographic invasion of Siberia by the Chinese.

China in possession of Siberia would pose a mortal danger to Russia, and therefore something must be done to prevent China from possessing Siberia. That something is to sell Siberia to the United States of America.

Why, you ask, would Russia be so crazy as to sell Siberia to America? Why not? The Louisiana Purchase in 1803 was worth 15 million Dollars US, and the area purchased was 2 million square miles. 15 million dollars worth of gold back then would have bought 300 million dollars today, at roughly 15 dollars per ounce of gold in 1803 and roughly 300 dollars per ounce of gold today (Interestingly, the US dollar was originally pegged against the silver Spanish 8-real peso, more famous as the "piece of 8" ). So the Louisiana Purchase was quite a deal. Alaska, by the way, was sold for 7 million dollars by Russia. So Russia selling Siberia to the USA isn't completely crazy, Russian territory has been sold to the US before. And not all of it has to be sold, only the easternmost parts, in fact. And plenty of precedent already exists. And selling Siberia to the US has a lot of benefits to Russia. First off, it will likely be sold for more than 300 million dollars, or even 3,000 million dollars. Russia could likely get billions for the deal, billions of dollars that it desperately needs to rebuild infrastructure ruined by decades of communist imposed socialism. A deal worth tends of billions of dollars could literally be a G-dsend to the Russians. Also, selling Siberia to America would turn the issue of eventual Chinese control of Siberia from a Russian problem to a US problem. Indeed, Russia could use it as a clever ploy to increase tensions between the US and China. With both focused on each other, Russia could improve its economy, military and world position.

HERE'S A SPAM FIGHTING SCHEME THAT MAKES CENTS: The Penny Black Project

As with the British Post of the 1830's, Internet email is becoming increasingly expensive for message recipients.  In the current case, the culprit is spam.  Although spam does not constitute a monetary expense for most users, it does require time and attention (and hence productivity) to deal with spam.  Moreover,  measurable costs associated with spam are incurred by providers of network services, and these costs are increasing daily.

In a nutshell, the idea is this: "If I don't know you, and you want to send me mail, then you must prove to me that you have expended a certain amount of effort, just for me and just for this message."  The approach is fundamentally an economic one.  Suppose we measure effort in CPU cycles.  Since there are about 80,000 seconds in a day, a computational "price" of just ten seconds per message would limit a spamming computer to at most 8,000 messages daily. So spammers would have to invest heavily in hardware in order to send high volumes of spam. (While this idea is simple, people often misunderstand its implications. We encourage potential critics to look here first.)

WHILE ONLY A BUBBLE IN THE BLOGSPHERE, the fiasco aborning at Six Apart and MovableType is certainly of interest to those of us who have up til now used the application. So far, among the many hundreds of posts about the Trotts announced plan to sink their own company, the best explanation of how badly they have handled this and how disastrous it will be for them is: This is why VCs bring in the MBAs

MT is decent software, even if its kind of rough in areas. But what they're looking at doing is just silly, and is going to be incredibly detrimental. They've always had very... "iffy" licensing, and lots of people have been chomping at the bit and looking for alternatives... but a combination of inertia and features kept people using or trying to work around the license issues.

But this is just beyond stupid, it's just obvious they don't "get it". And really the reaction looks to be about 95% negative.

Oh, I'm sure they'll try to spin it... At some point soon you'll see one of them come out and try to throw all sorts of spin on this, using lots of vague terms and mentioning "people who have to live", "mouths to feed", "features aren't free", etc. in the coming while.

And that is just the nub of it. Read the whole thing and become educated in how good companies go bad in... oh, about a day.
====
UPDATE: I've note decided which new system to use, but WordPress is getting good buzz.

For those of you who want to know the way to migrate from MT to WordPress, the skinny is at: C A R T H I K . N E T » Moving from movable type to WordPress "A lot of MT users might want to move to WordPress, but may have a lot of questions and doubts regarding the move, and about WordPress. I thought a short post with essential resources, tips and answers will come in handy to at least a few people, so here goes."

RICH MAROTTI, who I wish was sober more often, makes a strong and compelling point in seldom sober: open letter. I'm placing it here in the hopes that others who, like myself, have experienced a surge of traffic in the wake of the Berg killing will, in some way, echo it.

