Bob Woodward on "Deep Throat"

"If we are going to define the news as what the government says publicly and what people say publicly we are not going to get at whats really going on. "
--- Bob Woodward

Last week, Mark Felt, who was better known as "Deep Throat" to Americans for close to thirty years, passed away at the age of ninety-five. Felt was the confidential source for Bob Woodward's watergate reporting for the Washington Post. NPR chose to rerun an interview with Woodward from 2005. Woodward discussed his relationship with "deep throat", as well as the government's response to his reporting.

Pullitzer Prize Creates New Eligibility for Online Reporting

In an effort to keep up with the changing media landscape the Pulitzer Prize board will expand its prestigious award to online-only news organizations for all 14 of its journalism categories. The online-only organizations must publish weekly and contain primarily original content, as oppose to being a news aggregator. It is still vague as to which sites will be deemed eligible. For example Pulitzer Administrator Sig Gissler refused to comment on if the Huffington Post which is a mix of personal blogs, link aggregation and original reporting, would be eligible.

The Wild West of the World Wide Web

The New York Times turned an eye towards internet censorship in a recent article titled: "Google's Gatekeepers," by Jeffrey Rosen. This fascinating and in-depth story dispels the assumption that the internet is a "free-speech Panacea" by discussing the ways in which Google makes its decisions on what to censor, both in the US and abroad, through its display on search engines, YouTube, Blogger, Picasa, and Orkut. While the article paints Google as a company that desires to preserve free speech as best it can, even when operating in "rogue" countries, it also raises concern that as a business it may not be the best entity to preserve free speech. Rosen asks: Is Google a neutral free speech tool or a Media/Advertising company? One area of great concern by civil rights activists is Google's role in collecting information about its users. The best way for Google to preserve civil rights is not to collect this information at all since having it makes it available for governments to request it. Google uses this information for advertising purposes, revealing the tension between it being a for-profit company as well as a free speech tool. Rosen also points out that Google and other service providers may have their power superseded by telecom companies like Comcast and Verizon, who can build censorship into the actual infrastructure of the internet. By focusing on Google, Rosens article raises broader questions about the potential danger of censorship, especially as our dependence on the internet grows. What is the future of free speech on the internet? Should there be a governing body of rules to protect free speech? In the world wide web - whose laws prevail?

Below are a few ideas and quotes from the article:


* Google controls 63 percent of the world’s Internet searches and owns YouTube, Blogger, Picasa, and Orkut.

*The Global Online Freedom Act, a bipartisan bill introduced by the House, would require Internet companies to report to the State Department all online material filtered at the requests of foreign governments. Internet companies are attempting to modify the bill to preserve their ability to do business with repressive countries.


* Google and other companies face these decision making processes all the time. As a business their goal is to profit and succeed. When they enter markets such as China, they wish to maintain their contract there, but then what is their responsibility to the human right of free speech? Rubin spoke with Wong about Googles approach to this question:

"She stressed the importance for Google of bringing its own open culture to foreign countries while still taking into account local laws, customs and attitudes. 'What is the mandate? It’s ‘Be everywhere, get arrested nowhere and thrive in as many places as possible.’ ' "

* “information must be free” ethos - The US protects most service providers from any lawsuits involving, having hosted, or linked to illegal user-generated content. However, search engines in other countries can be held liable for indexing or directing users to content that is illegal in a foreign country. Rosen gives the example of Holocaust Denial Websites in France and Germany. If you do a search at google.de or google.fr you will not find Holocaust denial sites because they are illegal. This is not true for the US site, google.com

* Harvard’s Berkman Center runs a Web site that keeps track of censored online materials: chillingeffects.com.

*Last May, Senator Joseph Lieberman's staff contacted Google told the company to remove "jihadist videos" from their site. While google attempted to maintain a level of free speech, they did announce new guidelines in September prohibiting videos "intended to incite violence."

* Rosen Writes:

"Right now, we're trusting Google because it's good, but of course, we run the risk that the day will come when Google goes bad," Wu told me. In his view, that day might come when Google allowed its automated Web crawlers, or search bots, to be used for law-enforcement and national-security purposes. "Under pressure to fight terrorism or to pacify repressive governments, Google could track everything we've searched for, everything we're writing on gmail, everything we're writing on Google docs, to figure out who we are and what we do," he said. "It would make the Internet a much scarier place for free expression." The question of free speech online isn't just about what a company like Google lets us read or see; it's also about what it does with what we write, search and view.

Wu's fears that violations of privacy could chill free speech are grounded in recent history: in China in 2004, Yahoo turned over to the Chinese government important account information connected to the e-mail address of Shi Tao, a Chinese dissident who was imprisoned as a result. Yahoo has since come to realize that the best way of resisting subpoenas from repressive governments is to ensure that private data can't be turned over, even if a government demands it. In some countries, I was told by Michael Samway, who heads Yahoo's human rights efforts, Yahoo is now able to store communications data and search queries offshore and limits access of local employees, so Yahoo can't be forced to turn over this information even if it is ordered to do so.

Isolating, or better still, purging data is the best way of protecting privacy and free expression in the Internet age: it's the only way of guaranteeing that government officials can't force companies like Google and Yahoo to turn over information that allows individuals to be identified. Google, which refused to discuss its data-purging policies on the record, has raised the suspicion of advocacy groups like Privacy International. Google announced in September that it would anonymize all the IP addresses on its server logs after nine months. Until that time, however, it will continue to store a wealth of personal information about our search results and viewing habits - in part to improve its targeted advertising and therefore its profits. As Wu suggests, it would be a catastrophe for privacy and free speech if this information fell into the wrong hands."

