jena 6, big box bloggers 0

cross-posted at skippy and a veritable cornucopia of other community blogs. via jon swift guesting at c&l, we find pam's house blend having a quite astute realization that none, that would be zero, zip, zilch, nada, goose egg, null set, absence of anything, of the big box blogs have had anything to say about the jena 6: chris kromm of the institute for southern studies and its blog facing south, is appalled, rightfully so, at the sparse coverage of the historic march for justice in jena, lousiana. it's not to say that it isn't being covered in the blogosphere at all -- black bloggers have largely been responsible for the high profile of this case, picking up the ball where the melanin-challenged blogs of influence have dropped it. you'd think that the events today, which are being covered by the msm, would mean that the story is now mainstream blogworthy, but you would be wrong. chris: dailykos features a handful of posts about injustice in iraq today -- but not a single entry on its main page, or even its user-generated "diaries," about this important case. talkingpointsmemo, a favorite of the dc wonk set, is similarly incensed about foreign policy, but apparently not about racial justice in the south -- nothing there either. long-time progressive blogger atrios doesn't have a lot of posts up,but found time to touch on paul krugman, iraq and the state of the euro -- but not this major issue. surely talkleft -- which has positioned itself as the leading progressive blog about criminal justice issues -- would have something? think again -- not a single mention, not even in the quick news briefs! what about another progressive favorite, firedoglake? a rant about republicans being "little bitches," but nothing on the jena 6. when the jena 6 does make an appearance on progressive blogs today, it's little more than a passing nod. huffington post has a blog post buried below the fold; thinkprogress gives it a two-sentence news brief. [ed. note: the today pam refers to is last thursday, the day of the huge march and demonstration in jena] however, many of these blogs are eagerly pointing to news stories which suggest the republican candidates don't care about black issues. [btw, nothing's up at americablog either, to be fair. my guest blogging stint is by and large up.] what is the explanation? oh, i could think of several, but overt racism isn't one of them. i have a couple of theories. her theories are not kind (not that they should be), but worthy of thought. we suggest you go read her rant en toto (and dorothy, too), and the comments left thereon. we admit we were late to the party ourselves, at first employing the instapundit excuse (duh! too complicated fer our little brains! hyuk! hyuk!), but then we found (via susie madrak) the great background piece by gil kaufman on mtv news, which was succinct, thorough, well-laid out, and easy to follow. (commenters on pam's blog also point out msnbc's piece, also quite comprehensive.) now, it is, to be fair, 4 days after the massive march, but some of those big box blogs have jumped on the bandwagon: talkleft has three posts, including one "jena six thread"; c&l, our fav bbb, has seven posts, three of which are blog round-up compilations, all guested by non-staff members [ed. note: it turns out blue gal has been promoted to front page status at c&l, making our assertion of "guested by non-staff members" wrong, and our congratulations to her overdue]; tpm has one, count 'em, one story, about how fred thompson is out of the loop on the jena six (hello, pot? this is kettle...) tpm cafe has one; dkos (aside from the facing south cross-post pam alluded to) has three front page stories which include the words "jena six," two of which are open threads (but several, upwards to 50, diaries by members, including some asking why blogtopia* is so lax about this story); fdl has one story, but at least it is from the ground at jena, and pam reports that jane told her there were technical difficulties getting the report from the blogger in jena; huffpo cross-posted susie's piece, and had another post; way down at the bottom of the list, americablog has zero, still; and, to a lesser extent, duncan. go back to the comments section on pam's house blend and there you will find plenty of smaller blogs plugging their own efforts. it does seem to us that here the smaller entities in blogtopia* have picked up the ball dropped by the bbb. another reason to keep clicking those links to the esoteric blogs you've never heard of before. now, we're not about to accuse anybody in blogtopia* of unconscious bigotry. that would be easy. and we hate unconscious bigots. we'll never rent to them, or let them into our schools. but it seems to us, that if we are to call ourselves progressives, it behooves us all to make the extra effort to be inclusive. and for god's sake, how hard can that be in this case? all you have to do is do some reading, and make a frickin' link, and voila! your readers become a little more aware of a tragic situation that the mmm is refusing to delve deeply into. *and yes, we coined that phrase!

