Slashdot Mirror
Disinformation.com
The site's left-of-center-pieces -- with generous links to other POVs -- vary wildly in quality and usefulness, but you can find some real gems on disinfo.com. Taken together, the stories on this important, possibly even landmark site are a sharp indictment of the humorless and tepid way the popular media screen out opinion and commentary that's different, provocative or original.
We know too well that most mainstream media -- TV networks, major newspapers and newsmagazines, commercial news web sites -- have been corporatized, homogenized and mass-marketed by profit-obsessed corporate execs from Disney and General Electric. They could as well be -- and simultaneously are -- selling them park tickets and light bulbs as ideas and opinions. Newspapers have grown stupefyingly boring, their commentary relegated to snoozy op-ed pages. Cable TV, once the great hope, is becoming a nightmare of fragmentation, eternal argument and dogmatic fanaticism. Except for slight variations -- Fox News' interesting right-wing tilt, for example -- most mainstream news organizations stock to a militantly moderate point of view, veering a wee bit to the right or a tad to the left but never much further.
The target audience of most major media, from your daily paper to Time and CNN, is the appliance-and-car acquiring middle class, who seem to like their politics tepid and lite, the way AOL users like their Net. With media so firmly in the grip of market research, it's tough to know what they might cover if they were left to their own imaginations.
"Disinformation" is, to say the least, different. It was launched in l996 by Richard Metzger, now edited by Alex Burns. It's arguably one of the best-designed and most interesting alternative news and underground culture sites online. Apart from its own content, the site provides a subculture search engine which directs a reader to sites and relevant links. The site's political bias is clearly leftish, but its links are refreshingly open-minded, incorporating ideas, opinions and responses far beyond traditional definitions of "progressive." In fact, Disinformation is really, in many ways, a dogma killer. Despite the editors' viewpoint, readers get drawn into all sorts of opinions and debates any time they pursue a story or essay.
Apart from the excitement generated by a website that circulates about alternative ideas -- ideas the Net helps to keep alive -- Disinformation is beautifully designed. There's a Disinformation store, of course, offering T-shirts and books. There's easy access to stories by popularity and topic -- from activism and aliens to media, mind control, spirituality and technology. For all the ballyhoo and media hype about sites like Slate, with its heavy Microsoft subsidy, Disinformation really seems to get the fusion between interactivity and ideas. It's an exciting place to browse.
From the beginning, the Net was meant to open up information and give voice to different kinds of people and points of view. The Web, with its hyperlinking, took that idea still further. But in the past few years, that notion seems to have grown tired, in between the copyright wars, the dot.com era and the so-called Net slump. It seemed that corporate America -- Yahoo, MSN and AOL -- was devouring the Web whole. That's why sites like Disinformation are so important. They are the real heart of the Web.
What else is new?
How about this?
--------
Bleah! Heh heh heh... BLEAH BLEAH!!! Ha ha ha ha...
Gee, Jon, you sound like a cheerleader for disinformation.com (ewww, yuck).
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
Hey, I have a lot of respect for all you guys who like to eat pussy because there are too few of you out there. And I'm not the only woman who says this. Furthermore, some of you guys who are giving it the old college try are not doing too well, so maybe this little lesson will help you out. When a woman finds a man who gives good head, she's found a treasure she's not going to let go of him too quickly. This is one rare customer and she knows it. She won't even tell her girlfriends about it or that guy will become the most popular man in town. So, remember, most guys can fuck, and those who can usually do it satisfactorily, but the guy who gives good head, he's got it made.
Most women are shy about their bodies. Even if you've got the world's most gorgeous woman in bed with you, she's going to worry about how you like her body. Tell her it's beautiful, tell her which parts you like best, tell her anything, but get her to trust you enough to let you down between her legs. Now stop and look at what you see.
Beautiful, isn't it?
There is nothing that makes a woman more unique than her pussy.
I know. I've seen plenty of them. They come in all different sizes, colors and shapes; some are tucked inside like a little girl's cunnie and some have thick luscious lips that come out to greet you. Some are nested in brushes of fur and others are covered with transparent fuzz. Appreciate your woman's unique qualities and tell her what makes her special. Women are a good deal more verbal than men, especially during love-making. They also respond more to verbal love, which means, the more you talk to her, the easier it will be to get her off. So all the time you're petting and stroking her beautiful pussy, talk to her about it.
Now look at it again.
Gently pull the lips apart and look at her inner lips, even lick them if you want to. Now spread the tops of her pussy up until you can find her clit. Women have clits in all different sizes, just like you guys have different sized cocks. It doesn't mean a thing as far as her capacity for orgasm. All it means is more of her is hidden underneath her foreskin.
Whenever you touch a woman's pussy, make sure your finger is wet. You can lick it or moisten it with juices from inside her. Be sure, by all means, to wet it before you touch her clit because it doesn't have any juices of its own and it's extremely sensitive. Your finger will stick to it if it's dry and that hurts. But you don't want to touch her clit anyway. You have to work up to that. Before she becomes aroused, her clit is too delicate to be handled.
Approach her pussy slowly. Women, even more so than men, love to be teased. The inner part of her thigh is her most tender spot. Lick it, kiss it, make designs on it with the tip of your tongue. Come dangerously close to her pussy, then float away. Make her anticipate it.
Now lick the crease where her leg joins her pussy. Nuzzle your face into her bush. Brush your lips over her slit without pressing down on it to further excite her. After you've done this to the point where your lady is bucking up from her seat and she's straining to get more of you closer to her, then put your lips right on top of her slit.
Kiss her, gently, then harder. Now use your tongue to separate her pussy lips and when she opens up, run your tongue up and down between the layers of pussy flesh. Gently spread her legs more with your hands. Everything you do with a woman you're about to eat must be done gently.
Tongue-fuck her. This feels divine. It also teases the hell out of her because by now she wants some attention given to her clit. Check it out. See if her clit has gotten hard enough to peek out of its covering. If so, lick it. If you can't see it, it might still be waiting for you underneath. So bring your tongue up to the top of her slit and feel for her clit. You may barely experience its presence. But even if you can't feel the tiny pearl, you can make it rise by licking the skin that covers it. Lick hard now and press into her skin.
Gently pull the pussy lips away and flick your tongue against the clit, hood covered or not. Do this quickly. This should cause her legs to shudder. When you sense she's getting up there toward orgasm, make your lips into an O and take the clit into your mouth. Start to suck gently and watch your lady's face for her reaction. If she can handle it, begin to suck harder. If she digs it, suck even harder. Go with her. If she lifts her pelvis into the air with the tension of her rising orgasm, move with her, don't fight her. Hang on, and keep your hot mouth on her clit. Don't let go. That's what she'll be saying too: 'Don't stop. Don't ever stop!'
There's a reason for that - most men stop too soon. Just like with cock sucking, this is something worth learning about and worth learning to do well. I know a man who's a lousy fuck, simply lousy, but he can eat pussy like nobody I know and he never has trouble getting a date. Girls are falling all over him.
But back to your pussy eating session...There's another thing you can do to intensify your woman's pleasure. You can finger-fuck her while she's enjoying your clit-licking talents. Before, during or after. She'll really like it. In addition to the erogenous zones surrounding her clit, a woman has another extremely sensitive area at the roof of her vagina. This is what you rub up against when you're fucking her. Well, since your cock is pretty far away from your mouth, your fingers will have to do the fucking.
Take two fingers. One is too skinny and three is too wide and therefore can't get deep enough. Make sure they're wet so you don't irritate her skin. Slide them inside, slowly at first, then a little faster. Fuck her with them rhythmically. Speed up only when she does. Listen to her breathing.
She'll let you know what to do. If you're sucking her clit and finger-fucking her at the same time, you're giving her far more stimulation than you would be giving her with your cock alone. So you can count on it that she's getting high on this. If there's any doubt, check her out for symptoms. Each woman is unique. You may have one whose nipples get hard when she's excited or only when she's having an orgasm. Your girl might flush red or begin to tremble. Get to know her symptoms and you'll be a more sensitive lover.
When she starts to have an orgasm, for heaven's sakes, don't let go of that clit. Hang in there for the duration. When she starts to come down from the first orgasm, press your tongue along the underside of the clit, leaving your lips covering the top. Move your tongue in and out of her cunt. If your fingers are inside, move them a little too, gently though, things are extremely sensitive just now.
If you play your cards right, you'll get some multiple orgasms this way. A woman stays excited for a full hour after she's had an orgasm. Do you realize the full impact of that information? The potential? One woman was clocked at 56 orgasms at one sitting. Do you know what effect you would have on a woman you gave 56 orgasms to? She'd be yours as long as you wanted her.