Latest Reality Show: "Homeland Security USA"

Beginning in January ABC will debut its latest reality TV show: "Homeland Security USA." As someone who already finds the agency to be an impotent and ridiculous hoax, it should be interesting to see how things play out. The agency itself must be stoked because this show will expand public consciousness on the role of this relatively young agency. What will expanded consciousness do? Possible desired impacts include bolstering public opinion of the agency and scaring or comforting people, based on their profile. As someone who values civil liberties, I would be stoked if this show were a "reality" show with the ability to ask difficult questions about the agency and their actions. But alas, our mainstream media does not wish to do this. In being a reality show, the embedded cameras will be showing us America through the lens of these agents. A lens where terrorists lurk around every corner. It will be interesting to see how the producers emphasize daily missions and frame the people that officers approach. "Cops," with its cheesy theme song, comes to mind. You would think Homeland Security would see the cameras following them around as a distraction, but the benefit of publicity must outweigh the negatives. Stay tuned for further analysis once the show hits the airwaves.

Resource:
Homeland Security Goes Hollywood
Ed O'Keefe

Mayor Newsom Attempts Youtube Address

Newsom's virtual speech draws mixed reviews


C.W. Nevius for the San Francisco chronicle wrote a pretty comical recap of the mixed reviews SF Mayor Gavin Newsom received after posting his first State of the City Speech on Youtube this week. Following in the footsteps of Barack Obama, Newsom's political strategist believes that this will be the norm in a few years. One critique of the video is that because of its length, it is not going to appeal to someone sitting in front of their computer watching it. Two of Newsom's colleagues, city supervisors, Aaron Peskin and Sean Elsbernd, comment that because his speech occurrs in cyberspace the ability for real world dialogue is diminished:

"Part of the purpose of the State of the City is not just the message, but a civic gathering where department heads and city employees and politicians get together and feel a sense of common purpose," Peskin said.

Interesting point, Mr. Peskin.

Word of the Day: Meme

meme (/miːm/) or (meem) - noun,
a cultural item that is transmitted by repetition in a manner analogous to the biological transmission of genes.

This is the coolest concept I have heard of in a long time. It is seemingly too broad for a word, but having a word allows for easy exploration into this phenomenon. The word meme could come in handy in my blog's musings when tracking various things. How information spreads and is eventually covered by the media. How different types of media cover information differently. How information spreads from media producers to the public. How the public interprets and transmits information they receive from the media.

I will use this term and give an example of it in a future blogpost!

Media in your Inbox

The media in your inbox. MoveOn.org is a 5-million member liberal public policy advocacy group that helped elect Barack Obama through mobilizing its members through emails. The MoveOn.org emails deliver information, inspire letter writing, fundraising, and local meetups. I am very curious how email delivered into one's inbox is a form of media. I scan my inbox and find emails from MoveOn.org, The New York Times, CBS News, Truthout.org, Barack Obama, Film Arts, Aunt Sally. With an amalgam of emails from various realms of everyday life I wonder: Is my inbox my new TV? Each email, a different channel? Hopefully I will understand this concept better as I learn the basic framework of this discipline. For now, I find it interesting to reconceptualize my inbox.

Obama Uses Internet to Connect

Blog based on San Francisco Chronicle article by Joe Garofoli:
Obama Testing Ways to Use Internet to Govern


Many attribute the success of Barack Obama's campaign to its engagement with new media, including its utilization of social networking sites, youtube, twitter, and email. These tools gave Obama the ability to surpass traditional media and address people on his terms. This direct access gave him an advantage in connecting with the electorate.

Now that Obama is elected, he plans to continue using similar strategies to govern. In his transition period he is using youtube to post weekly updates. Steve Grove, YouTube's head of news and politics, predicts that we may even see "behind the scenes" coverage of the White House. This may not sound as interesting as "The Hills", but the San Francisco Chronicle reports that "Obama's YouTube channel had more than 1,800 videos during the campaign, and they were viewed 110 million times." Once Obama is president, the interest for viewers in this type of coverage may lie in the fact that this unprecedented. There is something very personally engaging about these media tactics. These videos as well as the personal emails I received throughout the campaign reached out to me in a way that made me feel that Obama and his team were transparent and were making an efforts to keep ME informed and involve ME. This video of Melody C. Barnes, Director-designate of the Domestic Policy Council introduces herself, feels very personal and entirely different then what I have seen before.

White House press releases are a common source for news reporters, sometimes to a nauseating degree. But how will things change now that the president is using the internet to speak directly to the people? How will it impact news media coverage and the public perception of information coming from the White House?

It will be interesting to see exactly how Obama uses new media technology as he governs. On the flip-side, how will people use new technology to participate in government and influence Obama? So far Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe surveyed the estimated 11 million members of Obama's e-mail list about ideas for the administration. The SF Chronicle also reports that many of the social networking sites that were used to mobilize Obama voters are now deciding how to regroup and use the energy built up during the campaign.

It will be truly fascinating to see how Obama governs using the internet, as well as how much power Americans will wield using the internet to shape our government.


=========

Why this Blog?

One profession I can envision myself ending up in is that of a college professor in media studies. This will require grad school. There are a few programs that interest me, one at New York University, and a few others that I will look into and blog about. This blog will be a way for me to become familiar with both the large concepts and specific situations that shed light on the role of media in our society. Look for blog posts on news articles and books. Also, look for profiles of organizations and research into history, terms, and theories. This blog will be a method for me to learn about this field while finding a calling within it.

What is in it for you? I hope to infuse you with some of my enthusiasm for this topic that impacts our everyday lives and to make you think in new ways about how you receive and interact with information in the 21st century.