Tag: Recently Read

The tech companies demand the ability to publish more detailed information on surveillance orders.

via POLITICO – TOP Stories http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/yahoo-facebook-surveillance-orders-96506.html

Liz Bury in The Guardian: After years of hovering in the wings, this could be Haruki Murakami’s year to clinch the Nobel prize for literature – at least if you go by the odds offered by Ladbrokes on the Japanese…

via 3quarksdaily http://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2013/09/haruki-murakami-emerges-as-favourite-for-nobel-prize-for-literature.html

If the U.S. attacks Syria, it should “expect everything,” Syrian President Bashar al-Assad tells CBS News’ Charlie Rose in an excerpt from their Damascus interview, which will be broadcast this week.

On her Facebook page, CBS News’ Norah O’Donnell has published a series of transcribed excerpts from the interview. In one, Assad and adamantly denies the use of chemical weapons on civilians:

Charlie Rose: “Speaking of reality, what was the reality on August 21st? What happened, in your judgment?”

Assad: “We’re not in the area where the where the alleged chemical attack was happened, as it alleged. We’re not sure that anything happened because—”

Charlie Rose: “Even at this date, you are not sure that chemical weapons, even though you have seen the video tape, even though you’ve seen the bodies, even though—”

Assad: “No, I have—”

Charlie Rose: “—your own officials have been there.”

Assad: “I haven’t finished. Our soldiers in another area were attacked chemically. Our soldiers. They went to the hospital—as casualties because of chemical weapons. But in the area where they said the government used chemical weapons, we only had video and we only have pictures and allegations. We’re not there. Our forces—our police, our institutions don’t exist. How can you talk about what happened if you don’t have evidences? We’re not like the American administration. We’re not social media administration or government. We are the government that deal with reality—”

In another, he attempts to outline a mainstream, reasonable case against war in Syria:

Charlie Rose: There is an intense discussion going on about all the things we’re talking about in Washington. Where there’s a strike, it will emanate from the United States’ decision to do this. What do you want to say in this very important week in America, and in Washington, to the American people, to members of Congress—to the President of the United States.

Assad: I think the most important part of this now is—let’s say the American people. But the polls show that the majority now don’t want a war anywhere, not only against Syria. But the Congress is going to vote about this in a few days. And I think the Congress is elected by the people and represent the people and work for their interests.

The first question that they should ask themself, what do wars give America? Things we have till now, nothing. No political gain, no economic gain, no good reputation. United States is at all low, dying, the credibility is at all low— all-time low. So this war is against the interests of the United States. Why?

First of all, because this is the war that is going to support Al Qaeda and the same people that kill Americans in the 11 of September. The second thing that we all want to tell to the Congress, that they should ask and that what we expect, we expect them to ask this administration about the evidence that they have regarding the chemical story and the allegations that they presented.

I would then tell the the president when he have the option ’cause we were disappointed by their behavior recently because we expected this administration different from Bush’s administration. They are operating the same doctrine with different accessories. That’s it. So we expect if we want to expect something from the—from this administration, it’s not to be weak, to be strong to say that we don’t have evidence, that we have to obey the international law, that we have to go back to the security council at the United Nations.

He also warns Americans to “expect everything” in the event of a strike—not just Syrian attacks, but attacks from rebel groups as well:

Charlie Rose: “Will there be attacks against American bases in Middle East if there is an airstrike?”

Assad: “You should expect everything. You should expect everything. Not necessarily from the government. It’s not only the government are not the only player in this region. You have different parties, you have different factions, you have different ideology. You have everything in this region now. So you have to expect that.”

Charlie Rose: “Tell me what you mean by expect everything?”

Assad: “Expect every action.”

Charlie Rose: “Including chemical warfare?”

Assad: “That depends if the if the rebels or the terrorists in this region or any other group have it, it could happen I don’t know. I am not fortune teller to tell you what’s going to happen.”

via Gawker http://gawker.com/syrian-president-chats-with-charlie-rose-denies-everyt-1274899648/1277102493

Congress failing to authorize military action in Syria could affect imminent battles over funding.

via POLITICO – TOP Stories http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/critical-week-for-obama-presidency-96444.html

Who are the Millennials? Narcissists, that’s who. Entitled types who actually expect to be paid for the work they do. A generation foolish enough to have graduated into a recession—“liking” rather than loving, stealing Wi-Fi, twerking molly (or whatever it is you do . . .

via The New Yorker http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/television/2013/09/16/130916crte_television_nussbaum

The latest revelation, based on documents from Edward J. Snowden, does not indicate what information the N.S.A. wanted about Petrobras.

via NYT > Most Recent Headlines http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/world/americas/nsa-spied-on-brazilian-oil-company-report-says.html

New “Crossfire” hosts (l-r) Stephanie Cutter, Van Jones, S.E. Cupp and Newt Gingrich.

When last we saw CNN’s “Crossfire,” it resembled a scene from “Animal House,” minus the togas.

Eight years later, “Crossfire” has learned its manners, according to CNN. Hosts will use their indoor voices, and will allow each other to finish sentences. The experiment begins at 6:30 tonight, with Newt Gingrich and Stephanie Cutter on set with two guests.