The last advice I have for you is this: After you've made her come, made her your slave by giving her the best head she's ever had, don't leave her alone just yet. Talk to her, stroke her body, caress her breasts. Keep making love to her quietly until she's come all the way down. A man can get off and go to sleep in the same breath and feel no remorse, no sense of loss. But a woman by nature requires some sensitivity from her lover in those first few moments after sex.
Oral sex can be the most exciting sexual experiences you can have. But it's what you make it. Take your time, practice often, pay attention to your lover's signals, and most of all, enjoy yourself.
The G-Spot
This does exist. And in over half of the women out there, it works better than anything else you can do to cause a strong, prolonged orgasm. The original name is the Grafenberg spot, after a doctor, Earnest Grafenberg, who documented the area (which may have been known by people here and there throughout history) in the fifties.
This "spot" is a small "mound" of tissue inside the vagina, between a penny and quarter in size, which responds to being pressed upon. It's almost certainly not the skenes glands, (which are located around the urethra, which is behind the G-spot area), as has been suggested by a few people. In fact, the G-Spot is the tissue in that raised area of the vagina, which has a higher concentration of sexual nerves, and produces hormones similar to those made by the male's prostate gland.
A sort of map to the area -- Imagine your lover lying on her back, legs spread. Your position is between her legs. You would slide a finger inside her vagina, palm up. With your finger straight back, middle finger is best, you would curve it toward yourself, gently, as if you were gesturing to someone to "come here". In doing so, the area you press on should be pretty near her "G-Spot" area. If you know enough to follow the urethra (the tube that leads from the bladder to where the pee comes out), along the inside of her vagina, you may feel a slight swelling (if she's excited) at the point where the g-spot is.
She must be excited, especially if either you or she is new to the g-spot, for the g-spot to have any real effect at all. It's not the ideal area for getting your lover aroused.
But when she is excited, this area (more often than not) is the best way to bring her to orgasm. You work your way back to it gradually, teasing her (typically, this works best) with your fingers, slowly and gently. It's easier to hit the right area with two fingers, but this may not be comfortable for her, depending on how "tight" she is at that moment. When you have your fingers around the right area, try gently pressing, not too quickly. The movement should be fairly rhythmic. It's typically best if you're licking her clitoris (or near it, depending on the woman) at the same time...don't make a big deal out of the "quest", this will often make her feel self-conscious, or distracted. The licking should seem to be the primary activity.
When you find the right area, she should respond by getting more excited. Most of the vagina's inside surface isn't really that sexually sensitive, believe it or not...most of the excitement of randomly inserting fingers is more psychological than from the actual stimulation.
While more complicated techniques work with some women, some of the time, the best basic technique, upon finding the g-spot, is to continue to slowly, rhythmically press on it, while licking her clitoris (for a few women, the labia (lips) are sensitive to licking, too).
This should cause her to build up to an orgasm.
A G-Spot orgasm is different (always, when it works at all) than any other kind women have. It is possible, with some women, to have different qualities and kinds of orgasms from vaginal, clitoral, anal, and even breast stimulation...but with other women, those kinds of orgasms are all pretty much the same. But the G-Spot orgasm not only feels different; it also causes her body to react in a different way.
First, it often causes a "push out" orgasm. The area around, or "above" (farther inside, that is) your fingers seems to swell up or to contract toward the opening of her vagina.
If you find the right combination of pushing back when this happens, and slacking off to let it push out, you can cause (in perhaps half of the women) her orgasm to continue happening, long after normal ones would have subsided. In some women you can even keep her at a "plateau" (raised level) of sexual excitement, like a prolonged orgasm (or a little less than one) afterward, building up to an even bigger climax.
That brings me to another important point; G-Spot orgasms sometimes causes a huge amount (relatively speaking) of lubrication (juices, wetness)...far more than even the most excited woman gets from "conventional" stimulation.
When that extra wetness combines with the push-out orgasm, you get actual ejaculation...like a guy, but much better tasting. The built up juices can shoot out in such volume that you, or she, may be afraid that she lost control of her bladder. That is (almost always) not what happened. The fear that she peed can be enhanced by the fact that the urethra is behind the g-spot, so that in rare cases the woman can sometimes get the feeling that she needs to pee, even though she does not.
In reality, in both men and women, enough sexual excitement prevents peeing, unless you try really hard. This is a built-in reflex, because urine is something of a spermicide. The "pee hard-on" that men get in the morning is partially his body taking advantage of this reflex, to keep him from accidentally wetting the bed with the urine that built up while he was sleeping.
Taste
Anyone who likes, say, coffee or beer should have no room to complain about the way most women taste. No, I don't mean it tastes like coffee or beer, genius...I mean that beer and coffee are, at best, acquired tastes...they are not naturally pleasant to a human being, no matter how much your addiction to one or both has convinced you otherwise. Most people, whether they remember it or not, had to learn to like the taste of beer/coffee, and had the desire to be Like the Adults to help them along. Well, I'd list taking pleasure in cunnilingus above drinking addictive beverages on the list of things that prove maturity. Aside from that, there's the fact that many people who give it an honest try genuinely enjoy the taste/smell.
Err, how evil ...
;)
Slashdot (the good) vs. disinfo (the bad) and me (the ugly)?
I can't stand it
Life sucks.
I personally prefer www.fair.org. Disinfo, while interesting, are oftentimes too radical for my taste. It almost seems like they go out of their way to fabricat-err, uncover conspiracy in the name of "no smoke without a fire".
fair.org is more a kind of media watchdog. I like their work. You might too.
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
This is what I get when I try to go there from work:
"Access to this web page is restricted at this time.
Reason: The Websense category "Alternative Journals" is filtered.
URL: http://www.disinfo.com/"
I guess some how what I would have read there would have made me a worse employee? I am glad they saved my eyes from seeing that!
This is cool and I have visited their site previously, but some of the stuff just leaves a bad taste in your mouth. Its one thing to wish for untainted information, stive for truth and freedom, and quite another to spew frothing at the mouth about it, hidden in an amongst what appear to be good information.
AND it is yet even more of a shame when a whole bunch of conspiracy seeking, alien hunting, govermentphobes start giving, us good truth seekers a bad name....
Wheres the tin foil hat when you sighn up to their site, I thought that wsa a requirment.
Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
I think the idea of going to a centralized site for news, whether it's "alternative" news or whatever, is still a bit old fashioned.
Jon keeps talking about the corporatized net, and the failure of democracy on the net, but I think Blogger and related self-publishing tools are providing millions of people the opportunity to easily get their opinions and information on the net.
But not always. Yes, the Net was for the exchange of ideas, but when it became available for mass consumption, the average user didn't want to exchange ideas, but to put up pics from their last vacation for their family to see,or host their N'SYNC fansite.
There are areas for information and areas for pop culture. Now that's why we have Google, to separate the truly informative stuff from the drivel.
I'm not afraid of falling, it's the sudden stop at the end that frightens me.
Warning Flamebait!!!! Mod me down if you want.
Now he just seems like someone spouting off at the mouth about technology he doesn't understand or really care about. The web remains an emerging technology, where existing models of television (video on demand), radio (internet radio anyone) and print media (salon, slate) were applied with varying amounts of success. The web is none of these things but its own medium. When someone complains about the centralization of media outlets on the web I have to take it with a very large grain of salt.
The beautiful thing about the web is that anyone can express their opinion (including mine and Jon Katz), but with such a low barrier for entry users of the web are looking for quality with their quantity. Sites like Yahoo, MSN and AOL offer those. And mainstream viewers demand mainstream values and opinions. I applaud smaller sites that cater to a smaller audience with just the same amount of integrity. These type of efforts would not be possible in any other type of publishing or broadcasting environment. So God bless the web and screw Jon Katz.
We had to destroy the sig to save the sig.
Hey, what's wrong with cheerleaders? They're human too. (And often quite tasty.) This is one nerd who got along quite well with the ladies back in school, including cheerleaders. Of course it helps if you're a *cute* nerd. :-)
Perhaps we could get a waiver for Farscape, though. Production values aren't everything...
Was that out loud?
Adbusters.comc om
Indymedia.org
WhatReallyHappened.
All interesting media, culture, and commerce critique websites.
For the life of me, I can't understand why Jon Katz would've posted Disinfo, but dog bless him anyway.
Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma
God, that "cheerleaders" piece was awful. As reporting, it was incompetent and uninformative. As ranting, it was slow and anticlimactic. If this is the sort of feeble attempt at interesting writing that Jon Katz is urging us not to miss, then I think I'm beginnig to understand why he's so hated around here.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Disinformation is nothing. If you are looking for the web that was "promised" -- and who promised it, anyway, technofuturists drawing a paycheque on empty predictions -- then you should go to www.google.com.
What do you want to know about? Type it into the search box. Check your results. Read the ones that are interesting. Alter your criteria. Try it again.
Use their links to read newspapers from all around the world. Use babelfish to translate a German page to English.
