Monday, April 29, 2002
Marathon Broadcast to Save Internet Radio!
Duane Whittingham, producer of the Tom and Darryl Show, e-mailed me this announcement:
The RIAA and CARP want the Library of Congress to impose large
fees imposed on webcasters, this has been discussed on the various
shows on W0KIE and the net. Well now via one of the largest
Webcasters on the net WOLF FM there will be a 12 hour marathon to
talk about this issue and get the word out. Joined by the C-Band
Satellite Network W0KIE (GE7/AMC7-Ch.5-7.5 mHZ), the Dishnuts Audio
feeds and other net radio stations around the globe we hope to
really make some noise on this Day of Silence May 1st (Mayday).
Programming will be live all day from 8am CT till 8pm CT OR
9am ET till 9pm ET Wednesday May 1st, 2002.
Co-hosted by Steve Wolf of Wolf FM and W0KIE/RFD Host Blair Alper
of "Life The Universe and Everything" Show, they will talk
about the RIAA, Carp and how it will impact and shutdown webcasters
all over, they will have industry leaders on as well as take your
phone calls. Join us for this live special broadcast.
If you are a webcaster or radio station you are allowed to carry
all or part, space is made at top of hour for IDs and 2 min breaks
at :15 and :45 pass the hour.
posted 4/29/2002 11:13:05 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Counterpoint on the Washington Post's Treament of IMC
My pal John Anderson -- former editor of the Radio/Pirate Radio page at About.com -- e-mailed me with some comments on last week's Washington Post article about IMC journalists covering the A20 protests. Overall, he doesn't think I'm being critical enough of the Post, and then registers the most incisive critique of this article that I've heard so far. John writes, "Wow, it is amazing how two people can read the same thing and come away with completely different interpretations. I was pissed off in a big-ass way with the Post's piece." He then details a few choice quotes that exemplify what bothers him about the article.
Although I don't think article isn't openly hostile to Indymedia, what John sees is that "selective quotes and the not-so-subtle condescending tone spoke volumes about where the author, David Montgomery, is coming from. I don't think I've seen such a stinky piece o'journalism since CNN did a 'Indymedia replacing us? yeah, right' kind of piece during the A16 activity" last year. In a second e-mail John explains that he might be a little sensitive since he used to be a mainstream journalist for a commercial radio network, and so now he says that "I relish the critic's role now that I've left the fold, so to speak. I do have to admit that I'm gunning for them, ready to pounce when I see the snarkiness come to the surface in large amounts."
But beyond just the tone that the mainstream media takes when reporting on Indymedia, what worries John is that Indymedia journalists themselves are often surprisingly uncritical of such articles. He elborates that "It's kind of a cart-before-the-horse situation, in a sense - many of us realize the "wrongness" in the corporate media, and jump right to the citizen-journalist role without doing enough to keep developing our own media literacy/critical thinking skills. I think that we should not only tell our stories in the light we want to see them in, but we should also continually confront and critique what comes out of the corporate media as well - and teach others the abilities we often take for granted. I guess I see IMCs as having a dual role: supplementing the coverage of unreported and under-reported stories while also spotting the bullshit of the corporate media and calling them on it, explaining how and why it is bullshit."
But don't take my selective quotes for it -- John gave me permission to let you read our exchange yourself.
I can't say how much I appreciate and enjoy getting feedback and having some dialogue. So, if something I write is stinky, or demands response, please let me know.
posted 4/29/2002 10:50:40 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
The haul from Quimby's: At yesterday's underground bookstore outing we picked up several fine publications that I'll share. The book that instantly made me go "gotta have it," is Tape Op; The Book About Creative Music Recording, edited by Larry Crane, which is chock full of interesting techniques for the DIY and low-budget/no-budget sound recordist. Apparently it's compiled from Tape Op magazine, which I'd never heard of, but will now have to keep a lookout for. I've read a couple of short pieces about microphones and using a 4-track recorder that give no-nonsense advice without recommending you spend thousands on super-pro equipment.
