Gnorb.NET

Slashdot is currently featuring a story by OSTG’s Editor-in-Chief (and my former boss) Robin ‘roblimo’ Miller titled A Recipe for Newspaper Survival in the Internet Age in which he answers the question “How do we [the newspapers] adapt to the Internet?”

You’d think, with all the smart people working for newspapers, that by now most of them would have figured out how to use the Internet effectively enough that it would produce a significant percentage of their profits. But they haven’t. In this essay I will tell you why they’ve failed to adapt, and what they must do if they want to survive in a world where the Internet dominates the news business.

Interesting read for anyone working as a journalist or reporter, on or off the Web.

President Bush was at a news conference today and was asked the following question:

Q: Hi, Mr. President. Thank you. Did Karl Rove tell you the truth about his role in the CIA leak case? And do you owe the American people an apology for your administration’s assertations that Karl Rove and Scooter Libby weren’t involved?

Good question. Let’s see how Dubbya answers:

THE PRESIDENT: We’re going through a very serious investigation. And I will — have told you before that I’m not going to discuss the investigation until it’s completed.

Ok, nice, diplomatic “political” response: say a lot without saying nothing, and cover your butt. We get it, you don’t want to answer. But he continues:

And we have got a — my obligation is to set an agenda, and I’ve done that. And the agenda is fighting and winning the war on terror, and keeping the economic vitality and growth alive, dealing with the energy problem, nominating people to the Supreme Court that adhere to the philosophy that I can depend on — Judge Alito being such a person. I noticed today that they’ve got a date. I’m disappointed in the date, but happy they do have a firm date for his confirmation hearing. We’ve got to recover from the hurricanes. So I’ve got a lot to do, and will continue to focus on the people’s business.

Fear! Terrorists! Hurricanes! Economy! Supreme Court! Strong Leadership! Integrity! (Talk about a lot of BS. If you check out the speech, you’ll see that there’s a LOT more where that came from.)

Worst. President. Ever.

Source: Whitehouse.gov.

Click here for the complete speech, in case the White House suddenly happens to delete this page.

Read the rest of this entry »

NOTE: This post may contain racy material. I’m not usually this uncouth. This is also a total rant which will at least be a bit funny, and at most kill part of your brain in the most horrible manner possible. You’ve been warned.

Last edited 20 October 2005. — Here we go again. Another hurricane, heading our way. Really, this is getting ridiculous — and old.

A couple of days ago, I read the following headline on Fark:

God remembers that Tampa has never been directly hit by a major hurricane in the modern era, seeks to rectify that situation

Ok, pretty funny headline, especially since I read it Sunday while in Tampa. Apparently, Tropical Storm Wilma was at that time somewhere south of the Yucatan peninsula. (You know, where that comet struck 65 million years ago which wiped out the dinosaurs, as well as 80% of all life on Earth.) Due to some amazing atmospheric foot-work, that storm was (edit:and still is) predicted to head pretty much straight north, then take a sharp, 90-degree angle turn east, towards Tampa. Since nothing ever hits Tampa, this meant that Tampa’s surrounding areas should start preparing for another hit. Heck, just to be safe, even Tampans (pronounced “Tampons”, like that thing women use when they’re “not so fresh”) were being told to get ready, since this might have been the area’s very first direct hit in something like 900 years.

Key words: might have been.

Read the rest of this entry »

Ok, which of the following statements is false?

A) America sees scenes otherwise only known in African capitals. The forces of order are absent. Anarchy and chaos reign. Supermarkets are plundered, helicopters shot at.

B) Moscow offers to send rescue teams and other aid to the US.

C) Canada sends police to help protect US cities.

D) A Bosnian television station offered to raise money to help the US.

E) In Kosovo, a civil emergency unit made up of former ethnic Albanian rebels offers to send a team to help rebuild parts of the US.

F) Sri Lanka pledges to send money and disaster relief experts to the US.

G) El Salvador offers to send soldiers to the United States to help police zones in the US.

H) None of the above.

Answer: H — None of the above. These are all really happening. You know, once upon a time, this stuff used to be funny.

Ok, I admit it: I’m a news junkie. (Given my journalism background, is that really any surprise?)

I’ve been following the news updates from the Gulf coast pretty closely, especially those coming “out of” (for a lack of a better term) New Orleans. With everything that’s going on there, the news makes for some frighteningly addicting — uhm — entertainment. (Again, for a lack of a better term.)

I won’t bore you with all the news about lootings and fires, or the Mad Max-like post-Apocalyptic scenes taking place there since you can find those on just about any news website. (For video, check out FoxNews.com and MSNBC.com. For updates straight from the city itself, check out NOLA.com) What I’ll bore you with instead is the following question: Is New Orleans worth re-building? And if so, why?