I have all of the information I could possibly need at my fingertips through a combination of Google, Lexis-Nexis and sites like Everything2 and the Guerilla News Network. I have opposing viewpoints, case studies, major media coverage, independent media coverage, essays and fiction based upon pretty much every major event in the last twenty years. Going back a bit, the completeness level goes down for all but the most major of events, but nonetheless.
The Internet allows anyone to put anything up. Google allows you to find it. Your brain allows you to parse, to judge, and to collate it.
The third part of that equation is the important one.
If you're still using major media to define your worldview, you haven't understood a thing about what the internet has done (nevermind what it was supposed to do or what it should do in the future). I check in with major media sites because they tend to be well laid out. When I actually want the information, all of it, that's when MSN and CNN can kiss my ass good-bye, because they do not and never have provided anything more than sound bites.
Which is pretty much what Disinfo does, except with a snotty, leftist bent that doesn't do much more than pre-emptively derail most of the discussion that occurs.
The heart of the web? No. Just another meta. The heart of the web is that anybody with access to a PC and 20 minutes to learn can put a basic webpage up that will be indexed by Google so that somebody like me can stumble across it.
Google and the WayBack machine are the killer apps of the net. The provider of the content (Disinfo or whomever) don't matter. That's just branding.
And, hey, wasn't the 'Net going to take us away from all that? Or is it acceptable in the case of clearly lefty-biased sites?
One of the things I admire most about America is that you've got your sports groupies in uniform and parading on the sidelines. It's just so organised ! The unarguably subservient status of cheerleaders versus actual players is also a cause for wonder. It's so refreshingly old fashioned. It shows that at some level the country hasn't completely lost it's head up it's own ass in the fad of expecting identical roles for men and women.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
I am getting glaringly sick of Jon Katz. Grow up. You are no longer a teenager. This teen angst us versus them, media bad, internet freedom fighter good thing is getting really really old. Grow up and realize that this is a wider world, and that some people dont necessarily suck. Also that not all news agencies lie, and that just because it is on the internet doesnt mean that it is any better. Either that or you will be the oldest guy at a Limp Bizkit (is this spelled right) concert.
- Corporate Totalitarianism
- Marijuana is good for you
- The Matrix
- Marilyn Manson
- The Illuminati
- Blah, blah, blah...
It's the same old stuff, over and over and over again....why are we hyping this site over any others? Is it the cool web design? Is it because there's nothing useful or relevant to write about today?Got Rhinos?
That cheerleader piece is really annoying. I agree with only the tiniest fraction of what the Christian Cheerleader Leaders say and stand for, but the guy who's doing the interview is the biggest dork I've read in a while. He sounds like a newish convert to his lack of religion, and like most new converts, he's all guns blazin' and basically a smug asshole. (I don't have religion either, but at least I try to have some dignity about it, even if I think concepts of faith help lead to stuff like WTC.)
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Well, I was going to compliment Katz on actually writing a meaningful article without totally devolving into marketing speak while doing it.
/.er decide to keep you on the homepage.
Then when I went to check it out, no-wrap was on so I couldn't read it!
Oh well, Katz, keep it up. If the rest of the story is anything like the intro paragraph, congratulations. You've made at least one
I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!
It seemed that corporate America -- Yahoo, MSN and AOL -- was devouring the Web whole. That's why sites like Disinformation are so important. They are the real heart of the Web
Lets see now, you like this site because it gives an opinionated, stinted, and rebellious view of the world, and in the same breath you'll raise a fist to the corporate shambling of AOL and the like who happen to provide content that massive numbers of people enjoy reading.
Do you actually believe this rubbish? Do you honestly think your opinion matters in the slightest? Theres 6 billion of us out here. We can think for ourselves. Give us content, ditch the pretenious retorhic.
http://twitter.com/onion2k
And just how is Marty Beckerman's taunting a cheerleader different from the "cool kids" taunting "geeks" as was roundly condemned in the Hell Mouth articles? He sounds like a complete jerk to me.
Published in Penthouse, multiple newspapers, and now mentioned on Slashdot, Martin Beckerman is on the verge of mainstream media.
[unofficial Slashdot credo]
Looks like you're wrong again, Mr. Katz.
[/credo]
Indymedia is full of cooked-up conspiracy theories, anti-Semitic bullshit, and hate-America-first screeds. I've never seen a single bit of useful info there, although they do a great job of highlighting lies like the CNN-fake-Palestinians crap. It's all extremism, support for criminals and murderers, and extreme-left ranting. Forget about it.
WRH is another anti-Semitic junk site that would blame everything on the Mossad and "international bankers" if they could. Not a single useful reference to be found.
The article is mostly spent insulting "Christian" Cheerleaders, not cheerleaders in general. There are many jokes about how slutty cheerleaders are, and so the article is trying to say it is stupid to have a Christian group that actually supports this slutanic culture.
I don't like cheerleaders for many of the reasons he brought up. However, I must admit I knew one cheerleader back in highschool that defied all the stereotypes. Only cheerleader I've ever been attracted to. JLW from GHS. Oh well.
I just consider the source of these things, and am glad there are a million other sites out there.
I think Katz is only happy with Liberal point of view though. Not exactly 'fair.'
There are tons of sites just like this. Why is this interesting?
I went and read "Death to all cheerleaders," and
it's utter garbage.
I'm sick of this type of satire. It's not necessarily funny or interesting to try to make people look dumb, especially when you're willing to make yourself look dumb to do so. Think Tom Greene. Think "The Daily Show." The death to cheerleaders could be a transcript of a Daily Show interview, it's that unoriginal.
It's easy to make fun of stuff. It's also pointless and boring unless there is some genuine insight to it.
Why are you afraid to tell us who you are, AC? Are you afraid we'll find out you're a Jew?
Don't let them immantize the Gershenback continuum!!
You might also try www.fair.org or, if you like me are frustrated by the current warmongering attitude of the mainstream media... you may find www.antiwar.com a good choice. The voice of the common man is still out there on the net, there just aren't as many commericals for it :-D.
yeah, I should post a review of this book, but let me just say this: it is one of the best tools for blowing minds one could ever want. The perfect bathroom book,due to it being a series of rather short pieces, but loads of phun to leave about here in a big corporation.
it is a dead tree distillation of much of the best content of disinfo.com. there is something that is both offensive to, and confirming of the pet conspiracy theories of, just about anyone.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
i've visited indymedia and WRH and they don't seem to critique much of anything, they just throw any crap on the wall and see what sticks. it seems to try to take itself seriously, but most of the "stories" read more like cooked up conspiracy theories.
He's hated because he's obviously an idiot!
We know too well that most mainstream media -- TV networks, major newspapers and newsmagazines, commercial news web sites -- have been corporatized, homogenized and mass-marketed... stupefyingly boring... Cable TV, once the great hope, is becoming a nightmare of fragmentation, eternal argument and dogmatic fanaticism.
This paragraph is inherently contradictory. On the one hand we have unacceptable media which homogenized, on the other unacceptable media which is too fragmented (never mind that cable TV channels usually follow a theme rigorously, which isn't fragmented at all, imho). On the one hand, the commentary is too boring, yet on the other it's too argumentative and fanatical. Katz can't decide which he likes less or why. What he does know is he found something likely to rile people up that kind of agrees with his left-of-center politics and that he has a column to write. So here we are. Filtering Katz stories is almost enough to make one log in to Slashdot.
The net has never succeeded in promoting free expression of ideas. Instead it has founded enclaves of like-thinking people, who need to have their own point of view reinforced by others. Take Slashdot for example -- a community of people who have similar views about free software and intellectual property law. When was the last time a justification of Microsoft's tactics was posted to the front page, without an immediate rebuttal? Or a repudiation of the GPL? The readership here wouldn't stand for it, because that's not what they are here for ... not free expression, but validation.
Really, we shouldn't be surprised that the "mainstream" media is boring -- most people don't like to hear views that strongly conflict with their own. This is a consequence of the popularization of the internet, and Slashdot is an example of that in microcosm.
"Alternative media" sites like disinformation.com are no different. They have their own axioms (the media is lying; the police are out to get you; corporations will enslave the world), their own jargon, and their own orthodoxy. Read an "alternative paper" for a while and you'll see what I mean.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
Isn't slashdot an example of disinformation?
Its regurgatated storied from these "bad" sites.
Not to mention the bias.
The fact is, everyone is human, everyone has a bias. News will always have a bias, unless news is delived from TWO people. Two people with opposite biases.
Sure, you can say money is the reason that information is bad. But the internet kills most of that idea, doesn't it?
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Now true, I will grant that the first aim of the mainstream media is to make money, and thus, they are going to select the news stories that will attract the highest viewership. Which means if they have to drop details to keep people falling asleep and candycoat issues without stretching the truth, they will do so. There does exist some indy media that is less worried on the profit and more worried on the truth, and will report in greater depth than typical newsblurbs. However, again, the target audience for these indy media are not the population at large, but generally intellicuals that want more information than the mainstream can give them. Then of course, there is the indy media that goes on as little information as possible to stretch the truth as decribed above.