Next, I picked up Michael Albert's Moving Forward; Program for a Participatory Economy. I've always been intrigued by Albert's ideas on how organizations should run themselves as they would like to see the world run (i.e. democratically) and his writings in Z Magazine, and since this looks like an attempt to put his ideas into practice I thought it might be a good read.
In the 'zine mix my partner Ellen and I picked out applicant, edited by Jesse Reklaw. Here's the project: "One night while rooting through the recycling bin for magazines, I found all the confidential Ph.D. applicant files for th biology department at an Ivy League university from the yeard 1965-1975. Stapled to many of the yellowed documents were photographs of the prospective students. They were treasures! I tore through the folders and rescued every portrait I could find. I had to have them. Only later did I realize I had to publish them" And publish he did, with this digest-sized 'zine made up entirely of the pictures subtitled with comments from their letters of recommendation. Truly priceless stuff.
Ellen also bought copies of Found magazine and Clamor magazine, the folks behind the latter are also behind the Underground Publishing Conference. Her book purchase was How to Rock and Roll; A City Rider's Repair Manual, for bikes. Another truly DIY book that doesn't urge you to buy hundreds of dollars in specialized tools to keep your bike running.
posted 4/29/2002 10:34:32 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
USA Today reports that many 'net radio stations will have a day of silence this Wednesday in order to protest the outrageous copyright fees being levied on them.
posted 4/29/2002 01:06:12 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Sunday, April 28, 2002
I'm going to Chicago this afternoon, will probably visit Quimby's again. If you click through that Quimby's link, you'll see I wrote about the zine bookmobile project. Those folks e-mailed me a few weeks ago and said they're thinking of passing through Urbana, since apparently they've gotten a few requests. If you're an Urbana-ite and would like to see it come through this little burg, send them an e-mail, too. I'm willing to put people up at my place, and the IMC is the perfect locale, no?
I should have the last few shows encoded and available this evening...
posted 4/28/2002 12:53:23 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Friday, April 26, 2002
Since I haven't been able to get a good recording of the entire mediageek radio show for the last two weeks, here's the news headlines as read on the program:
headlines for 4-12-02
headlines for 4-19-02
I'll have the features from the last two shows up for on-line listening this weekend.
posted 4/26/2002 12:10:47 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Monday, April 22, 2002
Dow Jones reports that the FCC is appealing an appeals court ruling that the TV nationwide ownership cap is unconsitutional. The FCC argues that it has the right to limit how much of the national audience a single company's TV stations may reach. The parent companies of three major networks -- FOX's News Corp., NBC's GE and CBS's Viacom -- made the court challenge against the FCC's rules. Broadcasting and Cable also has a short report.
Note that this is reported in the guise of business and industry news and not the national or politics news section of a prominent newspaper. The underlying assumption is that this isn't important to anyone besides businesspeople.
posted 4/22/2002 04:14:55 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Can the Mainstream Press Understand Indymedia?
The Washington Post has a surprisingly fair and mostly accurate article on the Independent Media Center movement, with a focus on coverage of protests of the World Bank & IMF in Washington DC this weekend. Nonetheless, a certain amount of the author's professional journalism bias comes through, as in this passage, wherein his scepticism for non-hierachical democratic decision making are apparent:
"And yet the IMC utopia is confronting some universal verities of storytelling dating back at least to Homer. The indie chroniclers haven't invented any newways of telling stories yet. Most of their pieces adopt forms already much used by the mainstream media, albeit with different content. But in the end, crafting content requires selection, shortening, simplification and even a mildly authoritarian editorial brain making decisions -- all of which indie media makers resist."
But this is only one method for crafting content. Mainstream news organizations, like the Washington Post, are very concerned with creating an air of authority and maintaining the illusion that their reporting is utterly consistent, complete, fair and authoritative. Indeed, it requires authoritarian methods to get tens to hundreds of writers, reporters, copyeditors and editors to absorb and mimic the approved style and approach (something for which journalism school has prepared them well). And regardless of how well a story is researched, reported and written, it cannot be singularly authoritative -- any such appearance is the just the effect of style that we have been trained to read as "objective" or "true."
