G.P.S.: Gettin' Pretty Slick

Nathan Rodriguez, nrodriguez@vailtrail.com
July 9, 2008

Global Positioning Systems (GPS) have been around in one form or another since the Soviet Union launched Sputnik more than 50 years ago.

For decades the military used the technology, and it has proven to be a successful tool in disaster response. But for most people, GPS hasn’t seeped into daily life. Sure, some high-end vehicles have them, and more backcountry hikers are using them. But they’re not as prevalent as, say, the iPod.

That could change in the next couple years.

Corporate heavyweights Apple and Google have recently jumped into the GPS game. The new iPhone hits store shelves this weekend at half the cost of the original, and features GPS capability. Meanwhile, Google signed an agreement last week with Tele Atlas for navigation content. Although Google already had a primitive system in place, it can now offer turn-by-turn navigation.

The Center for Transportation Studies in Minnesota predicts there will be more than 50 million GPS users by 2010, and research from ABI Research, a technology research firm, shows global shipments of GPS devices are expected to double in less than five years.

Locally, sales are up. Wristwatches with GPS and hand-held devices “have been gaining in popularity and are definitely still on the rise,” said Dan Bogarduf, manager of Bag & Pack Shop in Avon. “We’ve seen a big increase in sales over the last couple years, but this year especially. It’s gaining momentum.”

It’s not just that current technology will become more popular, it’s that GPS is being integrated into more devices. GPS will likely remain a constant feature in vehicles, but now it’s being used in everything from tractors to cameras to dog collars. It’s worth taking a glance at the innovations now entering the market.

In-car information
Many GPS devices provide traffic and weather information, but more are beginning to carry things like movie theater showtimes and local gas prices.

“Most of the big advances right now are related to Internet connectivity,” said Tim Flight, editor and owner of the Web site GPSreview.net. He went on to say that a permanent connection to the Internet will become more common in vehicles, allowing people to “find a number of things like gas prices, homes for sale nearby, weather and traffic information.”

Earlier this year, Dash Express software was released, offering live traffic information using embedded road sensors. The feature is sexier than it sounds, as users can view average speed on roads in real-time to determine the quickest route based on traffic flow.

Live crowd movements
CitySense maps where GPS users are concentrated in cities allow anyone in business or marketing to identify “hot spots” in cities. Soon, people will be able to analyze their travel history and see where friends travel. Another slick feature is if CitySense determines there are larger crowds (worse traffic) than usual, it can adjust your alarm clock by a few minutes. The application is available on BlackBerrys as well as the new iPhone.

Avoiding high-crime areas
In Japan, Honda has a GPS system that gives directions to avoid “bad neighborhoods,” or areas with high rates of vandalism and auto theft.

Will we see this in the U.S. anytime soon?

“It’s definitely something that consumers are interested in because people use GPS in areas they’re unfamiliar with,” Flight said. “There’s some hesitation right now due to political correctness, so I think we’ll see the user community establish it first with their own files.”

Trucking
Motorola just completed a study showing GPS could save the trucking industry $53 billion annually by providing data on things such as low bridges.
“There’s an untapped market right now,” Flight said.

Agriculture
Farmers have used GPS for years, but the practice has only recently gained traction on midsized and smaller farms. Having GPS in a tractor ensures straight rows that don’t overlap, which reduces fuel, time, chemicals and product. Though this may seem like overkill under clear conditions, the technology can come in handy as the sun goes down or blustery winds blur visibility.

Most systems have manual guidance, which tells the operator how much to correct the steering, but the assisted steering systems are even more impressive because after the first initial pass is made by the farmer, the tractor takes over, steering itself through the remaining rows.

Real estate
A few Internet sites offer downloadable “Points of Interest” of homes for sale. Homebuyers upload the information to a GPS device, and as they drive past a place, an audio recording kicks on with information about the location.

Personal safety
Remember those “I’ve fallen and I can’t get up!” commercials? Well, now “personal beacons” are being marketed as a lifesaver for hikers in distress. The technology is slightly different than GPS, as one receives information and the other transmits.

Flight said most personal beacons are able to transmit signals where GPS devices would not function, adding they can pinpoint a position within 10 meters, even if the view is obstructed.

