BY DAN
KENNEDY
Notes and observations on
the press, politics, culture, technology, and more. To sign up for
e-mail delivery, click
here. To send
an e-mail to Dan Kennedy, click
here.
For bio, published work, and links to other blogs, visit
www.dankennedy.net.
For information on Dan Kennedy's book, Little People: Learning to
See the World Through My Daughter's Eyes (Rodale, October 2003),
click
here.
Saturday, January 25, 2003
Resistance is futile. A
little over a week ago I posted an item on a
software dilemma. After
years of a pretty much Microsoft-free existence, my book editor was
asking me to switch to Microsoft Word so that we could use the "Track
Changes" editing feature.
I did some experimenting to see
whether I could avoid such a calamity, but to no avail. His "Track
Changes" comments did not survive the arduous journey from Word to
AppleWorks when I translated his documents with MacLinkPlus. Another
option -- an inexpensive alternative called ThinkFree
Office, which is supposed
to be Microsoft-compatible -- was even worse. Even allowing for the
distinct possibility that I was doing something wrong, I could find
no sign that ThinkFree supported "Track Changes."
I received some e-mails from
readers, and they broke down into two camps. One side argued that,
though they sympathized with my anti-Microsoft stance (admittedly
somewhat tongue-in-cheek, since I do, after all, own a few shares of
Microsoft), MS Word was nevertheless a pretty cool program. The
other, more militant side suggested I check out open-source
alternatives.
Tempting as the militants' vision
may have been, I decided that the time had come, at long last, to get
with the program, so to speak. I managed to pick up a legal version
of MS Office 2001 for Macintosh on eBay for a little more than $200,
a huge savings over the $499 list price. I installed it yesterday,
and, well, here I am. I write Media Log with a
long-since-discontinued program called Claris Home Page, which is now
close to being the only non-Microsoft software I use. Word, Excel,
Entourage, Internet Explorer (which was already my browser of choice)
... I mean, what the hell. The only thing left to do is ditch my
PowerBook G3 and pick up a Wintel laptop. (Not going to
happen.)
I'm rattling on about this because,
to me, it demonstrates perhaps the key ingredient of Microsoft's
success, which is, well, its success. Illegal monopolistic behavior
aside, the most important reason for me to use Word is not that I've
fallen in love with it (it is, in fact, a notably unlovable program),
but that everyone else uses it. No longer will editors have to waste
time reformatting stuff I send them. My book editor and I can
exchange "Track Changes" comments to our hearts' content.
It may be true that Microsoft's
monopoly has stifled innovation. But when you need to get things
done, innovation is less important than compatibility. And Bill Gates
has done more than anyone to ensure compatibility by crushing the
competition, by any means necessary. It ain't pretty, but it
works.
posted at 9:41 AM |
link
We don't need no education.
Hey, Mitt: Go ahead and cancel every last penny of state aid that
goes to the Medford Public Schools. If
they won't take it seriously,
why should the taxpayers? And how would you like to be the parent of
a Medford student, having to scramble for child care at the last
minute because superintendent of schools Roy Belson decided it would
be a neat idea to take the day off? One last question: Why is Belson
still employed?
posted at 9:41 AM |
link
Friday, January 24, 2003
Who smeared Scott Ritter?
Good interview with former UN weapons inspector Scott
Ritter on the website of
WRGB-TV (Channel 6) in Albany, New York. (I found the link through
OpinionJournal.com's "Best
of the Web," which is
enjoying Ritter's torment.)
In the past few days we've learned
that, in June 2001, Ritter
was arrested at a Burger
King and apparently charged with attempting to arrange a sexual
encounter with an underage girl he'd met on the Internet. According
to Ritter, the charges were dropped and the record of the case was
sealed. But that didn't stop someone from leaking the information at
a particularly inopportune time.
Here are a couple of key exchanges
with WRGB's Darcy Wells:
Q: Do you think this was
an attempt to silence you?
A: Again, I don't want to get
into that. I think that's a question that maybe you journalists
should delve into more.
...
Q: Who do you think leaked this
information?
A: I don't know, but whoever did
should be held accountable. I mean, I'm held accountable to the
rule of law. I was called forward. I stood before a
judge.