It appears that the mainstream press can't or won't understand the deficiencies of this approach, or why people would want something different, even if it appears less definitive.Indymedia is interested in creating no such illusions of authority or compreshensiveness. Indymedia challenges the reader to think, "is this bullshit?" And, if so, challenges her to respond directly to the item in question, or, even better, create her own piece that responds to, expands on or explicates the first.
The mainstream journalism approach is a lecture. Indymedia is a dialogue.
When you respond to the Washington Post your letter goes on a page designated for the purpose, divorced and decontextualized from the piece you're responding to. If your reader missed the first article, she's only getting the second half of the story. When you respond to an Indymedia article on-line it's attached to the piece itself, no matter how scathing or complimentary the response. No credentials necessary.
posted 4/22/2002 11:01:50 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Thursday, April 18, 2002
Free.The.Media is having a live webcast tonight, called "Victory over Violence...
Palestine, Israel, and Beyond. Free.The.Media is "a member supported autonomous network and cultural think tank whose purpose is to reclaim public space on the net and preserve free speech, privacy and access for all." Looks interesting -- I'll try to remember to tune in.
posted 4/18/2002 06:06:20 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
This Austin-Statesman article details some more problems at community station KOOP, one stemming from a broken elevator in their building that the landlord doesn't want to fix. KOOP is a pretty young station that seems to have been mired in difficulty, infighting and other problems since the start. This 1999 Texas Observer article lays out some of the story: "Looking for Real Enemies."
posted 4/18/2002 05:48:28 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Michael Moore and the DIY Spirit
Michael Moore was in town last night on his DIY-ish book tour for Stupid White Men and, of course, talked about how much trouble it was to get the book published in the first place, and how, then, his publisher refused to fund a real book tour (I believe the tour he's on now is self-financed, someone correct me if I'm wrong). He was also up on some of the local scene here, like the debate over the U of I's racist mascot and the fact that the local Dem's aren't even running a candidate against our slimy Republican representative Tim Johnson -- so our local Greens are running a candidate instead. Moore talked up the local Greens and urged them to circulate the auditorium for petition signatures.
I mention Moore's visit here because I think he serves as a good example of how DIY-media might be done. While now he certainly plays in the arena of corporate media -- he relies in them to publish his books, distribute his films and broadcast his TV shows -- he still carries that DIY ethic with him in those endeavors. His first film, Roger and Me, was certainly not a studio venture (even if it did eventually get studio distribution). His advice to the audience -- mostly college students -- was to be active and stick by your guns, telling us "I don't give a shit, I never have."
It's not that he doesn't give a shit about anything at all. It's that he hasn't given a shit about other people's expectations of him and what he does, which has helped him succeed at doing things his way. I think that's a crucial thing to keep in mind when doing your media. The opinions and advice of other people whom you trust can be useful and helpful in finding your way, but they shouldn't take the place of your own ideas and path. The opinions of people you don't like and/or don't trust should just be ignored, because you can be damn sure they don't give a shit about you.
A short video excerpt from Moore's talk is up at the Urbana IMC site. There's also a short article. I understand that more audio is forthcoming.
posted 4/18/2002 05:25:06 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Wednesday, April 17, 2002
Non-profit webcasters write in to Salon calling 'bullshit' on the proposed copyright fees going to the Recording Industry (not the artists, since they already get paid through ASCAP and BMI) and the RIAA's pompous lies and defenses. I'll let the absurdities and truth-telling speak for themselves. But I will say that it becomes clearer how absolutely hostile industry is to non-profit endeavors -- as if maybe nothing non-profit should exist in the first place.
posted 4/17/2002 04:40:32 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Tuesday, April 16, 2002
In today's Christian Science Monitor Professors John Nerone (who, incidentally, is my excellent academic advisor) and Kevin Barnhurst argue that the redesign of the Wall Street Journal is emblematic of newspapers' shift to accurate user-friendliness at the expense of
"empowering citizens by immersing them in a common news culture. In the industrial newspapers, readers made news their own, becoming better citizens and, in the bargain, more loyal customers – something the newspaper needs desperately today."