Howard Dean on the power of the internet

More from Howard Dean's Yearly Kos keynote address. Part 1 can be found here. Howard Dean: Now, I want to say a few things about the net. This is an extraordinary thing, and, speaking for myself, even after the campaign four years ago, I didn't realize what a powerful tool this is. This is the most extraordinary invention for empowering ordinary people since the invention of the printing press in the `400s. It really is. It has re-democratized America. There is an enormous shift in power. I thought the YouTube/CNN debate was sensational. And why was it sensational? That is the first time since the Nixon-Kennedy debates when ordinary people, not members of the media, but ordinary people in large numbers got to ask in front of a national television audience, any question that they could dream up. Censored of course by the CNN people, but I know the person who did this. He's about 26 years old, and he basically did, I thought, a pretty good job, putting up a generation of questions that were direct and directly from people's hearts and minds, aimed at the candidates. Put them on the spot--I thought, frankly, some of those questions were a lot tougher than what the media would have asked. But even if it was tougher or not as tough, the point is, it got the exchange outside the cozy realm of the beltway and put it out in the rest of Ameria, where it belongs. (Cheers and applause.) It's okay to make politicians a little uncomfortable--it's good for us! And what a surprise that the Republicans don't want to do it. (Laughter.) It turns out that as the influence of the internet expands, both by more and more people using it, and by the extraordinary innovations--remember, YouTube essentially did not exist when I was running four years ago. And today, without YouTube and the people who use it, we would not have a Democratic majority in the United States Senate. (Applause.) That is true. So, what this party is about is change and evolution, and that's not not easy. There are forces of resistance even inside the Democratic party--I know that would surprise you! (Laughter.) But this party is about evolution. This party is about the future, the other party is about the past. Look at who they have running for president--doesn't that look like something out of the 1950s? Look who we have running for president! (Applause and cheers.) The fact of the matter is, it shouldn't be true, but it is a revolutionary idear to have the public taking over the agenda of campaigns and political parties had better get used to it, because they are going to lose and become irrelevant if they don't get used to it. The power in campaigns belongs as much to shifting networks of committed citizens as it does to the political establishment. And in the long run, community-built networks will have a more dramatic effect in bringing democracy to both America and to creating democracy where it doesn't exist now--I predict now, that because of the net, and because of the extraordinary binding of the world together, that Iran and China one day will have to decide that they have to become democracies, simply because they are forced to by the extraordinary devolution of power to their citizens because of the internet. (Applause.) Nations run by authoritarian forces will not stop the dynamic of technologically enabled citizens working together. Hundreds of thousands of networking citizens will find ways to circumvent and evade government interference in the free exchange of idears, as we have already demonstrated in the United States. Repressive governments at the helms of nations that would become world or regional powers, face a difficult choice. They can allow democracy to evolve and flourish on the internet, or they can destroy the technology that enables their best and brightest and most determined citizens to network, and that will cause them to fall back into third world status. So, we can still win the battle for a democratic world. It will not happen by sending troops to Iraq to establish democracy at the barrel of a gun. (Applause.) The truth is that the most important weapon in the struggle for world democracy is a free and open, commercially and politically unfettered internet that empowers ordinary people from across the globe to speak and act in the interest of their own communities. (Cheers and applause.) When I started as Chairman of the DNC, I said that Democrats had to show up everywhere and campaign everywhere, and ask for everybody's vote. And that includes the way we interact with communities online. In the Democratic party we're focussed on connection, empowerment, and community organizing. And I'm incredibly proud that our candidates have begun to change with the times. We are running what I call two-way campaigns. That is, we're using technology to start a dialog and engage ordinary Americans. Traditional campaigns have relied on enormous amounts of TV advertising, 30 second spots, aimed at you, telling you what we think, and what we think you ought to do. The new campaign, the two-way campaign is, we listen to you before we start talking, and we, throughout the campaign, have a dialog between the people whose votes we're hoping to get, asking for their advice as we go through, and taking it to heart. This is not a gimmick or a "schmooze" as we call it in the trade. This means real two-way campaigns where the views and opinions of the American people have an impact on the leadership, so leaders are with the people instead of seeking to lead folks that aren't interested in being led by them. (Applause.) It is an extraordinary evolution. An extraordinary evolution. Essentially it means that politicians have to acknowledge something that's been true for a long time. Which is, power is loaned to us--we don't own the power, and we need to earn the power every two years. (Applause.) Taking a break from transcribing to do some family stuff. May transcribe more later, depending on whether my Sitemeter indicates that the effort is of value to people.