In a realm where traffic is seen as some sort of payment, the kind of traffic this has been generating and the reasons for it are certainly cheapening that coin. Marotti sums up how to view this and how, perhaps, to get some good out of it:

An Open Letter to Internet Connected People on the Occasion of Nick Berg Bringing Me an Unusual Number of Hits

If you are looking for this video because you have some sick fetish for snuff films, please turn off your computer and get therapy now. The first few copies of this video that I could find were actually on sites dedicated to sickos like you. I am sorry if you are cursed with a psychological affliction, but don't go hunting around the internet trying to satisfy your baser desires. Get help. Now.

If you are here for other reasons I need to point something out to you. The blogosphere (the community of those who write weB LOGS) broke this story, not Big Media. The blogosphere continues to cover it while Big Media continues to largely ignore it. The blogosphere has the courage and integrity to show this video (or images from it) while Big Media cries "Offensive!" as they continue to show pictures of naked Iraqui prisoners piled on top of one another.

THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED OCCURENCE! If you are unfamiliar with the blogosphere, get familiar with it now. We break and cover stories like this all of the time. We are largely honest in our coverage, if not always objective. We cover the stories that Big Media does not, because of their agendas, because of their connections, or for any other reasons. Don't make your search for this one tragic story your last stop in the blogosphere. We offer honesty and (most of the time) truth on a regular basis. Try finding that in the New York Times.

I have to admit I was initially pleased today to see that my usual small circulation of 1,500 to 2,200 visits a day was pushing on 10,000 yesterday, but that pleasure faded when I checked the search terms. That kind of attention I don't need.

So, if you are here for some snuff, get out now. I've already spent too much time dealing with people like you.

If not, stick around, pull up a chair, have a cold one, come back when you want, glad to meet you.

DANIEL HENNINGER reports on unseen videos out of the Iraq Prison in: OpinionJournal - Wonder Land

As perfect justice, the story in fact begins in Abu Ghraib prison, in 1995. With Iraq's economy in a tailspin, Saddam arrested nine Iraqi businessmen to scapegoat them as dollar traders. They got a 30-minute "trial," and were sentenced, after a year's imprisonment, to have their right hands surgically cut off at Abu Ghraib prison.

The amputations were performed, over two days, by a Baghdad anesthesiologist, a surgeon and medical staff. We know this because Saddam had a videotape made of each procedure. He had the hands brought to him in formalin and then returned to Abu Ghraib. Oh, one more thing: The surgeon carved an X of shame into the forehead of each man. And the authorities charged the men $50.

OKAY, TELL ME AGAIN the ways in which Americans are just the same as the regime they destroyed. Tell me again all the ways in which we are just as evil and that the Saddam torture chambers have reopened under new management but with the same old ways.

But wait a moment. The sequel to this story is not the same as we would have had in Iraq if we had not gone to war. Instead the sequel reads:

Last year, after we liberated Iraq, a veteran TV news producer named Don North--who has worked for major U.S. broadcasters--was in Baghdad with the U.S. to restore TV service. Iraqi contacts there brought him a tape of the men's amputations. Mr. North says dismemberment was common in Saddam's Iraq and that if one walks down a crowded Baghdad street one may see a half-dozen people missing an ear, eye, limb or tongue. He decided to seek out the men whose stubbed arms represented the civilized world's lowest act--the perversion of medicine.

He found seven. Mr. North determined to make a documentary of their story and get medical help for them. How he found that help, if one may still use this phrase, is an all-American story.

An oil engineer from Houston, named Roger Brown, overheard Mr. North's tale in a Baghdad café. He suggested Don North get in touch with a famed Houston TV newsman named Marvin Zindler. Mr. Zindler put him in touch with Dr. Joe Agris, a Houston reconstructive surgeon, who has worked in postwar Vietnam and Nicaragua repairing children.

Mr. North sent Dr. Agris a copy of the videotape of the surgical atrocities, and Dr. Agris said: Send me the men; I will fix them.

How this was done is something that will restore you after the last week of the news. Read it.