There has still barely been a word
about this in the national media. But the fact remains that someone
leaked sealed court documents about a leading (if misleading) critic
of the White House's Iraq policy on the eve of a likely military
invasion. Is anyone in the media going to get to the bottom of
this?
posted at 10:38 AM |
link
It's a dirty job, but somebody's
got to do it. Wow. In today's New York Times,
William
F. Buckley Jr. defends
affirmative action for the children of rich alumni, but not for
African-Americans. On the same page, Times columnist Nicholas
Kristof defends the affirmative-action policy that got a mediocre
student named George
W. Bush into Phillips
Andover Academy, and wonders why Bush can't understand that others
deserve the same opportunity. Hey, Bill: Read Kristof.
posted at 10:37 AM |
link
Thursday, January 23, 2003
Silencing an antiwar voice.
For the past year or so, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter has
claimed loudly and ceaselessly that Iraq had largely gotten rid of
its weapons of mass destruction before kicking out the inspectors in
1998. He hasn't been particularly effective. As the Phoenix's
Seth
Gitell has pointed out,
much of what Ritter now says contradicts his earlier statements, and
he has failed to articulate a convincing explanation for his
switch.
Richard Butler, who headed the
inspection team on which Ritter served and who emphatically does
not believe Iraq has disarmed, has been far more persuasive in
his joint television appearances with Ritter -- even as he asserts,
as he did on MSNBC's
Donahue last week,
that he agrees with Ritter that the United States has no right to
invade Iraq unilaterally.
Still, Ritter has been a visible
and articulate spokesman, as well as something of a rallying point
for those who oppose George W. Bush's apparent plan to launch a war
against Iraq. So it is curious, to say the least, to watch the latest
attempt to discredit him unfold.
Last night Ritter
appeared on CNN's NewsNight
not to talk about Iraq, but to answer questions about a very
different matter. It seems that, in June 2001, Ritter was arrested at
a Burger King near Albany, New York. I'm not sure why Ritter agreed
to go on CNN, since he resolutely refused to answer any questions
other than to say the charges had been dropped and the case has been
sealed. But, reportedly, Ritter was accused of seeking a rendezvous
with an underage girl whom he'd met on the Internet. If news reports
are to be believed, he was met not by a teenage girl, but by
undercover officers.
Ritter claimed he was barred from
discussing the matter, but the host, Aaron Brown, dismissed that.
Brown told Ritter that CNN had consulted legal authorities who
concluded that though the government was prohibited from talking
about a sealed case, Ritter, as the person who was arrested, was not.
But Ritter wouldn't budge. At one point Brown told Ritter:
I'm trying to give you an
opportunity, if you want to take it, to explain what happened. And
here's the point of that. And you know this is true. You are
radioactive until this is cleared up. Until people understand what
this is about, no one is going to talk to you about the things
that you feel passionately about.
Ritter disagree, replying that "the
bottom line is, the rule of law must apply here and we must never
lose sight of that. I think you hit on something. I was a credible
voice. I am a credible voice. And I will be a credible voice in
regards to issues pertaining to Iraq." Unfortuntely for Ritter,
that's probably wishful thinking.
For days, now, Ritter's
year-and-a-half-old arrest has been a cause célèbre
among the prowar right. The right-wing website FreeRepublic.com has
been all over this, passing along lurid
details from local news
reports. Ritter's troubles have been the subject of much clucking and
chuckling on Rush
Limbaugh's radio show as
well.
I hold no brief for Ritter. But the
fact that sealed police records regarding one of the country's most
prominent critics of Bush's policy in Iraq would be leaked -- days or
weeks before war may begin -- is absolutely chilling. Rather than
snickering at the hapless Ritter, the media could perform a far
greater public service by finding out who was behind this sickening
attempt to smear a White House foe.
posted at 9:21 AM |
link
Wednesday, January 22, 2003
A brilliant takedown of
SUVs. The New Republic published it a couple of weeks ago,
but only last night did I have a chance to sit down and read Gregg
Easterbrook's brilliant, entertaining, and only occasionally
overwrought essay on SUVs. Titled "Axle
of Evil," the piece is
notionally a review of Keith Bradsher's book High
and Mighty: SUVs -- The World's Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They
Got That Way.