Creating our own ladder

This morning I attended a Yearly Kos session entitled "Evolution and Integration of the Blogosphere", a self-congratulatory panel moderated by Chris Bowers (late of MyDD), featuring Tracy Russo (blogger for John Edwards' campaign), Ali Savino (Center for Independent Media), the Big Blue Smurf, Amanda Turkel (ThinkProgress), Amanda Marcotte (Pandagon), and Matt Stoller (late of MyDD). I can't say I didn't anticipate the self-congratulatory, "holding court" atmosphere of this session, but what struck me was the similarity between the "We're successful because we work really hard and if you work as hard as we do you can be successful too" message that those who were early adopters of the blog format convey and the "I got mine and fuck you" attitude of Republicans. The so-called "top-tier" bloggers have been defensive of late at having been accused of running a closed shop. At this panel, that defensiveness was very much in evidence, enhanced by the "panel on the podium talking to the assembled masses layout of the room. I thought my head would explode when Tracy Russo opined that the reason they have been successful is because they work very hard to get where they are. When you think about some of those bloggers lurking just below the top tier, people like Driftglass and the Group News Blog folks, the idea that hard work is what makes bloggers successful (and by implication, those who are still trying to achieve traction are slackers) is like saying that Warren Buffett is more successful than the average family living in the projects because he works harder. Isn't this illusion of meritocracy and this notion that it's ALL about hard work the very thing we knock when Republicans advocate against a social safety net? Don't we rail against Republicans for insisting that the reason you can no longer afford to pay your mortgage isn't because you had to train your H-1B replacement and you are over 50 and can't find another job but because you simply aren't trying hard enough? Isn't a certain degree of collectivism and sharing part of progressive philosophy? So for a progressive blogger to claim "It's all because we work harder than you do" in a room full of bloggers, is breathtaking. To be fair, later on in the session, lip service was given to the notion of outreach, but it's clear that the belief that because there is no formal central authority who decides who makes it and who doesn't there is no elitism among bloggers is preposterous. Chris Bowers loves to joke about "We all take our orders from Markos", but his voice drips with condescension towards the Great Unwashed Masses as he does so. The other topic discussed was whether the individual blog has gone the way of the dodo -- another meme that has been given a lot of air of late. I wrote movie reviews online for seven years, and in the heyday of online film criticism, we faced the same issues -- whether an individual reviewer could generate enough content to make a viable site. Online film criticism evolved from many individual sites to group collective sites. Gabriel (ModFab) and I started Mixed Reviews from two individual sites, but later on we added two more critics. Anyone reviewing movies online was sooner or later asked to "gain exposure" by writing for another startup online magazine -- no payment, just "links and exposure." Now, with political blogging, history is repeating itself. Earlier this year, WNBC in New York fed shrimp to a few hundred bloggers offering to provide "links and exposure" in exchange for bloggers providing content to General Electric. Group blogs are running around here recruiting contributors, saying "We need content." Of course they do. Ever-changing content is required to generate the traffic that generates ad revenue. But I think it's dangerous to buy into the meme that it is somehow OK to give away your work in exchange for some vague promise of "links and exposure." The reason that the Heathers in a high school have power is because those not in that inner circle bestow power upon them by longing to enter the club. The reality is that most of us aren't going to make a living blogging. We will continue to have to work a real job, take care of kids, pay the mortgage on time, and other mundane aspects of life. So we have to decide for whom it is we blog, and why we blog. I blog because for me, writing is like breathing. If I stop doing one, I may stop doing the other. I blog so that people I know who may not read other blogs see the stories they may not find elsewhere. I blog to keep my sanity. I blog because not to do so is unthinkable. I blog because by writing, I come across other writers who visit this blog who blow me away with their talent. And THAT is what lower-tier bloggers ought to be doing. Forget about the big boys. You're never going to be invited to play golf with the CEO and you're never going to be in their club. Decide why you blog, and help out other bloggers who deserve greater recognition. Blog because you love it. Don't blog for ad revenue, or for recognition by the famous, or because you want your name on the masthead of a group blog. If you want a blog that reflects your own identity, don't let anyone talk you into giving that up so you can be part of a group blog where someone else makes a living. On Sunday, I'll be inviting five or six people to guestblog for me at Brilliant at Breakfast from August 11-17. Those who aren't selected shouldn't think it's because their work is lacking. I'm just another mid-tier blogger who isn't going to have computer access for a week. Frankly, I'm thrilled that there have been so many people who want to guestblog. Part of my mission is to recognize writers I think are good so that the few hundred people who visit here every day will consider visiting them too. My eyes are always open. And that's a promise. (Cross-posted at Brilliant at Breakfast)