As from MIB: "A person is smart; people are dumb", and all that the national media is doing is catering to people. Indy media, in most cases, is trying to cater to persons. The same thing with AOL; AOL and most big content creators cater towards people - independant sites (such as /.) cater towards persons, and just as with the media, some of these indy sites are good and details, while some are poor and over-the-top. That's what you get when you limit the scope of your audience and worry more on the content than about the profit.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
God damn. This guy needs to get a life and stop writing this shit for /.
AdBusters went away, dude, and WhatReallyHappened may not be far behind. Sure, there's people out there that want to speak the truth, but noone wants to provide them with the funds to do it with.
-Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
I'm glad the Anchorage Daily News has some standards. The article was junk, basically just a diatribe and an illustration that Marty has some major issues to work out. Frankly, it's one of the most slanted, juvenile pieces of "journalism" I've ever read.
Just what "award" has Marty's writing won, anyway? "Best Yellow Journalist, Mrs. Freckam's Third Period English Class?"
Though, I'd have been more impressed if the Daily News had actually run his article through an editor before publishing it, and sent it to the circular file then.
Jon Acheson
All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
From Disinfo's main "Paranormal" page:
"It is interesting to see how the Internet's development has been hand-in-hand with the mass proliferation of inter-dimensional information. The reptilian phenomenon is of the astral or imaginal realm. The process of our coming to grips with the possible existence of reptilians, and fully comprehending the dimension of the mind, has the potential to trigger a larger awareness of our own multidimensionality, our spirituality and our relationship with Creation."
Yeah. I been thinkin that for years.
I just can't be bothered to sift through crap like this to possibly find something somewhere in there worth reading. Generally, when I hear something like:
"links are refreshingly open-minded, incorporating ideas, opinions and responses far beyond traditional definitions of 'progressive.'"
I consider it code for "they'll print any damn thing, even if it's silly, badly written, and completely devoid of usefulness." And sure enough, that's usually the correct assumption.
Some of this stuff, I'm sure, is ignored by the Man because it challenges the status quo. But for much of it, well, there's probably a good reason why it's never been picked up by the mainstream media: it sucks.
-brennan
Have you read some of the articles? They are all over the place. I was going to give some examples, but they now appear to be slashdotted and their db backend is overwhelmed. Some of the wackier ones make me think of Dale Gribble, definitely not a liberal.
I know I just read an article about disinfo somewhere in the past month/month and a half, presumably it was the impetus for this article. If only I could remember where. . . Anyone read the same article?
Hey Katz, isn't this where you're supposed to say something about owning shares in "The Disinformation Company Ltd." or something? That's what usually follows a sales pitch like this.
Oh, I'm sorry, did that sound cynical?
Of course, I probably shouldn't be saying that here, the site most known for modding down anything that goes against the party line. :-)
Got Rhinos?
Did anyone actually follow the link, read, and then take Marty's work serious at all?
Initially, I read the header:
Marty Beckerman is an 18-year-old humor and opinion columnist living in tropical Anchorage, Alaska. His award-winning writing has appeared most frequently in The Anchorage Daily News, though occasionally manages to pop up in finer national publications.
and thought, wow this is interesting, a young adult doing some actual work as a columist and apparently being successful... But then I actually read part of the body of his work labeled You Just Can't Lose when Jesus is on Your Cheerleading Squad.
After reading the first page of his column, I stopped and returned to the top of the page to make sure I read this correctly:
Beckerman's first book, Death to All Cheerleaders: One Adolescent Journalist's Cheerful Diatribe Against Teenage Plasticity was published September 2000 on Infected Press.
What sort of crack addict book company would publish the crap this kid is writing... well Infected Press I guess, but the question was rather hypothetical, heh.
This kid is not a columnist, nor does this work represent that he is able to relay any sort of humor. Although, it appeared that he was attempting to do some sort of column with some investigative reporting included in order to back up... the... uh... opinions? or something I guess... that he had. The column started off ok, not of very high quality but decent enough to continue reading. But there are various points in the column when you can realize that this guy is actually just a jackass trying to rant a few loose viewpoints. Here, he starts off asking about the modesty in the cheerleader's dress, and then before the topic has even been finished he throws in an inflammable remark-type question that the guest responds to anyhow (Marty = MB, Guest = Rose):
MB: You dress more modestly?
Rose: Yes.
MB:
Rose: Right.
MB: They're like, knee-level instead of mid-thigh, or what?
Rose: No.
MB: By the way, how does Jesus tie into cheerleading again?
Where did this guy get his interviewing skills? Seems like he pulled them out of his ass. Note to self: Never pull interviewing skills out of Marty's ass, you can get better ones out of your own ass.
He then goes on to ask completely ridiculous questions in what apparently is supposed to be a semi-serious interview:
MB: Would you ever, like, consider taking one of the girls' pompoms and painting it green, and then setting it on fire so it would be like the Burning Bush or something?
Rose: No. We're not extremists.
MB: But that would be hilarious, wouldn't it?
Apparently, Rose thinks she is too good for my question.
This could maybe be classified under humor (section: lame) but what is it doing in an interview within an investigative opinion column? This is ridiculous.
The first page then ends with this portion of a second interview with the president of another Christian Cheerleading Organization:
"So obviously both cheerleading and religion have come under scrutiny and criticism over the years," I say. "How would you respond to people who might themselves say 'Death To All Cheerleaders And There Is No God?'"
"They would say what?" Coleman inquires.
"You heard me," I inform. "They would say cheerleading is worthless, and then go preach glorious Atheism."
"Anytime you get students involved in anything extracurricular, that's meaningful. You get them off the streets. Cheerleading is a character-builder, and there's a lot of positive things you can learn from athletics. As for faith, I think you have to walk the walk."
It's at this point in the conversation I realize I'm completely bored, and proceed to hang up the phone. Fuck walking.
You can finally sort of see where this kid is coming from: a place of no direction, morality, or ethics. He starts out with an inflammable question, hoping to get a repsonse he can poke at. But, when he is faced with some actual facts and serious views about life in the response, he cowers away and avoids all contact.
I gave this guy a tad of my attention, believing that he might have some serious views on things... boy was I wrong. Don't let this guy pull a fast one on you - don't read his column (and possibly any other columns). He is, simply put, a jackass not worth paying attention to.
wait until the /.'ers get home from work! you're in for it katz! you'll get yours!
Anyway, the 'Media Patrol' over at cursor.org is much more my cup of tea - it draws a lot on the mainstream press (American and foreign) but does so in a way to point out the deeper issues and expose the spin that major media puts on things.
Their articles are so well written that many people actually take them seriously. Unfortunately, I can't compare it to disinfo at the moment, because it (disinfo) seems to have been slashdotted.
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
what would hitler do? censorship and the new 'degenerate' art by Lucifer Marx, if anyone makes a bracelet, I want 5.
had one too many bowls of Sugar-Frosted Chocolate Bombs(tm) this morning...
Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma
Wow, Marty is almost as good as Jon Katz! You are right of course, he hasn't had pussy since pussy had him.
its content ranges from "The X-Men" and "Space Mutation" to "The Matrix" to pieces on the Real Jesus and Radiohead.
That's a range? Basically sounds like Newberry Comics to me.
I tried some of the links and got the following:
"Could Not connect to disinfo DB"
Argh, 'THEY' have found me!!!
From my Autobiography - "Lifestyles of the Sad and Desperate"...
This is all I get, "Could Not connect to disinfo DB"
Causing Chaos Everywhere,
Nik J.
The strange world of a loner, in a populous city, drowning in society
While it's great to point at sites like disinfo and such as great sources of non-mainstream AOL/MSN media, are these sites able to cover the cost of their existence for their owners? I think that is the bigger challenge to the 'net than competing between mainstream and fringe media.
Adcritic was great... but then it couldn't pay for the bandwidth and services it was offering because nobody wanted to help pay for it.
Will these sites and sites like these soon fold because, with added popularity or a decrease in popularity, the owners aren't able to afford to keep them live?
Where is the business plan that can turn fringe media into an effective business model? Last time I checked, the only business model that was able to effectively *sell* content online was the pr0n industry.
Let's see, we don't like mass media because the information they present is filtered, edited, spun, and content-stripped away until there's little left besides indoctrinary pablum fit for the lowest-common-denominator viewer, John & Joanne Q. Public.
But we LIKE disinformation.com because the information they present is filtered, edited, spun, and content-stripped away until there's little left besides indoctrinary pablum fit for the lowest-common-denominator "independent thinker", John & Joanne Q. Public.
Oh yeah, sure. That's a HUGE improvent.