It used to be that you got a talk show, then ran for president, à la Pat Buchanan, but Howard Dean may reverse that order. Dean is talking to Viacom about a TV gig and working with "Judge Judy" producer Larry Lyttle, who told Variety: "He's a little bit of Howard Beale, a little Dr. Phil and a little Donahue all rolled into one."
-- Media Notes Extra

SALON’S PRECARIOUS FISCAL STATE has obviously become dire. The “premium’ subscriptions which began at, I believe, $35 a year have now been discounted down to a dollar a year. Today, this email has been making the rounds.

I felt compelled to comment:

Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 00:59:24 -0700
From: Premium Help
Subject: Renew Salon Premium for $1

Dear *****: I understand that you haven't yet renewed your subscription to Salon Premium,

Right you are, David. No more premium Salon for moi. I’ve left you forever and taken the puppy.

so I'm prepared to extend you our absolute lowest rate ever: $1 for an entire year.

One dollar? Just one buck? One small Washington?

That's right, $1.

Zowie, David. Tell me more, more, more!

To take advantage of this great rate, all you need do is renew using our no-annual-fee Salon Visa card. This offer is only valid in the United States.

I don’t know. That smacks of cultural imperialism to me.

Again, the card carries no annual fee and has a low interest rate.

Sounds like a World Bank Loan to a third world country. Can I get some cash up front too?

Plus it looks fantastic.

I admit I was on the fence until you told me that. The one thing I require in credit cards is a fantastic look. The guy down at the Circle K always kicks back the ugly cards to me and demands cards that look “fantastic.” Will you be doing one next year that also looks “fabulous”? If so, will it go with my new Pinto print Speedo?

Just click on the following link to apply: [link deleted to keep readers of this site from swamping the Visa servers]

We both win because Salon is compensated for every credit card account we open

No kidding? And here I thought you were offering the dollar a year rate because you loved me and wanted me back desperately. David, don’t tell me you’ve become a Visa slut after all we’ve meant to each other. How could you?

-- enabling you to support independent journalism --

Actually, I have to confess that every credit card account I do not open supports my own independent journalism, David. If you really wanted to support independent journalism, you’d pay your own journalists more and on time as well.

and you save a lot on an annual subscription that includes great new benefits like a 1-year subscription to "Wired,"

David, David, David... don’t you know Wired=Tired especially now that it is edited by girls?

"National Geographic Adventure"

Yes, I really need another magazine shilling for the travel industry.

and "U.S. News and World Report"

A magazine famous for being number 4 in a grouping of 3? When Mort Zuckerman finally gets to be Secretary of the Treasury in the next Democratic administration in 2020, get back to me.

and access to reading Salon on your PDA or cell phone.

Now here’s where turning you down makes me sad. To think that I won’t be able to read Salon on my cell phone makes me misty. Promise you won’t let my refusal keep you from sending me those hot textings when we’re apart, won’t you?

Plus, great existing benefits like reading Salon in a blissfully ad-free reading environment.

David, do your paying advertisers (both of them) know you’re talking about them behind their back. If they find out you think of ad-free environments as blissful, you’re going to have some ‘splaing to do.

Applying only takes a moment or two and gets you all the benefits of Salon Premium -- the magazines, the ad-free reading, the PDA and cell phone access, everything --for just $1.

I heard you the first time, David. Get to the point.

Without loyal subscribers like you, Salon simply couldn't afford to stay in business.

There’s a thought.

That would silence the voice of the Web's leading independent source of unvarnished news coverage, unfettered opinion and unintimidated muckraking.

Right. Check and double check. Salon -- The No Bias web site. Got it.

Where would you turn for honest, fearless reporting on the 2004 elections?

Kind of hard to say, off hand David, since that would make me choose between about 249 sites currently residing in my favorites file. I suppose I could channel surf between about seven news channels if I go really hard up. Still, I agree there’s a real shortage of options when it comes to coverage of these elections, so let’s say I’ll keep you in mind.

Time and again, Salon has outpaced the other news media to bring you the "scoops".

That’s right, David. I think you’re shining moment last year was when you were out there in Texas running around with the web cam as the space shuttle debris rained down. That was you, wasn’t it? Or were you the guys who coined the BUSH LIED meme that’s making the rounds?