socal drinking liberally, starring digby!

cross-posted at skippy and a veritable cornucopia of other community blogs. last night skippy enjoyed the company of some of the finest bloggers in southern california at the quarterly drinking liberally get-together at the famous cock and bull pub in santa monica. the event was coordinated by skippy's buddy d-day, who is working closely w/the calitics team to promote end of the quarter fund-raising (tho readers of this space know how skippy feels about giving money to dems). economic agendas aside, however, it was a fine night of fellowship and interpersonal real-time physical space blogging, which used to be called "conversation" in the old school. among the many friends there that skippy was happy to see: our good buddy steveaudio and his lovely wife pam; john of crooks&liars (tho skippy was disappointed that nicole belle of same was not in attendance); our old co-blogger rj eskow (actually, he's not that old, at least, not any older than skippy); and the prolific thereisnospoon and hekebolos. but the queen of the ball was none other than the guest of honor, digby herself. since "coming out" as the premiere blogger who no longer needs pseudonymity, digby has been making personal appearances more than donald trump, or so it seems. it was delightful to finally meet digby, as digby and skippy have been supporting each other's blogging efforts since the old days, back before anyone even knew what the word "blog" was. skippy remarked that while they weren't pioneers, they were early settlers, and digby said her husband would call them "early adapters," a silicone valley reference. many new faces were also present, and it was a testament to the liberal cause of democracy, and to a lesser extent, alcoholism. a great time was had by all. on a personal note, skippy personally thanked john amato for starting the tradition of nightly music on blogs, which skippy unabashedly stole from c&l. but john said it's ok. addendum: d-day has some pics of the event up over at calitics.