First of all, let’s start with what may seem like a crude, tasteless, and extremist comment: Let’s forget about rebuilding New Orleans. Sure, it was fun while it lasted, but let’s face it, it’ll take years to rebuild, it’ll cost billions of dollars, and unfortunately this will probably happen again. Why not just give the money that would be spent in rebuilding to the refugees and businesses, and have them rebuild somewhere else, maybe somewhere that’s not, you know, below sea level?!

This, of course, doesn’t include all the shipping that goes on through these. That needs to be rebuilt, but the city itself hasn’t served the purpose of a trading port in a long time, and the port can be self sufficient. Heck, it would also probably be more secure.

Now, since it’s my tax dollars going to save their butts, maybe I should have a say, right? I mean, isn’t that how democracies work? Yeah, I know, we live in a republican democracy. Ok, so then we’ll do it the Republican-Democratic way: I vote for funds to be given to them if they rebuild somewhere else (democracy), but they can play Toxic Crusader and rebuild in Swamp New Orleans if they want (republic). Just not with my tax money. (Libertarian!)

Ok, so on top of this we have the whole cultural issue. Isn’t that more a “people” thing? If you moved the whole city inland, would the soul of the city be lost? I mean. more than it will already be anyway, because — let’s face it — most of those people will settle somewhere else, and when given a chance, they probably won’t come back. Landowners and homeowners might. Business owners may, unless it’s a large corporation. (This excludes franchises.) In that case, why bother. Get the insurance money and go build another store somewhere else. Go build another home, rent another apartment, and get another job.

Of course, most of these concerns come from the fact that, geographically speaking, it’s dumb to try to save the city as it is. It’s under sea level. In fact, the city’s shaped like a bowl. (What, it flooded?! OMG!!). This will happen again. The can rebuild the pumps and all the protection the city had — at the cost of billions. But once something stronger comes along — like, say, that Category 5 with 180mph winds that was expected to hit, before it went down to a Category 4 — it’ll happen again.

A bit of a side note: This whole situation — at least, the flooding part of it — reminds me of a quote from Monty Python’s Search for the Holy Grail:

When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build a castle on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that’s what you’re going to get, Lad, the strongest castle in all of England.

Fitting, isn’t it?

Now, I won’t take into consideration the fact that New Orleans has pretty much proven itself to be the crap-hole of humanity. I mean, even New Yorkers had enough decency to drop the “we be tuff” act for a while after 9/11. (I still admire New Yorkers for that. I may not like the city, but daing it, at least they’re classy.) These idiots are shooting the frig’n help/rescue personnel that’s trying to get them to safety, feed them, and give them medical attention. And why, so they can get their next drug hit?

(I won’t get into the looting of stores part, since it’s pretty obvious that if it’s for survival, it’s necessary, and you don’t need 17 DVD players to survive. )

On the bright side, I’ve heard that 2300 troops are being sent in, hopefully to enforce the “comply or die” type of martial law. Maybe that will calm things down, if only a bit.

Speaking of which, I’m glad to hear some foreign aid is finally getting in. Sad to hear how long it’s taken. Then again, maybe it just seems long because I’ve already been hearing about Katrina for almost 10 days, having gone through the Category 1 version of the storm myself. And not all of it is the foreign government’s fault: I’m sure that if we asked England, we’d have some of their disaster rescue teams here within a day. Key words: “If We Asked.” The US doesn’t exactly need money. What it needs is organizational experience. On top of that, for now, what it also needs is man power, seeing as the Louisiana National Guard — whose job is to take care of stuff like this — is over in Iraq hunting down Baghdad Bob. But that’s an argument for another time.

Now, I haven’t forgotten that it’s not all about New Orleans. Mississippi and Alabama both need help, but then again, they don’t have the problems New Orleans has; bad geographic location and more than its share of bad people. Mobile and Biloxi will rebuild. It’ll take time, but they’ll rebuild. And in those cases, it’s worth it.

Ok, so I’ve given enough reasons why New Orleans isn’t worth saving, but let’s face it: New Orleans is a jewel in the world of the arts. (And besides, the “Shreveport Saints” just doesn’t have the same ring to it.) Maybe the city should welcome its new watery overlords, and take a hint from Venice. Can New Orleans become a River City? Well, why not? It’s in a swamp, it’s sinking, and the buildings are pretty much already all built with a super-strong infrastructure. And, like Venice, I’m sure the rest of the world would have at least some interest in keeping it around, at least enough to help fund its survival like Venice.

Alright, enough of this. This was a rant, plain and simple. The arguments set forth here are the arguments of someone who hasn’t the foggiest ideas of the logistics involved in moving a city, building a river/water city, or whatever. Still, I’m not the only person to ask these questions, and I guess I’m just plain interested in hearing some answers other than “We’ll have to spend $30,000,000,000 of your money to rebuild this city. Live with it.” I don’t mind helping out with hurricane repairs — after all, hurricanes happen, just like tornadoes, earthquakes, and blizzards. But since nature’s already done us the “favor” of tearing down most of New Orleans, why not come up with some imaginative ways to raise it back up?