Comments on: Tip of the Iceberg?

By: Mitch

Mitch — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 12:19:59 +0000

Taking a seriousness break from my normal frivolity, I'm working up a piece (another one that may or may not get finished) on Dr. Norman L. Johnson and what he calls "symbiotic intelligence" and the related topic of self-organizing systems, eventually finding the optimum. Bottom line: the Internet is too robust to be put out of business. It will find its own solutions by exploring multiple strategies. And BTW, Johnson's work partially explains how Rather got killed, gutted, plucked, cooked, and eaten so quickly. LINK

By: Pixy Misa

Pixy Misa — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 06:22:05 +0000

And remember, the blogosphere is just one tiny part of the internet, and the internet provides an infinite number of ways to share information whether or not it is via something you would recognise as a “blog”.

Blogs don’t matter, really. It’s the internet that matters.

By: Pixy Misa

Pixy Misa — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 06:18:35 +0000

The internet is much bigger than all the traditional media companies in the world put together. If they tried to shut it down, they’d get squashed like bugs.

They’d have to be much more sneaky than that, but I don’t think they have the intelligence to do anything remotely effective.

Now, lawsuits, sure, you can expect bloggers to get sued. But if they think the response to Rathergate was loud, the response to such an action will fry their brains.

Not to say it won’t happen – it will. Just that unless the blogger screwed up in a major way and flat-out deserves to be sued, the mainstream media will lose, again, badly.

By: Brett Bellmore

Brett Bellmore — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:58:04 +0000

Wargaming this, I wonder how much denial of service attacks cost? If you’re willing to forge documents, I doubt a bit of electronic warfare will outrage your sensibilities.

By: Lex

Lex — Tue, 14 Sep 2004 00:11:09 +0000

“So if my business can live without the internet, but my enemy cannot. I would directly go after their bread and butter to put them out of business.”

Nito thinks like me. The counter-attack will come eventually.

By: incognito

incognito — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 23:56:37 +0000

Jonathan, agreed they’re shooting themselves in the foot to a point, along with the bad publicity generated. But I think that the internet are still loss leaders for Big Media. Their bread and butter is still through selling TV advertising or print advertising. If the internet went away tomorrow, they would still be in business. I would even venture to say they would love it if the internet went away tomorrow. I really wonder who goes to say CBS.com or NBC.com for news, it’s garbage. Their websites are like third wheels on a bike. I think a big reason they have sites is because everyone has sites. That’s why they’re dinosaurs. So if my business can live without the internet, but my enemy cannot. I would directly go after their bread and butter to put them out of business.

By: Fredrik Nyman

Fredrik Nyman — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:54:17 +0000

Well, googling for "gennifer flowers don hewitt" gives you a hint. In related news, Don Hewitt, the creator of the CBS television news magazine "60 Minutes" will receive the 2004 Al Neuharth Award for Excellence in Journalism.

By: Rahul

Rahul — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 20:40:48 +0000

I wonder if anybody has any speculations on what else Rather et al have gotten away with over the years?

By: Fredrik Nyman

Fredrik Nyman — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 17:58:39 +0000

You know, it’s impossible to read this post without also thinking about Gore’s “digital brownshirts” comment, and Evan Thomas’ confession that the MSM partisanship is worth 15 points to the D’s.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:46:40 +0000

I don’t know, Incog. Linking cuts both ways. The MSM sites would lose a lot of traffic without direct links. If the NYT forced everyone to go through its website’s front page to access stories, few people would read them because it would be too much trouble. CBS is in a similar position or will be eventually. Besides, I think this issue is practically moot, because media sites that tried in the past to prevent direct linking only hurt themselves, traffic wise. It will be interesting to see how this issue plays out, but it may not do so in a way that any of us anticipates.

By: incognito

incognito — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:44:54 +0000

Andy,

Yeah, I love irony. It’s like the left creating a “free speech zone” at their convention for protesters. Or them suing every which way to stop the Swift Vets.