Why blogging matters

Last night I posted "What does it mean to be a blogger?" in response to a piece by Jerid of Buckeye State Blog (currently blogging from New Hampshire) entitled "Don't Tell Obama You Blog". Since then, Jerid has described positive interactions with Obama's staff (see his remarks at the end of this post) Do check out some of the comments in the "Don't tell..." post to see what some of the concerns might be about admitting bloggers to such an event. In particular, one commenter suggested that maybe the candidate wanted to have an open discussion about faith with people who didn't want their opinions broadcast across the universe? maybe they didn't want their pictures taken. maybe they didn't want to be quoted. Yeah, I can see that. In particular, the thought of some blogger snapping an unflattering picture of me, posting it on the internet, and me not being able to do a dang thing about it. It would be nice to have some assurance that people would have the decency not to do that. Maybe someone can answer this for me--are there any rules for "real" news media with regard to getting consent before publishing someone's image and/or words? As a blogger, I don't really consider myself to be "press", but the "real" corporate press does have something to do with why I blog, and this goes back long before I was annoyed by the slanted coverage of the Dean campaign. I used to participate in a program called Parents as Teachers. The program's headquarters were in a building that used to be a public high school, but at that point in time housed a number of continuing education and career and job search prep programs. There was this little resource center room which was childproofed and had books for parents and age-appropriate toys for infants and toddlers. I can't tell you what a blessing it was to have such a place available to me when my kids were that age. I was feeling pretty isolated during the day at home, but the logistics of taking an infant and a toddler out *anywhere* by myself were sometimes daunting enough that they often *did* keep me home. The program also included (if you desired) home visits from a resource person who specialized in early childhood education. About once a month, she would come by with an activity or two to show us, and would give me a few printed handouts about "what to expect" at a given age. Having taken child development courses, and having devoured plenty of parenting books, I could have gotten by just fine without the handouts. But I really appreciated the social connection, and the reality check that the things I was dealing with really *were* par for the course for a parent of small children. And one more thing...this program, unlike a lot of programs out there, was not aimed at "high risk" families. Nor was it designed for low income families. It was just a little bit of that "village" that makes raising a child a bit easier, especially for a new parent who didn't live near family or in a neighborhood filled with other young parents that the kids and I could hang out with. This is where the press comes into the scene. You may have wondered where I was going with all of this, but it was necessary to try to give you a flavor of what sort of program this was, and what it meant to me before moving on to the part about the media. One day a reporter from a Columbus news station came to the resource center to do a segment on the place. It was clear pretty early on that the reporter had some preconceived notions. I later heard from the woman who did our home visits that he kept asking her questions like, "So, everybody here comes from a broken family?" No, she emphasized, again and again. Nor is everyone here financially needy, or a teenage mother, or...or...or... It didn't do a bit of good. That evening, Demetrius and I watched our local newscast, and were treated to the image of myself playing with little Son and Daughter in Ohio, accompanied by the voice of the reporter saying something to the effect that "This center is especially important to people from broken homes, who lack good role models for parenting. " Nice. All of this took place more than 10 years ago, and the specific details are a bit hazy at this point. But I do recall Demetrius voicing his displeasure that his wife and children were portrayed in that sort of light. My response? Well, it didn't bother me right away. I wasn't especially embarrassed or anything like that. But the more I thought about the portrayal, not of me, but of the demographic served by Parents as Teachers, the more I found it offensive. Because the message really seemed to be, "You see this place? This is a special service that is made available to the poor, sad, clueless people who would be lost--LOST, I tell you--without it." So, on the one hand, the resource center was getting some publicity. And that could have been a good thing. Sometimes there is a resource right in your own back yard that would be a big help if only you were aware that it existed. I loved the idea of making more people aware of that program. Parenting is a job for which most of us get precious little training--people from *all* walks of life, not just "people from broken homes, who lack good role models". But I wonder how many people automatically dismissed the program as something that is only for "those" people. How many people, who *could* have found that center to be a real blessing in those early years as a first-time parent, never even considered looking into it due to way that report was "spun". I know we can all think of more egregious and damaging examples of media bias. Certainly, the media's complicity in helping Bush sell the invasion of Iraq to the American public was one of the biggies. But more mundane examples, like the one I described above, are significant in their own way. They certainly are capable, for better or worse, of impacting the lives of ordinary people. Back then, blogging the other side of the story was not an option I had available to me. I can't tell you how grateful I am that we now have this medium at our disposal. And that, when we work together, we have the ability to "set the record straight" in ways that can make a real, positive difference for people.

iraq hits home with a blogger

laura linger, who writes sack of monkeys in my pocket, posts her tragic journey with her family as she finds out that her brother was killed in iraq earlier this month. our deepest sympathies, laura.