“You have to wait for someone to finish, then make your point,” says CNN Washington bureau chief Sam Feist, who began his CNN career as a “Crossfire” intern in 1989. “We get that. Obviously, it’s something to be mindful of. At the same time, we want to have passionate conversations.”

Even with what’s being billed as a kinder, gentler “Crossfire,” the question remains as to whether the conservative-vs.-liberal roundtable, launched in 1982, matters anymore in a radically altered cable topography.

Given that Fox News and MSNBC have become so polarized, a political program with both sides equally represented is more important than ever, says Charles Bierbauer, Dean of the University of South Carolina’s College of Mass Communications and a CNN correspondent for 20 years.

“Whatever happened to the guy in the middle?” he opines.  “I, as a viewer, like more than one point of view on issues. We’ve evolved, or devolved, to the notion that tuning into Fox gives you a right wing, conservative perspective and tuning into MSNBC gives you a left wing, liberal perspective.”

Going a step further, Feist says CNN “is the only cable-news channel that is capable of hosting “Crossfire” in an authentic way…. We’re bipartisan. Our job is to represent all points of view. It’s hard to imagine viewers would trust other channels to offer a debate program with equally balanced hosts and guests.”

“Balance” often leads to a deafening decibel level. Toward the end, this was “Crossfire’s” hallmark, fueled even more by a vocal studio audience. In his infamous 2004 appearance, Jon Stewart decried the cacophony, which led, in part, to ex-CNN chief Jonathan Klein’s decision to euthanize the show.

“Crossfire’s” approach was emblematic of the time’s ‘argument culture,’ says Amy S. Mitchell, new director of Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism.

continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

via TVNewser http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/turning-down-the-volume-for-crossfire-2-0_b194478

Confused by all the buzzwords floating around in the digital economy? Media Guy is here to help.

Adblock — n. A service that kidnaps your kittens, puts them in a sack and then drowns them in the river — unless you pay Adblock to “whitelist” your kittens, in which case they will be allowed to live. Wait, did I say kittens? I meant your online ads.

Big data — n. Data so big other data jogs around it to get exercise! Data so big it had to go to SeaWorld to get baptized! Data so big it puts its lipstick on with a paint-roller! Data so big …

Continue reading at AdAge.com

via Advertising Age – Homepage http://adage.com/article/commentary-and-analysis-from-simon-dumenco/dumenco-s-definery-digital-terms-definitively-dictionary-d/244013/?utm_source=Commentary%20and%20analysis%20from%20Simon%20Dumenco&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+AdvertisingAge/Commentary%20and%20analysis%20from%20Simon%20Dumenco

Chinese Internet users could face three years in prison for writing defamatory messages that are then re-posted 500 times under regulations announced Monday amid a broader crackdown on “online rumours”.

Web users could also be jailed if offending posts are viewed more than 5,000 times under the new rules, which appear to be part of a controversial campaign against online chatter, which has seen companies, bloggers and journalists targeted.

China has the world’s largest population of Internet users and authorities seek to keep close control on the country’s hugely popular weibo microblog sites, where a number of officials have been exposed for corruption.

The new guidelines announced by the country’s most senior court and its top prosecuting body stipulate that netizens may be charged with defamation if “defamatory information” they post reaches the quotas on viewings or re-posts.

Posts will also be deemed defamatory if the information causes “suicide or self-mutilation… of the parties involved”, the new law adds.

The maximum sentence for defamation in China is three years in prison, the official Xinhua news agency said.

The new regulations also contain rules against extortion, blackmail and provoking online arguments.

In recent months a wide-ranging clampdown on “online rumours” has been launched by Beijing, with hundreds of people questioned or detained as a result.

Last month officials told Internet celebrities with millions of online followers to “promote virtues” and “uphold law” online.

Among those rounded up in the clampdown are 27 people from the central city of Wuhan who were detained after police broke up an “online rumour speculation company”.

Chinese-American billionaire blogger Charles Xue was also arrested this month for suspected involvement in prostitution and “group licentiousness”.

Xue has attracted 12 million followers on Sina Weibo, China’s equivalent of Twitter, regularly posting reform-minded comments on a variety of sensitive issues.

Last week Chinese official Yang Dacai was jailed after netizens posted pictures of him online with expensive watches, triggering a corruption inquiry.

But analysts questioned whether such widely-circulated revelations could be repeated as authorities rein in Internet chatter.

Join the conversation about this story »

via Tech http://www.businessinsider.com/china-jail-time-for-spreading-rumors-online-2013-9

In an irony almost too rich to be real, AdBlock, the much-discussed browser extension that strips ads from web sites, is about to launch an ad campaign.

Less than a week ago, AdBlock founder Michael Gundlach, posted video asking AdBlock fans to donate money to “bring AdBlock to the world.”

And so far the internet has not let him down, raising over $55,000 dollars to date, far surpassing its original goal of $25,000 dollars. The funds will help AdBlock run conventional online ads, and place a billboard in Times Square as well.

Continue reading at AdAge.com

via Advertising Age – Homepage http://adage.com/article/digital/adblock-raises-55-000-anti-advertising-ad-campaign/243980/?utm_source=Digital&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+AdvertisingAge/Digital