Granted, disinfo.com is much more of the category of "oh look at me, I'm a free-thinker not beholden to mass-media" club, or perhaps the "look I'm different like everyone else" category. IMO you're just sucking at a different tit, and fooling yourself that it's more 'significant' because it's not mainstream. Well, sorry, that only means its got fewer error-checking hurdles.
The 'real' web is what you make of it, not what someone shoves in your face as 'important'. I choose my content, and I find my own primary sources. I refuse to see ideolgue-flavored ranting as an example of the best the web can be, rather, it's an example of the crap that one has to wade through to GET to the good parts.
And by the way, in re Marty's rant about cheerleaders: maybe we will never know if there is a higher power, but it certainly IS relevant, or does he disagree with Pascal's logic in the matter?
-Styopa
The one problem with this type of site is that morons (like my parents) actually believe what they read and turn it into chain letters of protest.
*growl*
-Sara
Nice knowing you, Jon. No really!
--
(if you're still looking for the point, it was back there, in the post. </sig>)
The article was junk, basically just a diatribe and an illustration that Marty has some major issues to work out.
Yes, but it is not an uncommon attitude to any of those who always wanted to belong to any group of people and weren't allowed to (because of looks, family, smarts rather than looks). Doesn't this ring true wish a good percentage of the slashdot crowd?
I think that just because he expressed his view - angst perhaps, but with an underlying reason - he shouldn't be condemned.
Ever read any of Katz's "Hellmouth" series on the exclusion and ridicule of anyone deemed slightly different by the average high schooler's standards?
The smoothing over and avoidance of this by the mainstream media is a result of commercialization / homogenization - not wanting to rock the boat - is a problem.
The guy has a point.
m
According to the article they don't listen to metal, wear skimpy clothes or include those from the left hand path. So what exactly do these people do for fun?
In the words of Mike Haggar, have my ears gone insane? All the Web has ever offered as it became popular are 10,000 different versions of the truth. As wrong as The Media can get things sometimes, it's simply fantasy to think that the Internet has it any better. In fact, it's probably worse because at least in the mainstream media their profile is high enough that when misinformation is caught, it is brought to light and reputations are tarnished. I know this has happened to some of the news shows on the tube. On the Web it's every man for himself and there is no penalty for misinformation. It always worries me when people say, "Guess what I read on the Internet..."
For other media watchdogging, also check out The Daily Howler. An incomparable site for shredding those pundits who twist the facts to sell you The Truth.
Who put this thing together? Me, that's who.
As someone who observed Beckerman's firing from the ADN (Anchorage Daily News) first hand, I must disagree with Katz's statement that he was fired for calling cheerleaders "a urine stain..." That piece passed the scrutiny that the editors desk gave all of the younger writers (the ADN had a number of reporters under the age of 18. they would write a weekly feature (sort of like a kid's page, but a little better) and if they were good, as beckerman was, some of them would get offered columns, usually on mondays)
Beckerman was fired because he was a rude little bastard. He'd badmouth his bosses infront of god 'n everybody, he was rude to the copy editors, he would miss deadlines. He was just a bad employee, and using his death to cheerleaders piece as an excuse for why he was fired is just a ploy.
Brant
Argle. Bargle.
Except for slight variations -- Fox News' interesting right-wing tilt, for example -- most mainstream news organizations stock to a militantly moderate point of view, veering a wee bit to the right or a tad to the left but never much further.
Ok, i admit up front i could not connect to the disinfo site, i got some DB error. That being said my comment has nothing to do with the info on the site.
What do we really want from our media? Do we want our journalists to give us opinions or facts? Isnt the AOL/Disney/MS/CNN/ABC/NBC bias the problem? The fact that they water down their facts to make their other interests look good? Isnt this Katz's point when he talks about selling tickets to a theme park? Wouldn't it be better to base our news stories on well checked out facts (how many major news organizations have retracted stories in the last year because of bad fact checking?) rather than opinions, ideas or 'leanings'?
I occasionally will read the op-ed page, to get some opionions, but when i read a news story i want facts such that I can make up my own mind about what I think of the situtation.
True, these politically opinionated sites are very important, it is necessary to see other's view on issues, but to say these should replace news organizations is just wrong. They each have a different set of goals and needs to address. Granted, I dont think most major news organizations are satisfying these goals very well, but making them more opinionated certainly won't help.
Isolationist USA ruled by a moralist conservative President who has acquired power beyond the current constitution and who serves the corporate world - not the public. Most of the GNP is diverted into "homeland security" and "War on Terrorism/Drugs/Crime/Intellectual Property Theft". Public roads, health care and education is privatised and practically abandoned. Thanks to this policy, USA still has the mightiest military in the world and overwhelming military action is taken whenever and whereever the corporate republic deems necessary.
Europe, including Russia, is as fucked as before. Corruption, bickering and confused monetary policy. Somehow it still manages to keep them as the third largest economy and third in military power in the world.
China is the World's only true superpower. There is a new Cold War between China and the USA. There is a "enemy of my enemy is my friend" kind of alliance between the Europe and China.
Guess humor's in the eye of the beholder.
What will Jon discover next year? This great new search engine called Google?
I don't believe Katz even thinks about the drivel he writes anymore. It's all reflexive, a mechanical stringing together of words. "We all know", "media this", "always has been", "corporate that". This man is nothing more than a puppet, an empty shell, his cliched writing an empty husk around stale fantasy and bankrupt ideology. I don't believe a word he writes.
Pushin' 'n dealin', shovin' 'n stealin'
I really get pissed at myself for even reading his articles. If his articles are why the 'net was created, give me a friggin abacus.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
... but John, really, cheerleaders are no better in bed than other girls. You really need to get over being turned down by them ;)
PHP, NT, and MSCOMObjects(?) -- not a good combo
i es/Media/',
SELECT categories.name from contentcats,categories WHERE contentcats.contentID=1164 AND categories.ID=contentcats.categoryID
An error occured in the logger. insert into activity_log values (
'2002-02-19 09:06:02 ',
'Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; Q312461)',
'24.167.1.1',
'',
'/pages/article/id1164/pg1/',
'Windows NT',
'MSIE 6.0',
'You Are Being Lied To: Homepage',
'http://www.disinfo.com/pages/categor
'unknown')
I'm not one to regularly bash Katz, but if he considers mainstream media to be taking a middle-of-the-road approach to reporting news, and considered Fox News to be Right-wing, I would hate to think what Katz would think about anything published in TIME, Newsweek, the New York Times, or The Washington Post. Those publications don't have a Leftist bone in their body. [end sarcasm]
adequacy dot org
Any website that's patronized by mental midgets like you can't possibly be good to look at.
Would that make JonKatz, "the urine stain on the toliet seat of Slashdot"? Or would that be his choice of topics to write about? Wasn't there a poll to end the stupidity that is JonKatz on Slashdot. I want news for nerds, not essays from some clueless dork that would his dot com from his backslash.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
What amazingly transparent adolescent sexual frustration. "Oh, women find me abhorrent, so I'll vent my spleen on the American symbol of desirability." No wonder they don't let more 18 year olds write for newspapers. JonKatz has done it again, ladies and germs: he's found profundity in an intellectual vacuum, and proferred it to us as something worthwhile. Slashdot is really going down the tubes these days.
* mild mannered physics grad student by day *
* daring code hacker by night *
http://www.silent-tristero.com
His point being that people who aren't popular (him) are somehow justified in vitriolic attacks on people who are popular?
Or his point being that because he is an enlightened atheist, he is better / smarter / more clever than the Cheerleaders for Christ?
Or his point being that he's so smart and funny that he doesn't need to display a modicum of respect to people who have consented to being interviewed by him?
Or his point being that a lack of capability in editing and writing can be overcome by being an asshole?
Er. Which point was it that ol' Marty had?
When you express your view through attacks, when your "interviewing style" consists of a 50/50 mixture of reductio ad absurdum and argumentum ad hominem with a little sprinkling of argumentum ad populos, and fail to show any respect to those whom you are meant to be writing about, and allow your own personal agenda to jump up and down all over whatever bit of journalistic integrity might have existed, then you deserve to be discounted. Your views? No. There are other people who can doubtless explain them more eloquently. It is possible to disqualify yourself as a spokesman, and that's what ol' Marty did.
-l
I got to agree. This is the worst piece of, and I hate to use the word journalism, I've read in a long time. Its just a long rant full of inconsistencies by a spotty teenager who thinks he's Gods gift to journalism just because he was once a columnist for the Anchorage news.
/.) give us stories that brings people to /. in the first place.
News for Nerds.
I don't think so.
Stuff that matters.M
Absolutely, 100%, completely definitely not.
Come on Jon (and
that article of his was horrible.
Could Not connect to disinfo DB
:)
That's just disinformation, I know you logged my IP address when I clicked!