“They keep a track log of where you’ve been and how long you’ve been there, so you will still have a last-known location,” Flight said.

“I think everyone remembers the story of Aaron Ralston,” said Steven Lundholm, sales associate at Bag & Pack in Avon, referring to the hiker forced to cut off part of his arm after being pinned under a boulder in Utah. “Now he’s the biggest spokesman for personal beacons.”

Children and pets
In addition to protecting yourself, GPS-type devices are now advertised as the solution to prevent losing a child or pet. Instead of milk cartons or homemade posters, people will be able to set up a tracking device that activates when your child or pet leaves a specific zone. With these systems, kids generally wear a wristwatch while dogs sport a collar.

Cameras
In what may be the most interesting new wrinkle, some cameras now have GPS. Snap a photo, and the navigational coordinates are automatically stored.

It’s easy to envision software that allows users to organize photos either chronologically or geographically. Hiking trails could become well documented.

Once GPS becomes common in cameras, expect to see virtual libraries containing massive photographic databases of locations around the world. Social networking sites like Facebook will likely provide applications for users to search their friends’ photos by location. Online travel sites may take advantage as well, enhancing their ability to preview destinations and accommodations.

Back to the future
Finally, there are a couple advances for in-car GPS technology worth mentioning.
First, they’ll have a new look. “Suction cups with cords hanging down isn’t a long-term solution,” Flight said, laughing. “One of the disadvantages of a typical GPS system, especially those installed at the factory, is that you have to look down to see it.”

And while this may remain the case for the next few years, help is on the way. A New Jersey company has developed Virtual Cable, which projects a 3-D image on the windshield that appears to be suspended over the road ahead. Now instead of being told to turn in 500 feet, the software shows the exact path to make the turn. Flight said the technology is “still several years down the road.”

In the meantime, people can set their sights on something a little more geek-chic: “Knight Rider.” Next month, Mio will release an in-car navigation system featuring the voice of William Daniels, “Knight Rider’s” Kitt. There are 300 names stored in the device, to add a personal touch. At $270, the device also has a Trans Am icon to mark progress on the journey, as well as red LED lights that flash as Kitt voices instructions.

Pretty soon, will it be possible to say no one will get lost again?


Nathan Rodriguez can be reached for comment at nrodriguez@vailtrail.com.

Tangled Up in TABOR

Nathan Rodriguez, nrodriguez@vailtrail.com
July 9, 2008

For 16 years, local and municipal governments in Colorado have been trying to figure out how to work with the Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). Now, with the state considering new changes to the law, it’s worth taking a look at how things shape up locally.

It’s pretty easy to get bogged down in the buzzwords associated with TABOR: “Referendum C,” “Amendment 23,” and “de-Brucing” are each worthy of separate articles. It’s also easy to get trapped in the talking points over TABOR’s effectiveness. Both sides are convinced of their cause and tend to flatly deny assertions floated by the opposition.

On its face, TABOR looks like an exercise in fiscal responsibility. In the spirit of “no taxation without representation,” TABOR acts as Colorado’s taxation and spending limitation amendment, requiring tax increases to be approved by voters.

Sounds simple enough.

“When TABOR gets sold, it’s sold on a bumper sticker, and it’s very easy and very seductive to say you want to limit spending,” said Robb Gray, state project coordinator for the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. “The problem is it takes 15 minutes to explain what a bumper sticker says in 15 seconds.”

A bad rap
After a brief honeymoon period with Colorado voters during the economic boom of the mid-90s, TABOR has since been blamed for a general deterioration of services statewide.

Opponents claim it creates budget shortfalls and short-changes vital programs, pointing to data showing that Colorado ranks 47th in the nation in school funding, and 44th in spending on public roads.

Proponents maintain those figures are intentionally misleading. And they say school funding figures measure spending as a percentage of personal income. But because Coloradans have higher earning power than residents of other states, it only appears that spending is low. TABOR advocates claim that a poorer state like New Mexico, which spends fewer dollars per pupil, ranks 7th overall.

Similarly, Colorado ranks either 19th or 49th in higher education spending, depending on whether tuition fees are included.

For most Eagle County residents, such speculation about TABOR’s effectiveness is
interesting but irrelevant, as they have essentially opted out of the amendment in a move known as “de-Brucing.”