I'll admit that my own communications news tunnelvision meant that I was largely unaware of the Venezuelan presidential coup until Sunday afternoon. Yes, it is really too easy to select yourself out of the stuff that affects and connects us all.
posted 4/16/2002 08:35:55 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Point and Counter-Point on Pacifica
In the newest edition of the Nation magazine Susan J. Douglas, a well-known communications scholar, asks, "Is There a Future for Pacifica?" In it she tries to take a middle-of-the-road approach apparently to objectively survey the prospects of the network as it tries to heal from its years-long conflict. That's a problematic task from the outset, given the enormous and venomous animosities that exist, and not necessarily one I'd recommend to anyone. I, myself, have been critical of the former Pacifica regime and also not always been happy with the rhetoric and tactics used by both sides, but I don't think I can accurately balance them against each other and have it come out even. Reflecting empathetically, if our board of directors even hazarded considering selling my beloved WEFT, I don't think there's any way I could give them much benefit of the doubt.
I do think I agree with Douglas' overall objective, which is to encourage resolving conflicts and to get Pacifica back on track as a leading voice of progressive radio and, especially, progressive journalism. But I'm not so sure I agree with many of her assumptions. It seems, for example, that she doubts the new Pacifica management's commitment to progressive journalism based upon the example of one program at KPFK ("a show called Visionary Activist hosted by an astrologist whose guests include 'planets, gods and, on occasion, dead people'? "), which it seems she hasn't even heard, because by her own admission she's in Michigan, "stuck with Britney Spears and "Satellite Sisters" and no Pacifica station or affiliate." Strangely, she makes no mention of Democracy Now, which is Pacifica's popular and consistently challenging, if somewhat humorless, daily progressive news hour.
In a response being circulated, Edward Herman, progressive economist and co-author of Manufacturing Consent, takes her to task for this and countless other errors in fact and interpretation that he finds in her article. I agree most strongly with Herman's criticism of Douglas' omission of Democracy Now and the fact that the excellent Free Speech Radio News is being carried by Pacifica stations and affiliates in place of the cancelled Pacifica Network News. Journalism is much more alive and well at Pacifica and its stations now than it was eight months ago.
However, Herman's take-no-prisoners approach in responding does clearly exemplify the tense battle that Douglas finds counterproductive. I find it hard to disagree that there needs to be resolution and some degree of compromise for the network to move forward, regain some of its former strength, and grow in new directions. I'm not criticizing Herman and others in the former dissident camp -- they have very good reasons for feeling and reacting the way they do -- and since the Nation does reach so many progressives I understand the importance of needing to correct as many perceived errors as possible. Still, writers and readers of the Nation will make far better allies than enemies. It seems like Pacifica might be in need of something like a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to try and pick up the pieces that still lie on the floor.
Recently in mediageek:
LA Weekly Socks It to KPFK and Pacifica; I'm Left Wincing 3/27/02
posted 4/16/2002 07:58:35 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Bill Moyers Investigating the Nation's Largest Radio Crook...er, Company?
Broadcasting and Cable reports that PBS's Now with Bill Moyers is ' is said to be working on a piece about "business models and vertical integration" in the radio business," which apparently will include Clear Channel, the nation's largest radio station owner, which now also owns artist/music and concert promotion companies. I'd say that any investigation worth a damn would have to investigate Clear Channel. I wonder how well such a piece will stand with the suits at PBS and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting who have a vested interest in not rocking the big communications boat. Luckily, the oil companies -- some of PBS's biggest advertisers.... er, contributors -- likely don't give a shite.
on an earlier mediageek:
Radio Consolidation --> Radio Corruption 3/8/02
posted 4/16/2002 12:02:54 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Monday, April 15, 2002
When Being the Media Is Vital and Necessary
The Guardian writes about the Palestine IMC:
"When the Israeli tanks rolled into Bethlehem, the only organisation left behind to report was a fledgling DIY news website. But that was enough."