Thank you, Roger Ebert

Also at My Left Wing, Street Prophets, and Booman Tribune I wasn't planning to try to write anything tonight, given that I'm tired from working overtime all week and am preparing to attend the consecration of our new bishop. But Roger Ebert has gone and made me admire him again. I suppose some background is in order... Back in the year 2000, when the movie 102 Dalmatians was coming out, my big issue was dog rescue/humane education. Simpler times, remember? Bush had not yet taken office and made such a pig's ear of this country, so I wasn't into any sort of political activism at that point. But, being involved in a local animal rescue organization, I had become aware that a big reason dogs end up being surrendered by their owners is that the decision to add a pet to the family is often made too lightly. And with Disney's live-action Dalmatian movie coming out, people in the rescue community were bracing for a rash of "impulse adoptions" of the spotted dogs. Which would be followed, inevitably, some months later, by a rash of owner surrenders because "It just didn't work out." I don't even recall how I got the idea, but at some point it occurred to me that Roger Ebert would probably be writing a review of the movie, so why not drop him a note asking him to address this issue when he did? So I found his e-mail address, wrote to him, and in less than an hour received a quick note back, which read "I'll see if it fits." As it turns out, it did fit. And I'm pretty sure that I wrote to him and thanked him at that time. But I don't think I've ever put into words what that meant to me to have someone with such a large audience take my request seriously. That early positive experience of calling on someone who had a big enough "soapbox" to be heard and potentially make a difference is a significant event in my life story. And it was certainly on my mind as I became more involved in blogging. About blogging...it's easy to get burned out, isn't it? Or at least to have those days when you wonder, "What's the point?" or "Am I really making a difference?" Well, I don't imagine I'll ever be able to completely banish those rough times, but I'll tell you what helps keep them at bay. *Really celebrating* the good stuff--especially those moments when we make a real human connection. Like the time, after the Washington Post article was published, Maryscott wrote: One little old lady sitting at her kitchen table alone in Virginia stopped feeling so alone yesterday because of something I did; that is enough. I remember reading those words, and thinking, "A-freaking-men!" Because, that is what it's all about, and we'd be wise not to let each other forget it. .... The article that inspired this post is well worth reading. Ebert: We spend too much time hiding illness Originally, that article was going to be the focus of my post, but once I started writing, it turned into something else. And, almost seven years later, the "Thank you" was long overdue.

Markos, are you *man enough* to apologize?

I haven't read Daily Kos for a few days, but this post by skippy caught my attention: shorter kos: come on, gals! take it like a man! markos weighs in on kathy sierra, the techie blogger who has been anonymously harrassed to the point of cancelling professional appearances out of fear for her own safety. Click here for the rest, and here for Steven D's post at Booman Tribune. It was from that post that I learned that the fear for her safety was due to receiving *death and rape threats*. Steven D also links to a number of other blog posts about the issue. I don't have much to add, other than the comment that *real* men aren't afraid to apologize. Real men have the courage to willingly say "my bad" when they screw up. You know who *does* have trouble doing that? I'll give you a hint...his middle initial rhymes with "Trouble you". Update: Steven D has a diary at Kos asking Why the lack of concern for Kathy Sierra? Yes, I'm breaking my own rule about not linking to Blogmart, but I've decided it would be worth it to helped the issue hit the recommended list on Markos' own blog.