Intent and effect
TABOR was originally intended to act as a check on government spending, but opponents claim the act is a Trojan Horse for slicing budgets.

“The real problem is that it restricts revenues coming into the state with a “population plus inflation formula,” said Gray. “It doesn’t just cap it at a reasonable level, it shrinks the budget over time.”

Gray argued that the services and functions provided by local government face different levels of inflation than those faced by consumers, so applying the consumer rate of inflation to government spending means the government falls short on funding. He said that sheer population numbers are not accurate, as they don’t take into account children with disabilities, senior services, or “needy populations,” which demand more funding than the general population.

This continual shortage of funds for government spending has been termed the “ratchet effect.”

De-Brucing
The solution to the “ratchet effect” for many Colorado communities has been to “de-Bruce,” or opt-out of many of TABOR’s provisions through a public vote.

“The town of Vail has de-Bruced from TABOR, so we’re not held to all the restrictions,” said Judy Camp, finance director for the city of Vail. “By our charter, we’re allowed to spend and collect existing taxes without limitation, but we’re still governed by parts of TABOR where voters need to approve new tax increases.”
So has de-Brucing solved budget shortfalls?

Calls to local agencies including Vail Fire & Emergency Services, Eagle County Health and Human Services, and the Eagle County Ambulance District all revealed that the agencies generally have adequate funding for operations in the area. Naturally, some people may question whether the agencies now have a surplus of funds generated from property taxes.

Still paying the price
Despite de-Brucing, Eagle County residents have still felt the economic impact of TABOR.

Over the last several years, county property values have risen sharply. So even though the mill levy has remained a constant, the dollar amount paid by property owners has increased substantially.

The chorus of calls to lower mill levies is beginning to grow, as are questions about where the extra revenue is going.

The trade-off
“Without the additional revenue [from property taxes], we would have had to cut services that people wouldn’t have been too happy about,” said John Lewis, finance director for Eagle County. “We’re moving ahead with rebuilding a one-lane bridge along the Colorado River. We have three bridges that need to be rebuilt soon, and we wouldn’t have been able to move ahead without revenue from property taxes.”

Lewis added that if the bridges aren’t rebuilt in the next five to 10 years, “we run the risk of having to close the bridges, and people will have to find another route to take.” With the local population continuing to grow, the stress on roads and bridges will only be exacerbated.

Lewis said that many costs for the county have gone up, from the price of gravel to the cost of new trucks and snowplows. Even retaining employees has become more costly.

“We’re having to deal with shortages of labor because of all the mine drilling done in Garfield,” Lewis said. “We’re losing employees and have to pay them more to stay ahead of inflation.”

In this view, a reduction in revenue from property taxes would force tough decisions.
“Without that revenue, we have to say which roads don’t get plowed, which roads don’t get dust abatement, and which bridges don’t get repaired this year,” Lewis said.

Decisions, decisions, decisions
From small towns to the state legislature, officials have wrestled with how to run government agencies under TABOR.

In 2005, Colorado voters passed Referendum C, which essentially suspends the majority of TABOR for five years, allowing the Legislature to spend rather than rebate extra revenue. With the addition of Amendment 23, surplus revenue is earmarked for education.

Now, speaker of the Colorado house, Andrew Romanoff, is circulating a petition that would leave intact the central provision of TABOR, requiring taxpayer approval before raising taxes, while allowing the state to keep tax surplus refunds to invest in the State Education Fund. His plan would also eliminate the mandatory education spending increases under Amendment 23 while creating a “rainy day fund” used primarily for education.

Despite its flaws, many fiscal conservatives see TABOR as a lesser evil, compared to what they see as runaway government spending.

“If (Romanoff’s ballot issue) is such a wonderful idea, why couldn’t the speaker of the House get it through the Democrat-controlled Legislature?” asks Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, a conservative think tank in Golden.

Caldara argues that Referendum C is more than just a “timeout,” claiming it never ends, and says it actually has a similar “ratchet effect.”

“It has an interesting little bit to it that the other side doesn’t like to talk about. It permanently ratchets up the baseline for the state budget because in the fine print it says that the highest budget in those five years becomes the new baseline.”