The article shows how IMCs work, along with how important it is to connect the world with the people living, breathing and dying in the streets. Not the government, not spokesmen, but the people.
posted 4/15/2002 02:50:40 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
The obvious truth in two sentences:
The NY Times interviewed Phil Donahue about his new talk program on MSNBC. I just had to share this simple little pearl of observation:
Q: Why do you think liberal voices are so rare on television?
A: Conservatives criticize government and liberals criticize business. And that is not something that media conglomerates are altogether welcoming to.
posted 4/15/2002 02:40:31 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Friday's mediageek radio show Now On-line
Despite the last three posts, I promise not all blog entries will be radio show related. Actually, the whole show is not on-line, since it was pledge drive at WEFT and so that consumes a portion of the program that would otherwise be chock-full of prime mediageek content. Rather than make you, the 'net listener, sit through our pitches for money, I decided just to post the meat of it all (though, please don't let that stop you from pledging to community radio WEFT, whether you live in Champaign-Urbana, or not, since without it, there would be no mediageek at all -- or if not, pledge to YOUR local community radio station if you're lucky enough to have one).
The feature of the program is an interview with Skidmark Bob of Freak Radio Santa Cruz, discussing the occasion of that station's seven-year anniversary -- one that few pirate stations reach.
Listen to part 1 in RealAudio (5 min)
Listen to part 2 in RealAudio (8 min)
posted 4/15/2002 12:45:39 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Sunday, April 14, 2002
Mad Props for mediageek radio show
The esteemed Carl Estabrook noted the aforementioned radio show in his biweekly column in the local alternative weekly, mentioning it as one of The Octopus, calling it one of "a couple of good new radio programs on the subject" of media criticism. Carl further compliments because the other show is Robert McChesney's "Media Matters." He says, "programs like these are successful because people are not fools and want to know how they're being hoodwinked."
For his part Carl has been dissecting the mainstream news with a big Chomsky bent for years on his WEFT program News from Neptune, along with co-host Paul Meuth. I suspect that the two of them are responsible for exposing thousands to a critical viewpoint of the media informed by the analytical framework introduced by Chomsky and Herman in Manufacturing Consent.
OK, enough horn tootin'...
posted 4/14/2002 11:57:37 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Friday, April 12, 2002
On Today's Edition of the mediageek radio show:
It's the first pledge drive edition. I'll have an interview with Skidmark Bob of Freak Radio Santa Cruz, an unlicensed "pirate" radio station that recently celebrated its seventh anniversary on the air. I'll also have some media news headlines. Hear it live on air Friday at 5:30 PM on community radio WEFT 90.1 FM, Champaign, IL, and later this weekend on-line here.
posted 4/12/2002 02:39:49 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Monday, April 08, 2002
CNet reports on the efforts of new satellite radio providers to slap limits on wireless Internet which they claim will interfere with their broadcasts (though it apparently hasn't yet).
Previously: The BCC asks, "What if the net was as free as air?"; Sirius Satellite Radio Says: WAH! Stop It! 3/21/02
posted 4/8/2002 02:32:26 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
The SF Chronicle has a nice overview of the media industry's current efforts to seize total control of copyright law and all technologies used for using and creating media.
posted 4/8/2002 02:06:10 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Sunday, April 07, 2002
Some intellectual property stuff:
Lawmeme -- a pretty good law blog from the Yale Law School -- has an annotated version of ZDNet's interview with movie industry bossman Jack Valenti. Tellingly, the Valenti interview is entitled, "Terrorized by file swappers." (oh, boo hoo, poor Jack. Can my interview be called "terrorized by greedy myopic corporate morons?") The annotating is good, though I was hoping for something a little more, er, factual -- perhaps some direct law and literature citations. Still, some counterspin from an informed commentator is worthwhile.
mp3 is NOT a crime.org is a relatively new blog that promises to be "Your source for DMCA/SSSCA/RIAA/MPAA news on fair use rights for your digital music and movies." So far it looks to be a pretty good resource.