--joshua
As for the "information" being disseminated on disinfo.com, it sounds pretty useless to me. The X-Men, Space Mutation, The Matrix, Real Jesus, Radiohead? How does this qualify as an alternative culture? It's just the standard, blank-stare, low-IQ pop culture that the USA, and increasingly other parts of the world, are already swamped with. We need less of this tripe, not more.
Also, I'd like to point out that the net can itself be a source of disinformation, particularly if you are trying to do scientific research. The net is full of bullshit scientific claims, proofs, and experiments, to the point where it is much more productive to just go to the library and get the information from the best source: peer-reviewed journals. The net has a long way to come until it's truly a source of unbiased, variegated, and correct information.
Once again, Jon Katz takes aim and misses...
appliance-and-car acquiring middle class, who seem to like their politics tepid and lite, the way AOL
users like their Net. With media so firmly in the grip of market research, it's tough to know what they might cover if they were left to their own imaginations.
Hey, Jon, does this look familiar?
What's wrong? Your agent can't land you another Time gig?
This is another view of the world.
Good job, Jon - I guess you found it in the last 13 days.
----
WWJD...For a Klondike Bar?
Page banned by company policy
Reason: Cult/Occult
!!
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
I had the pleasure of working with Disinformation from '96 to '00, and I am glad to see that Katz finaly discovered this GREAT news site.
I must plug some of the funkier things associated with Disinfo, namely the TV show, that ran 2 seasons on UK Channel 4, hosted by founder Richard Metzger. This show makes the X-files (for that matter most of the stuff on fox) seem like scripted corporate drech. If you can find it, i totaly recomend viewing it.
The disinformation convention, hosted in NYC in february 2000 was an awesome time. Speakers included Gennesis P. Orridge, Robert Anton Wilson, and Marilyn Manson. I cant wait untill they offer a DVD of the entire event, just incredible.
They also have a record album, with one album that I know of, which is a must for any MOOG Synth fans, called 'the best of moog' its perfect music for parties, heck, its going into the hold music on my office PBX.
I've seen Disinfo guerilla marketing stickers all over the US, in sweden, finland, norway, england, and even on a payphone on the isle of Kos in Greece.
Yet I digress, Disinfo is not a counter culture zine, it is not 'yahoo for the crop circle set' it is more like a mondo2000 for the literati and those that ask why.
This communication is secured using Rot-26 Encryption Algorithm, Unauthorized decryption will be subject to laughter.
Although this site has a very liberal taste to it, and doesn't always stick up for the other side... the commentary by the readers, etc make for a vastly greater view of many subjects then I would get from a mainstream news medium. Plus it runs slashcode ;)
Use the Z-modem protocol between Information Superhighway routers to compress the plaintext. ~LordOfYourPants
Katz, you should interview Richard Metzger and Garry Badely the guys who run Disinfomation LTD. They have an awesome story about how they were financed by a cable company who took about a year to figgure out what disinfo was then dropped them. You should ask how they rose from that situation and how they have suceeded for the past six years on their own. These guys have that stink of inteligent sucess when you speak to them in person, ...and their self produced TV show just kicks ass!
Their designer Jose Cabellero is one awesome graphics guru at Razorfish, I really dig his graphics.
This communication is secured using Rot-26 Encryption Algorithm, Unauthorized decryption will be subject to laughter.
That disinfo is owned and ran by razrofish
What the hell is this crap!
News Flash: CNN now has a website, Microsoft, and even the US government.
My point: Why is this news? Didn't Wired cover this about 8 years ago? (pre JonKatz?)
Patience is a virtue, but I don't have the time - TH
The Emperor's New Clothes is great alternative to the media.
I think the best way to describe the site is by telling more about its name. "The Emperor's New Clothes" is a fairy tale written by Hans Christian Anderson. A group of swindlers hustle an emperor into paying an exorbitant amount for magical clothes that are ostensibly magnificant; simpletons and people unfit for their office cannot see the clothes. In reality there are no clothes and everyone pretends they can see the clothes lest they be rendered unfit or simple.
This is a great metaphor for what goes on in America. Most Americans are incredulous to believe in anything other than the moralizing of the media; moralizing of the worst kind. Every country, or foreign head of state who is our enemy is evil, and we are self evidently good. This is a vile and simplistic caricature, yet so few even question it, the truth no longer matters. There is no moral reasoning behind America's actions but most Americans only see the media's illusion. The emperor really has no clothes. If you go to the site it will contradict a lot of the media and government's lies and unlike the New York Times, BBC, CNN, etc., they cite their sources for you to check.
I am into the copy and paste.
The only mildly entertaining part were the transcripts, and the whole time I was thinking about how The Daily Show would have done a much better job making fun of them. I love it when they find someone with a completely insane theory, back the person into a logical corner using their own answers, and ask that one question that inambiguously reveals the glaring error in their thought that everyone else can see, leaving them completely silent as those of us watching at home laugh their asses off. And they do that in the middle of making fun of them in ways that the person often doesn't even notice, with over-dramatic narrative and wacky commentary at the end. Comedy genius.
Yeah, I'm gonna get an Offtopic for this, but as Gir would say, "I love this show."
Don't forget Accuracy in Media, the right's (fairly wacko) answer to FAIR. One man's "corporatized reporting" is another's "liberal media," I guess.
sulli
RTFJ.
Thank you reviving Latin!
When you want to look smart toss in a bunch of common phrases but in a foreign language.
Capice?
You _are_ the corporate bloat, Jon. In a roundabout way you basically just told us that "hey kids, there is this waay groovy independent news organization!" by telling us about how the web links pages together. Oh my god! The web links pages together!?! Since WHEN?!?
How about getting off your god damn soap box and lose the elitist attitude. Everybody makes money by selling something. If you don't like capitalism then you are living in the wrong damn country.
You Bastards!
I thought Slashdot was the heart of the web... it's what keeps me alive =)
Jesus Saves! And takes half damage (shouldn't the Son of God have improved evasion?)
Er. "Argument to the Man", "Reduction to Absurdity" and "Argument to Popular Opinion" are rather unwieldy. The latin is more compact, and is the standard used when discussing logic.
But you already knew that.
Right?
-l
I must hold the position that I have found many interesting (and hilarious) sites thru Disinfo pages which I probably would not have found thru Google.
I'm sorry you are so angry that nobody recognizes Google as the web's killer app. Oh wait. We did. Right.
In all fairness, please understand that the copy on the site was a bit better back when internet content plays were able to pay employees. Sure, the search engine hasn't really worked since 1998, but hey, nobody is perfect.
Katz, how dare you smear the good name of Radiohead with this piece of garbage site that really tells me nothing except the same old left-wing rhetoric as every other "cool" site. oh, but it does have a slick interface, Katz, I will give you that.
Pascal's wager was just Pascal trying to logically justify belief. You can't do it. Pascal's wager just doesn't work -- because going by it, you should believe in whatever offers the greatest rewards.. just in case. Believe in me and I'll get you eternity in heaven AND a new car!
Well, I had tolerated Katz's articles, thinking all of his detractors to be just a bit unfair in their quick pouncing on anything he writes.
Now he says "dont miss" the most unfunny, juvenille piece of tripe I've ever read.
I don't think this Beckerman knucklehead's 'alternative views' have been surpressed by the Iron Fist of the ruling right wing media(? uhh. ok jon.), I think he's just a jackass. I wouldn't hire him to pump my gas, why would I hire him to write for my paper?
Welcome to my 'Exclude Stories from the Homepage', Jon.
It should be noted that Beckerman was forever banished from The Anchorage Daily News on July 25, 2000, after asking a cheerleader how it feels to be a urine stain on the toilet seat of America. As it turns out, neither the cheerleader nor Beckerman's editor found that interview question particularly amusing.
;). The entire ensemble is a pointless crowd of dropouts. The cheerleaders make the jocks believe that playing a game all your life is a worthy cause of humanity, the jocks make the cheerleaders think that all life's matters run down to having big breasts and blonde hair, and the worse thing about it, is that some of them are actually successful at it. Had i known about this scam earlier on, i would have become a footballer so i could rip millions from stupid people instead of following art and science. Oh maybe that's hypocritical. Cheerleaders are definitely the urine stain on the toilet of America, luckily I am not in America, and I grew up in schools that didn't have this stupid tradition.
ROFL, i found that question extremely amusing. Cheerleading is a pointless gimmick, it is almost as pointless as the actual game they are cheering (at least the game is responsible for getting a few dumb jocks where they belong - in hospital
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
and that makes him/the site/whatever cool/fun/interesting?
Follow the cheerleader link in the article, then go read some of his other pieces. Here's a summary-
"I want to go make fun of . I go interview , asking stupid, insipid, and obnoxious questions. Then I call them lots of names. The end"
What a fucking POS. I don't like cheerleaders (except for looking at), but even that cheerleading article made me feel uneasy. Somehow this twit has made name calling and mocking into a regular column. For some reason the word "fucktard" keeps popping into my head.