Right now, Romanoff’s ballot initiative is circulating throughout the state. At least 76,000 signatures are required to qualify for the November ballot.

“We’re actively working to gather those signatures,” said Colorado State Treasurer Cary Kennedy. “We’ve turned in a large amount, somewhere around 30,000 signatures in the past week, and we have people gathering signatures all over the state.”

Making TABOR work
It is difficult, if not impossible, to simply remove TABOR now that it is in the state constitution.

“It’s due to the single subject rule. You can’t remove something, you just have to pass a slew of budget measures to counteract it,” Gray said. “TABOR has its tendrils in the state of Colorado.”

Many local officials have found a way to work around TABOR, and are now hesitant to shake things up.

“It seems to be working now, so I wouldn’t change it,” Lewis said. “There’s some talk about reinstituting [TABOR] so there’s only a certain amount of increase per year, and as a taxpayer that sounds rational.”

Lewis said the problem is that once property values level off, the county could experience revenue shortfalls yet again if it chooses to lower the mill levy.

In the meantime, voters have given government agencies some breathing room by de-Brucing.

“Just look at the counties that have not (de-Bruced),” Lewis said. “Pueblo is having huge financial difficulties. It’s hard to predict exactly what life would be like if we were not De-Bruced, but looking at it from the perspective of providing services, it would be a scary proposition.”


Nathan Rodriguez can be reached for comment at nrodriguez@vailtrail.com.

No Town, No Problem

Edwards has found a different way of getting things done

Nathan Rodriguez, nrodriguez@vailtrail.com
July 2, 2008

The letters to the editor continue to trickle in, arguing the neighborhood of Edwards should incorporate.

The reasoning generally boils down to straight economics. County sales taxes that are collected in other incorporated areas are used to support necessary roads, sidewalks and law enforcement needs of Edwards, the largest community in Eagle County with 8,000 residents.

Aside from the occasional flickers of interest though, it doesn’t appear that Edwards is inching any closer to incorporating.

“A library would be nice, but I like it the way it is,” said Michelle Harmon, Edwards resident since 1997.

That simple sentiment seems to capture the dominant view, which is that there is no pressing need to turn Edwards into a town.

“It should have been a town, but now it’s probably too late,” said Don Cohen, president of the Berry Creek Metro District. “The core of Edwards is pretty much set, and at this point it doesn’t make economic sense to unring the bell.”

Doing Just Fine
As president of the Berry Creek district, Cohen meets once a month with representatives from surrounding areas like Homestead and Singletree to discuss issues that affect the entire community, such as traffic.

“The main reason neighborhoods incorporate is to provide basic public services like public safety, fire, snow, or trash removal,” Cohen said. “But if you live in Edwards, you already get all of that with different organizations covering everything.”

Between the monthly meetings with other districts in the area and the services the county provides — like law enforcement through the Sheriff’s Office — Edwards has its immediate needs met.

But Bruce Moore, senior member of the wait staff at the Main Street Grill in Edwards, sees things differently. He said Edwards needs to incorporate.

“Traffic from here to Singletree is getting pretty bad, especially in the mornings, but we’re struggling with more specific issues like parking,” said Moore. “Not having parking spaces is bad for business, and we shouldn’t have to depend on the county to make decisions for us.”

Truth be told, it seems that many people in Edwards are indifferent about incorporation. Part of this stems from the fact that some Edwards residents only call the neighborhood “home” for a few months out of the year. Meanwhile, many other full-time residents simply don’t know or don’t care much about incorporation.

“There just aren’t any crying needs going unmet right now,” said Jan Strauch, president of Carlson Wagonlit Travel in Edwards, and former member of the Vail Town Council. “All incorporation would do is add another layer of bureaucracy and cost. The infrastructure is already paid for, and we have plenty of police coverage, so there’s really no screaming need to change anything.”

Strauch admitted there may be benefits to incorporating, such as a local police department, but added that the associated costs outweigh any gains for the neighborhood. As a former member of the Vail Town Council, Strauch saw the downside of bureaucracy. “Money gets used up on the smallest things, like pet waste disposal. But the county has been great so far, and the developers have done a decent job with the roads.”