(both links via the excellent infoanarchy)
posted 4/7/2002 12:54:10 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Saturday, April 06, 2002
Friday's mediageek radio show is now on-line. It was a fun show, though I was a bit more nervous and off-kilter than usual because the program that comes on before mediageek (free speech radio news) wasn't on due to more satellite errors, and because the station's pledge drive began at 6:00 PM, immediately following the show. Please ignore the weird pauses -- that's me trying to manipulate the equipment and talk at the same time. Keeping the show at least partially live keeps it from being too sterile.
posted 4/6/2002 11:57:46 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Friday, April 05, 2002
Info on the 'zines featured on today's mediageek radio show:
Food Geek #4 and The Assassin and the Whiner: Send $1 plus stamps to Carrie McNinch, PO Box 481051, Los Angeles, CA 90048
The Hungover Gourment, send $2 to P.O. Box 5531, Lutherville, MD 21095-5531
Hyperventilate #10, Lisa McKinley, 4616 Greenwood Place #1, Los Angeles, CA 90027
When sending for 'zines it's best to send well concealed cash and some stamps to help with postage.
mediageek's zine-reviewer A.J. Michel publishes Low Hug. Get yours at the Urbana IMC or send $2 to Station A, PO Box 2574, Champaign, IL 61825-2574, e-mail: lowhug@yahoo.com.
posted 4/5/2002 05:00:38 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Want Unfiltered News from Palestine? Turn to Indymedia.
Even if the mainstream media like CNN and the BBC have been kicked out by the Israeli military, there are people in the occupied territories, and they can and will be journalists. Because it's necessary. Go to http://jerusalem.indymedia.org -- it will make you sad and angry. (thanks to machination.org for keeping up on the links and reminding me about the Palestine IMC)
posted 4/5/2002 11:44:01 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Wednesday, April 03, 2002
A cool tool for Internet-researchers (as in people for whom the Internet is their object of study, not necessarily people who use the Internet to do research): Nethistory, "the most comprehensive directory of links (160+ and counting) to information about the history of the Internet, World Wide Web, Usenet, as well as related concepts such as email, browsers, online games and BBSs." (via boingboing)
posted 4/3/2002 12:19:54 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
A revelation on independent content on the 'net (?).
While surfing about, I found this interview with G. Beato on Kottke.org. Beato is a veteran of the dead but beloved Suck, and currently authors Cooking with Bigfoot, an online, animated cooking show featuring "an aggressively bisexual, substance-abusing Sasquatch". While discussing the decision of whether to go with an ad-sponsored model for his comic, Beato laid out this revelation:"While there has been a lot of debate about whether web content should be free or paid or sponsored by advertising, I think an important point has largely been overlooked -- and that is that an environment where the majority of content is free or sponsored by advertisers ultimately favors corporate-created content.... So the ultimate irony is this: while the Web has huge potential to distribute off-beat, unconventional, non-common-denominator media that traditional corporate media channels will never touch (i.e., the kind of content often favored by people who believe that web content should be free and corporate media sucks), it won't really be effective at doing that unless viewers/readers/users support that content in a direct financial way. "
I use word "revelation" only semi-sarcastically. I do find it amazing that people question the seemingly obvious fact that advertiser supported content -- from the evening news to Casey Casem's Top 40 to Slate.com -- must be advertiser-friendly, which is most likely content created by organizations most likely to themselves also be advertisers. But once you pry away the ideological facade of journalistic objectivity and artistic freedom espoused but unfulfilled by the corporate media and look at the facts, this revelation is hard to dispute.
And so, Beato is correct. If there is going to be an independent web (or any independent media for that matter) it will need to be funded by people who support that enterprise, otherwise it will have to be corporate and it will cease to be independent. Community radio stations have known this for over 50 years, which is why listeners must endure semiannual fund drives, and why these stations overwhelmingly rely on volunteers, too. It's time for more of the Internet generation to wake up to this realization, too.
Previously on der mediageek:
The Web Is Still a Volunteer Medium; Web Independents Suck and Feed on Ice 6/8/01
posted 4/3/2002 12:14:21 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
And then the government's mouthpiece is forced to admit the truth about the assassination our fair use rights. Dan Gilmour reports:"I've just come from the federal courthouse in San Jose, where government prosecutors essentially admitted that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act bans meaningful "fair use" rights for digitally produced content. You can thank Congress for this travesty."