Anyway, for the real topic, disinfo makes for many entertaining reads. YMMV depending on how paranoid or conspiracy oriented you are, but they have a nice variety of sections with a bunch of reads. First time I stumbled across it I spent 3 day's spare time browsing for fun.
Woof
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
I find it funny how the right always tries to portray itself as a victim. Last time I checked there are lots of right-wing outlets (Rush Limbaugh, WSJ, etc) claiming they have the truth and are fighting a left-wing media (even though they are a big chunk of the media themselves).
If you are on the far-right then yes, you probably will see everyone else sitting to your left.
"Poor us! The big mean left controls everything, except the government and businesses..."
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
If you meant to imply that reductio ad absurdum is a fallacy, it's not. As a matter of fact, it's used in a LOT of math proofs (assume the negation of what you're trying to prove, and show that it leads to a contradiction).
"It amounts to the same thing whether one gets drunk alone or is a leader of nations." -- Jean-Paul Sartre
Here is the spooky part:
There was one title (Cockburn, Leslie. Out of Control: The Story of the Reagan Administration's Secret War in Nicaragua, the Illegal Arms Pipeline, and the Contra Drug Connection. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1987) cited here, which I could find very little proof of ever existing. All the retail sites provided no records. The Library of Congress gave me no results. Other than the link I placed above, it is very difficult to prove this book was ever printed.
The only proof I could find was at eBay of all places. I have a hard copy of the book, which I bought for $3.95. The book does indeed have an ISBN number and Library of Congress call number.
Is there any possible reason for the lack of records regarding the publication of this book other than cover-up, censorship, book-banning, and historical whitewashing?
Please disprove this conspiracy theory.
Dangit, disinfo's /.'d.
It never ceases to amaze me how few principles people actually stick to when moneys involved. Here is a site (and I was going to quote before it went down) based on the premise that popular media is being deceptive in order to make money. And the first thing that happens when I goto it is some little window pops up an advertisement for a @disinfo.com email address.
Of course, the background was black and the text that said "For only $39.95 a year" was about #010101. In fact, it took like 30 seconds for me to actually figure out what it said since it was a silly animated gif.
So this bastion of truth is trying to trick me into buying an email address using methods that surely wouldn't pass the FCC standards for commerical advertising (FCC has no standards for the net, but it does for TV). Right. Thanks again Jon.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
That's definately a rediculous way to spell independent. Your a looser.
is workers.org
4/5 StarsExcellent, with a few flaws, October 24, 2001
Reviewer: A reader from CA, USA
This book is an excellent compilation of many interesting arguments that are often not heard in mainstream culture. It encourages critical thinking and fosters the ability to question much of what we hear everyday.
This book exposes (among many other things) the myth of religion (mostly about Christianity), the truth of US war crimes and the bloody foreign policy of the US, the cultural whitewashing in history textbooks, some myths of environmentalism, the child sexual abuse witch hunts, the distortions, fabrications, and suppression of the media, the power of large corporations and their subversive influence in the media , etc.
I found two (there probably are more) possible mistaken arguments in the book. One is the Nutrasweet scare - I believe that the threat of aspartame, while not yet certain, has been greatly exaggerated (not to say there might not be some threat however).
The other is the "Forbidden Archaeology" chapter - it seems to be very implausible and far-fetched, although I do not really know enough about it to question it.
Excellent book, with a few possible mistakes. Remember, this book encourages critical thinking - apply it not just to the mainstream media but this book also!
4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
2/5 Stars A pretty poor grab bag, December 27, 2001
Reviewer: mrliteral (see more about me)
Analogy time: Imagine being at the movies and snacking on a trail mix. Every now and then you get something sweet like an M&M or something tasteless like a cracker. For the most part, however, you're getting either lima beans or rocks. This book is that trail mix.
Although there is some good stuff (just enough to give this a two-star rating), for the most part the articles are pretty poor. Interestingly, they vary as to why they are so poor. Some of the authors are paranoid, some are incoherent and some are delusional. Many are tedious. Some are just plain wrong: especially outstanding in this area is one article that dismisses Osama bin Laden being a terrorist.
The major fault lies with Russ Kick who edited this book and apparently didn't subject the contributors' works to any real scrutiny. Many of the allegations are based purely on anecdotal evidence (yet they tend to dismiss others who rely on such evidence). Some present outlandish scientific theories: one states that humans have been around for hundreds of millions of years on only scanty evidence...in the end, he goes further and says that humans are actually devolving from some other spirtitual plane (maybe interesting, but not scientific).
Unfortunately, there are too many articles to really critique all of them. And it's a shame, because some of the issues raised are important, even if they are presented poorly. This could have been a good book, but it isn't. If you decide to read it, watch out for those rocks.
9 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5/5 stars Stellar Guide to Escaping the 21st Century Consensus Trance, April 11, 2001
Reviewer: Alex Burns (see more about me) from Melbourne, Australia
Spearheaded by editor Russ Kick, this massive volume skewers the most "sacred cows" since Adam Parfrey foresaw the Apocalypse Culture. Whatever your belief system, worldview, political or religious affiliation, there will be something here that probably both offends and inspires you. Filled with some heavy thinking, from Noam Chomsky and Howard Bloom to Riane Eisler, Douglas Rushkoff and Peter Russell, but always in an accessible style (and with helpful footnotes, references, and a further reading list), the material ranges from media studies and alternative politics to science, history, environmental and feminist thought, magick, psychology and more.
The book also collects together countercultural and conspiratorial explorations by key writers, including Richard Metzger, RU Sirius, Kenn Thomas, Preston Peet, Nick Mamatas, Robert Sterling, Cletus Nelson, Mickey Z, David McGowan, and myself.
You may not agree with everything here, but after browsing through You Are Being Lied To, you'll "know" that the cosmos is a stranger place than you previously imagined it to be.
I am into the copy and paste.
Holy crap, I'm starting to question the sanity of Slashdot. While it's well documented that "we are being lied to by the corporate media," the solution to this is not a website which is less accurate and less well-researched than the mainstream media itself. If you are interested in investigative reporting that is too uncomfortable for the US press, check out projectcensored.org as a start. Also, learn foreign languages and read non-english papers. But for fuck's sake, don't read disinfo.com and expect them to do all the work for you. The actual "information" on there is only slightly more accurate than astrology. Seriously, it is alternative news for idiots looking to reinforce their predjudices. If you find one piece there with serious investigative reporting that presents credible evidence for its thesis, please reply to this post.
The "cheerleaders" piece screamed `revenge', not journalism. It seemed more like a piece written by someone in high school, trying to use the same petty meanness against cheerleaders that he apparently received from them. Asking someone you don't like obnoxious and/or offensive questions is not always funny.
I read somebody's reply claiming that CNN et al built credibility over time with their news reporting and he would rather trust them than indie media. This is largely true, but I will tell you why indie media helps (despite that fact that folks like Marty gets to write in that :-)). In the recent coverage of war on terrorism, did you follow CNN's coverage of the war from Pakistan? They were glorifying pakistan's involvement as a frontline state and president (General) Musharraff's commitment. Most of the reporting just looked like some kind of a promotional material. The real truth is Pakistan (and Musharraff) created the mess called Taliban through their religious schools. Which is largely responsible for the terror attacks. There is absolutely no word on this from the CNN's reporters staged in Pakistan. Is this credible?
Qualify that. Pascal's wager works, but if and only if the spiritual world is binary, which it pretty much was in 17th century France (i.e. everyone believed in the same God, and were *supposed* to believe in the same way (the Huguenots, of course, would take exception)). The problem with Pascal's wager is that it's a logically sound deduction on false premises.
That's my big problem with it, really; of course, logical deduction regarding faith coming from a Jansenist (anti-rationalist cult of the 17th century and thereabouts, to those of you who don't know) is ironic to the point of being funny...
/Brian
Have you ever wondered why its the standard?
All of academia is inherited from schools that primarily taught priests. Latin was the language of those priests. Latin was used because the Church didn't want the peasants to hear or read the Bible in their native language.
Since those times, every profession has come up with a jargon designed to be unintelligible to the laymen. Personally, I think thats a standard that needs to be done away with, because its very clear that in this day in age 1) the average person should be well-educated and 2) different professions need to understand each other. Witness the suffering caused by the lack of understanding between the legal and technical professions.
Then again, the phrase ad hominem is pretty common...
No, Thursday's out. How about never - is never good for you?
But the people are BORING, REPETITIVE, and UNORIGINAL. If you put out 10 million viewpoints, as I've found at slashdot, you'll find two ideas, left and right. Period. No matter the subject or the posters of the subject, you'll find people on the left or right (or some combination thereof). When you repeat the process 10 million times, you'll always find people on the left/right of the graph. How many Abortion viewpoints you gonna listen to before you realize its just a simple trade-off of fetal rights vs. mothers rights? Or Operating systems? Or text editors? Or philosophies?