But Easterbrook's essay takes on a
life of its own, from original sin (Richard Nixon's decision to
exempt Jeeps from environmental regulations; it always comes back to
Nixon, doesn't it?); to Arnold Schwarzenegger's role in making the
Humvee a commercial success ("The Hummer screams to the world the
words that stand as one of Schwarzenegger's signature achievements as
an actor: 'Fuck you, asshole!' Maybe this class of vehicles should be
called FUVs."); to Senate majority leader Bill Frist's heroic,
unsuccessful attempt to save the lives of two children in an
SUV-rollover accident ("Will Frist become an advocate of SUV reform,
or will he return to Washington and join his colleagues in the next
round of cover-ups and exemptions?").
Weirdly, the person who may be
damaged the most by Easterbrook's piece is Bradsher, even though his
book is described as "dazzling," in the tradition of Ralph Nader's
Unsafe at Any Speed and Ida Tarbell's The History of
Standard Oil. That's because the review clocks in at just shy of
10,000 words. Having read Easterbrook's remarkably comprehensive
overview of the sordid history of the SUV, I can't imagine needing to
know more.
On the other hand, High and
Mighty has been on bookshelves since last fall. Maybe Easterbrook
will draw renewed attention to it.
posted at 10:11 AM |
link
Fenway's final years.
Herald columnist Cosmo Macero is right: it's time to start
thinking about moving
the Red Sox to the South
Boston Waterfront. At least that way there will be 81 days a year
when people can admire the empty convention center.
posted at 10:11 AM |
link
Tuesday, January 21, 2003
Even Lily Tomlin would gag.
The danger in trying to say anything nice about the Bush White House
was once nicely summarized by the political philosopher
Lily
Tomlin: "No matter how
cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up." Yesterday I posted an
item
about the happy irony of George W. Bush's top two foreign-policy
aides, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice, who are both
African-American, disagreeing over affirmative action.
Within hours I heard from reader
MG, who pointed me to a truly disheartening item that had appeared
last week in TNR &c., the New Republic's political weblog.
Remember that Washington Post story reporting that Rice had
taken a lead role in shaping Bush's anti-affirmative-action decision?
&c. recounts a Post follow-up reporting that the White
House had dragged Rice's name into it, apparently
without her permission or even her
knowledge, in order to give
themselves political cover (scroll down; don't read this on a full
stomach).
Rice and Powell's disagreement
seems legitimate, but this kind of sleazy maneuvering isn't.
posted at 9:48 AM |
link
Monday, January 20, 2003
MLK Day musings. It's a
holiday, a lot of people aren't working, so no heavy commentary
today. Not to be a Pollyanna, but there's something to be said about
celebrating Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday at a moment when the
top two foreign-policy aides to a Republican president are both
African-Americans, and they
disagree with each other
over the president's policy on affirmative action. Of course, I
happen to think Colin Powell is right and Condoleezza Rice is
wrong.
posted at 11:18 AM |
link
Speaking truth to Mitt.
Economist Ed Moscovitch has a terrific op-ed piece in today's
Herald on Governor Mitt Romney's campaign to slash $200
million in local aid. Unfortunately, it's not yet on the
Herald's website, but Moscovitch makes two main points: (1)
Romney, in refusing to consider a tax hike, is not telling the truth
about how much money even a modest increase would bring in. Simply
raising the income tax to 5.9 percent as of March 1 would bring in
$200 million this fiscal year, thus canceling the need for local-aid
cuts, Moscovitch writes, contradicting Romney's assertion that a tax
cut this year would come too late to make a difference. (2) Romney's
plan to cut local aid equally and across the board -- supported by
the House but opposed by the Senate -- will have a disproportionate
effect on poor urban areas. "A 15 percent cut across the board would
cost Worcester $192 per person, but Weston only $57," Moscovitch
writes. "This is fair?"
posted at 11:17 AM |
link
More on Mary Jo.
Globe ombudsman Christine
Chinlund reports that many
readers failed to appreciate the "brutally ironic" tone behind
Charlie Pierce's reference to Mary Jo Kopechne in his recent
magazine
profile of Ted Kennedy.
Even so, I
still can't understand how
anyone could not get it.
posted at 11:17 AM |
link
Safire on media
consolidation. Excellent commentary today by the New York
Times' William
Safire on the dangers of
corporate media consolidation. Safire says nothing particularly
original or startling, but it's important that the powers-that-be
understand this isn't just a liberal issue, and that conservatives
can get riled up about it as well. Thanks to Jay Fitzgerald for
giving me a nudge on this.
posted at 11:17 AM |
link
MEDIA LOG ARCHIVES
Dan Kennedy is senior writer and media critic for the Boston Phoenix.