By: incognito

incognito — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:32:22 +0000

“INAL, but doesn’t a link (essentially a footnote or bibliography entry) come quite safely within the fair use doctrine?”

Absolutely Mitch, this is just brainstorming on my part. Remember that big media is the incumbent with deep resources. To win, they don’t have to win outright, they just have to fight to a bloody stalemate with as much carnage as possible. They just have to put the fear of God into their enemies. Copyright infringement gives them an edge and terms they know how to fight on.

If I were CBS/big media, I would go after Drudge directly as the first major target. Drudge has become the go-to news source for the right. He more or less sets the pace in defining what’s news. That’s pretty powerful. Drudge is also essentially a link site. I would take every instance where Drudge makes the link title somewhat similar to what my content says, and argue that he is creating confusion in the market place. I would argue that people who don’t know better could possibly mistake the linked content as belonging to Drudge. Sometimes Drudge’s title is AP: blah blah blah, or Reuters: blah blah blah. Sometimes no. Again, I wouldn’t have to win, but just cause a chill effect. If I can put Drudge out of business by draining his resources, all the better.

By: Mitch

Mitch — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:25:25 +0000

In-cog-nito
INAL, but doesn’t a link (essentially a footnote or bibliography entry) come quite safely within the fair use doctrine? Hijacking content or “framing” it as your own is a different thing, but I don’t see that happening.

To my mind, the web is doing a good job of demolishing Rather in the most effective way: exposing him. He makes his living by persuading people to take him seriously. Once his audience starts laughing at him, either he or the audience will have to go. That’s probably what the suits are pondering now.

I like to think I’m doing my bit for the cause by cracking jokes about it. Too bad Donald Duck is now MSM – we could use something like “Right in der Fuhrer’s Face” (gratuitous Nazi reference! Does that make me a lefty?!).

By: Andy B

Andy B — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 12:15:55 +0000

The irony of it!! A MEDIA site suing to stop someone from linking to it. I wonder what kind of a hit their site traffic numbers would take if you removed the linking avenue?

By: incognito

incognito — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 04:42:31 +0000

If I were the big media outlets, I would sue sites such as Drudge and bloggers to stop linking to my copyrighted material. I don’t know if there are precendents out there, but they could argue something along the lines of not having control over distribution. If you make it illegal to link, it would directly attack the mechanics of why the web and blogging is so successful.

By: Lex

Lex — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 03:09:21 +0000

“the mind boggles with possibilities”

Right. We need to start thinking of possible counter-attacks, and the ripostes to them. One problem with attacking the dinosaur, is he may start to notice you are there, not like it, and try to stomp on you. See, he doesn’t know it is time for him to be extinct.

By: Fûz

Fûz — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:46:04 +0000

“there will be a next move. count on it”

via DRM?
amendments of McCain-Feingold to apply it to bloggers?
the mind boggles with possibilities

By: Noel

Noel — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 02:29:48 +0000

The Rathersaurus just looked upward at the huge Blog-meteor hurtling towards Earth. He wants to go back to his grazing-as-usual, but something tells him…It’s All About To Change.

On the other hand, he may “discover” a mimeographed copy of a contract with CBS giving him another 20 years and tripling his salary. And full creative control.

By: Sandy P

Sandy P — Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:00:52 +0000

The clip is out there, James. And not only him, w/in the last 2-3 months, a bunch of dem congressmen said the same things, there’s things they can do….

I swear Damian Penny posted on his blog that the Canuck gov was thinking of controlling all ISPs.

Let’s face it, AJ is available, but FoxNews is renegade.

By: James M.

James M. — Sun, 12 Sep 2004 21:28:19 +0000

I would dearly love to see such a lawsuit, although I can’t think what grounds the MSM would use.Lex, Glenn Reynolds, Eugene Volokh, etc would have a field day.

Incidentally, do we have a link for Dean’s threat?