The problem isn't that the net is boring, or failing to give voice to the 10 million people. The problem is that people are boring, and the thought that if we had 10 million ideas, that one of them would be good enough to compromise on, is ridiculous.
-Ben
The real problem with media is the people who watch/read/listen to it. People want to be informed so they read the paper for 5 minutes, watch the the news for 3 minutes or listen to the radio for 2 minutes.
People can't be bothered to actually think about the information that they are consuming. This does not only go for big media, but alternative media as well.
Everyone worries about what source is trustworthy and who you should believe. The problem is, no one is 100% trustworthy. So who should you believe? Yourself.
Read whatever the hell you want, but if you dont stop to process the information thoughtfully, then you can do nothing but regurgitate it when asked your opinion.
What people should do is read from every source available and then make their own decisions about what they've read. The problem is, that takes time and effort, which are hard to come by these days.
When someone asks Noam Chomsky, "why should I believe you", his common response is "Don't! Look into it yourself, and you decide what you should believe"... words to live by.
This is left as an exercise for the reader.
Well, for the first time Jon Katz posted something real interesting. I've followed the link to Beckerman's rant against cheerleaders, and then to Marty's own site (www.martybeckerman.com). The site happened to be real interesting.
I've read some other articles there ("Generation SLUT" etc.) and it became quite clear that Marty is just another self- proclaimed "enlightened liberal intellectual", i. e.:
1) Fervently anti- sexual. Probably more than Her Fucking Majesty Queen Victoria and in the same league with Ayatollah Khomeini;
2) An anti- Southern bigot
3) Homophobic (mostly restricts himself to innuendoes, but not too proficient in using them)
4) Has a strong phobia of everything "harmful"- from innocent Wendy's cheeseburgers to Jack Daniel's.
5) A fanatical old- fartist (despite his 19 years)
In a short, just a typical Dem/Green/Left sissie. I highly recommend this site- reading articles by an inexperienced Leftist still not quite out of his larval stage may give an enlightening insight into how nasty/mean/anti-life this pathetic lifeform can be.
Bias has been skewered pretty thoroughly by the Daily Howler.
My personal favorite was the example of "bias" - by quoting an item from a public relations newswire. You know, the kind of newswire that people *pay* to have their "news" distributed to media sources.
The Daily Howler is obviously liberal in it's slant, and quite histrionic in it's rhetoric, but is sourced well and provides an interesting interpretation of major media.
i always want to make time to hear what high school students think of cheerleaders. our friend marty certainly chose the road less traveled by.
go get it
That's one cool site, thanks for introducing it to everyone. Hey, I'll give you a couple sites which are really cool too.
Yahoo.com. It's a really cool search engine. And www.theonion.com, a really funny site that probably nobody on Slashdot has ever heard of.
Anyone else got some new fresh sites?
I still recommend cursor.org tho'
I hadn't checked for 8 months. I tried a few times earlier today and couldn't get in. Although I retract my claims, I *did* check loc.gov several times last year, on different days, searching for names and call numbers, to no avail. Perhaps I'm just stupid. Sorry for wasting everyone's time.
I go to games just to watch cheerleaders!! I don't find geeks nearly as interesting. Funny huh. Jon... come on.. You're giving us weirdoes a bad name. Lets declare war on apple pie and shoot are mom's cause she lied about that Santa thing. Face facts. We like lies. If we ever told ourselves the truth, let alone were told, we would have to change our entire way of life. Now that stinks and it doesn't smell like urine either. Naw I like cheeseburgers and big cars, atomic bombs and 7-11 big gulps, oh and cheerleaders too. So leave us alone or face the fury of denial!!!
hey who stole my nic?!?
I guess that I could have titled it "A word, a punctuation mark, and another word, followed by a period/full stop", or possibly "Two words and two punctuation marks, alternating", but neither of these flows as well as "Two Words".
And it is two words.
No wonder you post anonymously, if you can't count.
(I'm not going to mention that you also ended a sentence with a preposition.)
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
Yeah, I read it. It's a vaulable resesearch tool... when I want to write about weird fringe groups or run a game of GURPS: Illuminati. Not a place to go for "facts" but cool enough to spark flights of fancy.
Just a little inside info on Disinformation.com:
I have fairly personal expereience with the owners of this site as, at one time, ran a entertainment & news magazine ( of the dead tree variety ) called, oddly enough Disinformation Magazine here in Vancouver, Canada. We also ran a related website under the domain we registered, www.disinfo.org. We started up Jan 25, '99. the following Febuary, The Disinformation Company ( parent of dismagazine.com ) served us with a cease and desist order for the use of www.disinfo.org and the name Disinformation magazine. Upon doing some research and getting legal advice we found that we the trademark for which we were being hastled was only applied for in Canada, not granted. and only a month before we recived a cease and desist order. Since we had been publishing for a significant amount of time before the trademark was appied for, we could beat the order under with proof of prior use. It is under Canadian common law. But, since we were cash strapped, we came to a very one sided arangement with our tormenters. Disinformation payed us 500 US for our domain and after significant hasstles and delays, paid for the registration of www.dismagazine.com
We have since moved on to other, non profit things, but are pretty weary of these guys.
What'd you expect? I'm a Canuck!
Against all the principles that I and our many skeptical anti-establishment friends believe in, at the weekend we had no choice but to entrust the care of my flatmate ... a very talented 19 year old sys admin/programmer ... to the psychiatric unit of a major hospital to get his dopamine levels back to where he could retain line of thought for more than 2.5 seconds ... basically because he has no reality filter on some of the utter crap that these sites give equal billing to ... from smoking nutmeg to being able to control the world through psychic power alone.
... but suddenly our life revolves around hospital visits and making sure our systems hold up for our clients without him around to tweak them.
... where he now seems to be slowly recovering.
... which just goes to underline than New Age is no different to tobacco in providing an irresponsible way to rip a buck off a billiion suckers.
As can happen near the edge of insanity, the journey produced some interesting insights and until right before we realised just how serious it had become, his explorations were helping me to write what I think are some fairly deep and meningful notes
Fortunately, the work he has been doing right up to a couple of days before falling over the edge is high quality, and there had been other signs of hope which tended to hide the now obvious fact that he was simultaneously drowning in New Age fanatasies.
The point I finally had to accept that we had a problem, was when I came home from a business meeting to discover, in his quest to explore his psychic powers without electrical interference, he had thrown all the circuit breakers, killing the server and worksatations we run at home without even thinking of shutting them down first.
Even then we gave him another 48 hours to regain some semblance of self management before we finally and still reluctantly embarked on his one way trip to the hospital
Some of this disinformation really can be a health hazard and might need to start being labeled acccordingly, including The Matrix and a lot of Disney Channel programming
-- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
OK- I like Disinfo. Yes, it can be uneven, but at least it covers stuff that the 'mainstream' won't touch. Stuff like Magick, various subcultures, religion, philosophy- lots of brain food to pick through. And I like the links so generously placed within the texts. They have often led me to many wonderful discoveries and philosophies.
There are also other interesting, off the beaten path publishers, like AlterNet.org. They write about stuff that mainstreamers ignore, and have a stable of very interesting writers, like Michael Moore and Starhawk, for example.
I prefer not to imbibe the spoonfed pap the mainstream gives me- it is the news equivalent of fast food, full of empty thought, lots of 'filler', but not much brain food. Thinking for oneself is rapidly becoming a lost art, which suits the commercial interests just fine. "Hey," they tell us- "Relax, we'll think for you. Just buy this." And the sheep go along with it, straight to the shearer.
The internet is full of wonderful and stupid things- and it is up to us to discriminate between them. That takes an unfettered intelligence, not wooly thinking. Sadly, wooly, knee-jerk thinking is becoming the norm, rather than the exception.
I have never let my schooling interfere with my education. --Mark Twain
I Don't get it. My page is no wider than it has ever been? Can someone explain?
Slashdot has a new advertisement.
Patche says, "You will attract more flies with honey than vinegar... but who wants flies?
Its now clear why this article was posted. Mr Katz is referenced in their book as a wise point of view on the Columbine incident.
The good news is, slashdot is also mentioned a couple of times.
Quick review of the book: mostly tired old conspiracy theories. There are indeed some interesting articles. You just need a lot of tolerance to conspiracy gobblygook to get to them.
Like digging through manure to find truffles or something. Noam Chomsky's opener is pretty good. The wild ramblings about suicidal and megalomanical Howard Bloom entertained me. Most of the conspiracy bits like the one about JFK make you feel real ripped off.
Get a keyboard where the "One" (1) key isn't broken, or... FUCKING LEARN TO TYPE, you bloody moron!
Christian R. Conrad
mail me at iki.fi ; same user ID as here