I can't tell you what scandals, shams and outrages we'll cover in the year ahead.

How about the deadly email from Salon that offers a whole year for a quarter if only readers will send their bank account information to a database in Nigeria? That’s gotta be next.

But I can tell you this: No matter what happens, Salon will be there -- probing, digging, asking all the hard questions.

Unless, of course, I don’t send you the dollar. In which case, Salon might not be there.

We need you. You need us.

David, you naughty boy. If I needed you I would have stayed with you. Admit it, this isn’t about my needs, but yours. It’s not me. It’s you.

Please renew your subscription for just $1 by clicking on the link below and we'll both be the better for it.

David, it didn’t work the first time. I’ve moved on. You should too. If the Chronicle takes Mark Morford as resident pervert, they’ll surely hire you back. Man up, David. It’s time.

Cordially, David Talbot
Editor, Salon.com

“Cordially?” “Cordially?” After everything we’ve been to each other?

Pitzer College - Commencement 2004

Pitzer College's Keynote Speaker
Bernardine Dohrn

BERNARDINE DOHRN , Clinical Associate Professor of Law and Director and Founder of the Children and Family Justice Center, is a leading child advocate. Ms. Dohrn is a member of the Domestic Violence Child Abuse Working Group of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, the steering committee of the Illinois Family Violence Coordinating Committee and is a board member of the Human Rights Watch Children's Rights Project and the Midwest Coalition for Human Rights.

Ms. Dohrn has also been a member of the Weather Underground and retains the title of Convicted Felon Emeritus from that organization.

While most of her recent work is obscure, she is justly famed for her widely quoted remark on Charles Manson/Tate murders: "Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, they even shoved a fork into a victim's stomach! Wild!"

The veteran of numerous terrorist bombings and robberies, Ms. Dohrn is clearly one of the founding mothers of contemporary domestic terrorism. Pitzer is proud to honor this distinctive American and looks forward to joining her in her valuable work.

"Our graduates need to see positive role models, and Ms. Dohrn is among the best of the best," said Pitzer spokesperson Bill Ayers, who is also married to Ms. Dohrn.

Pointer via From Dunn to Dohrn: Covering Up Terrorism at the Claremont Colleges

The braindead at NASA took another step towards rendering space flight irrelevant today when they reduced the Space Shuttle to a Bus. A one stop only bus.

NASA officials overseeing the space shuttle's return to flight said Friday there are several technical reasons why shuttle missions should not be conducted to the Hubble Space Telescope or destinations other than the International Space Station. Shuttle managers, discussing the latest version of the return-to-flight plan, said that the lack of a "safe haven" at Hubble was a key issue that made shuttle flight s there riskier than those to ISS.
-- Shuttle managers back Hubble decision

I'll tell you what. Let's not fly it at all. That should get NASA down to the level of zero-risk space flight they seem to love.

American Studies
Art Within America
Blather & Spew
Citizens
Coasts & Heartland
Companions
Essays & Items
Global Reach
Icons
Issues & Episodes
Its the Law
Mass Distractions
Mondo Bizarro
Myths & Texts
Obsessed & Confused
On the Land
Oneliners
Pure Opinion
Pure Products of America
Reportage Redux
Simulacrum
Sites Unseen
The Americans
Zenecdotes

• Links
• Links

• DaVinci's Gia Principle
• MovableType Announces Revolutionary Pricing Scheme
• Why Blogs and Advertising Miss Each Other's Boat
• No More Letters to the Editor
• What's Just-So-Wrong With This Picture?
• The Siberian Purchase
• Making Spammers Pay: Time = Money
• Why Movable Type's Money Move Spells Disaster
• Here's a Post We All Need to Echo
• Abu Ghraib Videotapes We've Yet to See
• And a Little Bit of Rock and Roll!
• DAVID TALBOT: SALON’S "DOLLAR DAVE"
• Teach Your Children Well
• Making the Space Shuttle into a Bus
• Orkut: A Network of Trusted Friends on a Network You Can't Trust
• The Brick Science Major
• Why There Aren't Any Movies About 9/11 ?
• Signed Racist Artwork: Available Now
• The Mission of the Media
• The Long Dive Towards the Magic Number Begins