the wizard of kos

cross-posted at skippy and a veritable cornucopia of other community blogs. we know that several, if not a plurality of you out there, think that our contant harping on the blogroll purges of the big box blogs is not only boring and unseemingly, but it's just plain juvenile. upyernoz specfically defends anybody who wants to shape their blogroll in any way they want. and that's a point that is not easily refuted. this is america, after all, and we believe that the founding fathers actually foresaw blogs and blogrolls in the future of this country when they added the first amendment to the constitution. ("i tell you, adams, all blockquotes are created equal!") let us assume that our audience is right, and this meta talk about getting unceremoniously dumped off of big rolls is indeed boring and unseemly. we apologize for that part. however, we maintain that discussion of the massive purges is anything but juvenile (well, maybe the name-calling part). our good buddy liberalcatnip has forwarded to us proof that inclusion on "high quality" blogrolls adds greatly to the chance that a blog post will be recognized by the google search engines. from internet marketing and search engines optimization research and services (seo by the sea): first step involved in deciding a quality score has the search engine obtaining information about a blog document. that information may be from: the blog itself, the post, metadata from the blog, and/or; one or more feeds associated with the blog document. the next step is to identify positive indicators of quality: popularity of the blog, implied popularity of the blog, inclusion of the blog in blogrolls, existence of the blog in high quality blogrolls, tagging of the blog, references to the blog by other sources, a pagerank of the blog, and; other indicators could also be used. what google says about each of those: popularity popularity could be based upon news aggregator subscriptions: a blog document having a high number of subscriptions implies a higher quality for the blog document. also, subscriptions can be validated against “subscriptions spam” (where spammers subscribe to their own blog documents in an attempt to make them “more popular”) by validating unique users who subscribed, or by filtering unique internet protocol (ip) addresses of the subscribers. implied popularity instead of explicit subscriptions, an “implied popularity” could be calculated from data collected from people searching on blog search, and examining the click stream of search results: for example, if a certain blog document is clicked more than other blog documents when the blog document appears in result sets, this may be an indication that the blog document is popular and, thus, a positive indicator of the quality of the blog document. inclusion of the blog in blogrolls blogrolls are a dense collection of links to external sites (usually other blogs) in which the author/blogger is interested. a blogroll link to a blog document is an indication of popularity of that blog document, so aggregated blogroll links to a blog document can be counted and used to infer magnitude of popularity for the blog document. existence of the blog in high quality blogrolls a high quality blogroll is a blogroll that links to well-known or trusted bloggers. therefore, a high quality blogroll that also links to the blog document is a positive indicator of the quality of the blog document. this is also based upon the assumption that a well-known or trusted blogger would not link to a “spamming blogger.” [emphasis, and righteous indignation, ours.] the article goes on, discussing other factors such as tagging of the post, position of the post on the page, etc. it's very interesting and written so non-techie schlubs like us can understand it. the bottom line is, there is no way that markos, being the i t guy that he is, didn't take into consideration the effect his roll purge would have on search engine result placement for liberal blogtopia (y!wctp!) in general. and this brings us back to our original point which we tried to make back in february when the the fiasco began. if markos, and to a lesser extent, duncan, had only dumped skippy’s humble site from their rolls, we would not be bringing the matter up over and over and over and over and over again. we would have pouted, and swore to never mention their names again, and bought some dryer's slow churned cookies n' cream and complained to ourselves how little we get back in return for the literally minutes we spend, every day, copying and pasting other people's work from legitimate news organs and then making snarky remarks about it. but what markos, and to a lesser extent, duncan, did was to injure liberal blogtopia (y!wctp!) as a whole in the arena of national media availability. it was, among others, jon swift who pointed out that the conservative blogs are ironically quite liberal with their blogroll links. and, when google searching any number of stories, you may notice that more often than not there appears a higher number of conservative (vs. liberal) blogs in the search results. now you know why. and now you know why we continue to make a fuss about the blogroll purge. it doesn't just hurt our feelings. it hurts liberal blogs' ability to be recognized in daily news searches. and techie markos would have had to have known this, if we can use the passive-aggressive voice. we have, we are sure you are glad to hear, nothing left to say about this (tho we reserve the right to kvetch later on). we want to, however, announce the addition of liberal catnip to skippy's blogroll, in our continuing amnesty day program. remember, unlike some blogs, if you link to skippy, skippy will link to you!

