Slashdot Mirror


Television Reloaded

theodp writes "The TV times, they are a-changing. Over at Newsweek, Steven Levy offers a serious tome on the future of television, including time-shifting ("people will follow schedules only for real-time events like sports and election night"), space-shifting ("Now that you've stored your show on a TiVo, it's only logical to take it with you on your laptop, hand-held viewer or PSP game player") and the move from broadcast TV to broadband TV. Meanwhile, Conan O'Brien lightens things up with his own vision of the TV future ("Toddlers' bowls will have a television at the bottom, and children will be encouraged to eat all of their mush so they can see Morley Safer.")."

9 of 241 comments (clear)

  1. TELEVISION IS TEH NEW GOOGLE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Why is slashdot so obsessed with television in the last six months or so?

  2. Cowboyneal stole my toaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    And he ate ALL THE FOOD

  3. Newsweek lied; people died by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Newsweek erred, let's attack the bloggers

    Journalism professor Chris Hanson begins his piece in the Washington Post by taking Newsweek to task for its handling of the Koran-gate story. However, he quickly shifts his criticism to conservative blogs, and then implies that Drudge (which he calls a blog of sorts) is the real cause of Newsweek's error.

    Hanson's attempt to portray bloggers' handling of the Dan Rather and Eason Jordan stories as particularly noteworthy instances of the rumor-mongering that got Newsweek into trouble is preposterous. In the case of Rather, bloggers carefully examined every facet of the document-authenticity issue -- the document format, style, and substance -- before reaching their conclusion, to which CBS had no answer. Hanson claims that "no one has demonstrated conclusively whether the documents are fake." That depends, I suppose, on what one accepts as a conclusive demonstration. But for present purposes, the point is that, unlike Newsweek, bloggers presented the available evidence carefully, systematically, and openly. If no one has come forward to admit forging the documents, that's not the fault of bloggers.

    The same basic analysis applies to the Eason Jordan story. Bloggers interviewed everyone present for Jordan's remarks who was willing to discuss them. They also pressed for the tape of the proceedings, but to no avail. Bloggers laid out openly everything they learned. Contrary to Hanson's assertion, rumor and conjecture never blurred. The entire process was transparent. The absence of complete certainty is not the same thing as rumor-mongering, especially when it results, as happened in the Jordan case, from the unwillingness of an organization to release a tape.

    I wonder whether Hanson teaches his journalism students that Watergate and the role of journalists in that affair are still open issues because no one ever proved conclusively that Rosemary Woods didn't erase the famous tape by accident.

    Mark Tapscott, the excellent "reformed" journalist, has more on Hanson's piece, including the observation that Hanson's analysis inadvertently shows "why the MSM is probably wholly incapable of arresting its two-decade slide from one of America's most respected institutions to one of its most discredited, or of even grasping the reasons underlying that slide."

  4. Re:Future? How about Present. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Nice guess, it's indeed Gallium, as a google search will confirm you.
    --
    All 1663 scanned ports on localhost (127.0.0.1) are: closed

  5. Re:On-demand is the future, today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    As someone who works in the security field and comes across hacked systems all the time, I'll believe they give a damn when they start returning my calls. Sounds like PR to get someone more funding. Trying to get someone at the FBI to care when you come across bot networks at an ISP, bank, or even a power company is next to impossible.

  6. Re:Newsweek never makes mistakes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Well, why not whine about that gay now mean homosexual and not jolly or that spam should only used to descripe some kind of food.


    --
    HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?

  7. Re:On-demand is the future, today. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Harmless? No. In either case, a compromised system should be fully audited and rebuilt, barring certainty about the limits of potential damage. Any information that passed through that system also has to be considered compromised with potentially widespread effect. That costs non-trivial time and money.
    --
    -- Only the dead have seen the end of war.

  8. Re:Toddler Bowls by Limburgher · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hee hee. You've got one too, huh? :)

    --

    You are not the customer.

  9. Re:On-demand is the future, today. by NanoGator · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    What? What'd I say about security?

    --
    "Derp de derp."