Gilmour's talking about the suit against Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov and his company ElcomSoft which developed software that circumvents the anti-copying measures in Adobe's digital book scheme. Adobe first complained to the feds when Sklyarov was in the US at a conference, leading to his arrest. After a shitstorm of protest from the geek community, Adobe urged the gov't to drop the suit, but the gov't persisted. Eventually the feds dropped criminal charges against Sklyarov, but are continuing the case against ElcomSoft. Yesterday a federal judge refused to dismiss the suit even though the company is in Russia and not the US. The suit is widely regarded as a major test of the DMCA.
posted 4/3/2002 11:02:13 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
For those of us worried about copyright and fair use, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is running a weblog keeping tabs on the Broadcast Protection Discussion Group which is, "an obscure group of Hollywood studios and technology companies that are negotiating a "consensus" for any gadget or code that can touch the studios' product. Once they're done, they want to go to Washington and ask Congress and/or the FCC to give their 'standard' the force of law." Meaning, the entertainment industry is working behind our backs with the electronics industry to figure out a way to keep us from copying any digital content -- even if that copying is actually legal. Freely shared information is the tool to beat them back -- it's the one thing they're really scared of.
posted 4/3/2002 10:57:13 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Tuesday, April 02, 2002
Speaking of radio consolidation... Broadcasting and Cable has a feature article on "The Charlottesville question; FCC takes big step toward deciding how much radio concentration is too much."
posted 4/2/2002 04:50:09 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Broadcast Industry Asks FCC to Keep Ownership Limits(!?)
According to the Hollywood Reporter, the president of the National Association of Broadcasters has joined the president of two other broadcast companies in sending a letter urging the FCC to retain rules that limit a single company to having enough TV stations to reach 35% of the total US TV audience. You can read the letter in pdf format at the NAB website.
In TV the NAB primarily represents smaller owner groups -- networks like FOX have left the trade association over the very issue of ownership caps. Those smaller owners stand to be crushed by the big networks, which would prefer to own stations rather than simply have independent affiliates who aren't under their direct control. Thus, in this case, it's clearer why the NAB would want to retain limits that stand in the way of more consolidation in the TV station market. But do note that with big bullies like Clear Channel Communications still part of the NAB, we'll be far less likely to see them advocating for retaining caps on radio station ownership -- even if the principle is the same. In the world of commercial broadcasting, you stand on principle only when it stands for your side of things. You're not a hypocrite if you can explain it away (especially to shareholders).
posted 4/2/2002 04:21:13 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
The Radical Librarian pointed me to First Monday -- a peer-reviewed academic Internet journal -- which has a paper on the Indymedia movement entitled "Independent Media Centers: Cyper-Subversion and the Alternative Press". I haven't had a chance to read it yet (I'm working on a paper of my own), but I'll comment on it when I do.
posted 4/2/2002 02:40:17 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Monday, April 01, 2002
I just stumbled on to Peter Suber's Free Online Scholarship newsletter, which covers "How the Internet is Transforming Scholarly Research and Publication." Although aimed at scholars and researchers, a quick perusal of the archives indicate to me that it would be of interest and use to anyone concerns about freedom of speech and civil liberties on the Internet, the world's newest prevasive medium. (via infoanarchy)
I am occasionally asked how I keep up on all the myriad media issues and how much time it takes me. In truth it's about an hour a day of e-mail, web surfing and periodcal reading, on average. When I get a moment I intend to reveal these patented daily research strategies, which really only amount to a list of resources, annotated as to their relatively usefulness. My hope is that even more folks start websites and weblogs on issues of importance to them, as a shared edited research resource. Because, let me tell you, links and articles and news are all too plentiful, it's in the selecting, grouping, contextualizing and elaborating that we really get a good picture of things.
posted 4/1/2002 12:37:21 PM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Friday's mediageek radio show is now on-line. For those who prefer to read some, the headlines are also available in text form.
posted 4/1/2002 11:14:48 AM [link
to this entry] [respond]
[top]
Click
here for news archives...
|
|