three reasons to give three cheers to blogtopia! and yes! we coined that phrase!

cross-posted at skippy and a veritable cornucopia of other community blogs. we have noticed, as of late, a disheartening trend in various comments and blog posts around blogtopia (y!wctp!). several writers have seemingly fallen into the dumps because things are not progressing as progressively as progressives would like. they cite the dems' refusal to discuss impeachment, the iraq defunding which looks to be dead in the water, and the general tendency of those in charge to ignore the common citizens they are supposedly hired by to run things. however, we here at skippy international are feeling pretty good about things, and we wish that the rest of you in blogtopia (y!wctp!) would join us. after all, there are several major accomplishments that have come to fruition recently, all of which were done, if not completely, then certainly with major efforts, by the netroots. to start with, blogs and bloggers really came into their own as true-to-life journalists with the libby trial. thanks to the kids at firedoglake, and to marcy wheeler (also known as "emptywheel"...and maybe some day she'll explain what the hell that screen name means), as well as swopa of medianeedle, jerlayn merritt of talkleft and margie burns for bradblog (plus others we have surely missed, and our apologies if we have), the idea of blogs as actual journalism came into existence. where before blogs were seen mainly as an outlet for cranky powerless people to whine, suddenly it was proven that they could be used as an outlet for cranky powerless people to disseminate information on a national level at a level far deeper and wider in scope than any electronic media, and most dead trees media. dan froomkin, and admitted fan of blogs, said on a washpost.com q&a: i think what firedoglake.com did with this trial was not just impressive, it was transformative. by offering the public live-blogging of this very important trial, you not only put the msm to shame, but actually became a must-read for journalists who couldn't attend the trial, but wanted to get a better and faster sense of what was going on than they could from their own colleagues. i'm not saying that the msm should emulate everything bloggers do -- far from it -- but the blogosphere's enthusiasm for this story was something to behold, and admire. now, we here at skippy international had little to do with the libby coverage, short of a recurring photoshop, but just the very fact that several blogs made history by making journalism with this story should be an inspiration to everyone in blogtopia (y!wctp!). this post is far too long to take up any more room here at iba. you can find two more reasons to give three cheers, as well as tons of pithy analysis, available at skippy.

Accidental leadership

This excerpt comes from a particularly insightful comment by madscientist Causes left and right tend to spawn leaders, sometimes by accident. They may been someone who is in the right place at the right time. They may particularly devoted to a cause. They may become some uber-leader's boyfriend. Sometimes they just begin to be looked on as a leader. (I have no idea if any of these is true of markos.) All too often, these leaders begin to notice that people listen to them, that they have some small power. Sometimes, the new leader begins to bask in the power, or to enjoy the adulation. Or both. And sometimes, when this is the case, he uses this to create more power and/or adulation, and those who have enjoyed his leadership are only too glad to give it to him. All too often, this becomes a "cult of personality." When this happens, the freedom of thought in the cult (as it now becomes) is narrowed, and a premium is put on being with the leader. often a sort of priesthood edvolves whih not only seeks to be close to the leader, but also to be the favored to get any new dogma. then they go about making sure that everyone knows the new dogma. They often admonish or punish those with last weeks dogma. This serves to isolate the leader from the negativity somewhat, and serves his status as a cult figure. Unrest is often aimed at the second in command, who can often go mad with their petty power. Others, in this situation, try to become a priest by simply choosing to act as a dogma (or rule, unwritten or otherwise) monitor, hoping to thereby be elevated to priest. Read the full comment here.