Too Late to Incorporate?
Aside from random message-board chatter and sporadic letters to the editor, there has not been any consistent, concerted effort to incorporate Edwards.

County Attorney Bryan Treu said incorporation talk is a perpetual issue, but he hasn’t had any reason to move on the matter.

Don Cohen agrees. “We’ve lived here for 14 years, and we’re no further ahead or behind where we were 14 years ago,” he said. “In some ways we’re farther away from incorporating, because there used to be no real development in Edwards. Now it’s sort of done. If you wanted to incorporate, 15 years ago was the time to do it.”

Both Cohen and Strauch point to Avon as an example of what happens when a neighborhood incorporates, noting that the town has gained little from incorporating in 1978.

As Eagle County continues to grow — and state officials say the county’s population should double by 2025 — the calls to incorporate may gain traction. “Way down the road, it may make more sense to incorporate,” said Cohen. “By 2035 or 2040, I could see us all being one town. But we’re not there yet."

Running for Office, Running From the Borde

Nathan Rodriguez, nrodriguez@vailtrail.com
July 2, 2008

Last week, presidential frontrunners John McCain and Barack Obama made headlines with their attempts to court Hispanic voters. But unlike other issues on which the two make sharp policy distinctions, when it comes to immigration, it appears they share more in common than not.

Political analysts agree the Hispanic vote may be the key to carrying swing states like Colorado in November. The question then, is whether the differences between McCain and Obama’s immigration policies will be enough to sway the bulk of this crucial voting bloc.

Plenty of Similarities

In 2006, McCain introduced a bipartisan bill with Sen. Edward Kennedy to reform immigration policy. Obama favored the legislation while conservatives derided the proposal for “granting amnesty.” Two years later, in the heat of the campaign, McCain has shifted his stance, recently saying he would not support the measure.

McCain now frames the issue as border security first, immigration policy reform second. He faces a challenging tightrope walk of appeasing the substantial Hispanic vote without betraying his conservative base. Obama frames the immigration issue as one that has been exploited by politicians, and one that demands comprehensive reform.

The main talking points begin to blend together: both candidates agree on the need for reform, both agree on the importance of border security, and both prefer a moderate approach to deal with illegal immigrants currently living in the U.S.

Differences and the DREAM Act

There are a few differences worth noting. The most detailed analysis of the two candidates on immigration comes from Maribel Hastings of La Opinion newspaper. He finds two distinctions: Obama supports the DREAM Act, while McCain does not; Obama supports giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants and McCain does not.

The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act), is designed to benefit high school students who are long-term illegal immigrants, allowing them to serve in the armed forces, attend college, or gain legal status provided they meet basic requirements. According to the Immigrant Policy Project, an estimated 65,000 students would be eligible for the DREAM Act annually.

The other point of contention concerns driver’s licenses. Here, Obama takes the road less traveled, supporting measures to provide illegal immigrants with driver’s licenses. This bold move may delight many Hispanic voters, but is so far to the left that it risks alienating “mainstream” voters if he makes it a priority in the campaign. Notably, Obama’s stance on issuing driver’s licenses is omitted from the immigration policy overview on his official Web site.

The local view

Nationally, both Hispanic groups and coalitions opposed to illegal immigration seem uninspired by Obama and McCain’s positions on the issue.

“Both McCain and Obama have been good on immigration, so it kind of neutralizes that issue,” said Brent Wilkes, executive director of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). “I think Obama has an edge with the Hispanic vote primarily for the same reasons he has an edge with the rest of the electorate. Latinos are concerned about the economy and the war in Iraq.”

Ardent opponents of illegal immigration are less than pleased that McCain won the G.O.P. nomination. A nationwide Bloomberg poll conducted during the primaries showed McCain won just 1 percent of voters for whom illegal immigration was the “top concern.” It appears this sentiment remains valid locally.

Colorado representative and former Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo wrote an open letter to McCain in late June, questioning the consistency of his immigration policy. Tancredo mentioned McCain’s recent closed-door meeting with Hispanic leaders in Chicago in which he reportedly promised to pursue comprehensive immigration reform. Tancredo pressed: “Given your past sponsorship of amnesty legislation, such statements raise troubling questions. Are you planning to break a promise you made … to postpone other immigration reform legislation until we have first secured our borders?”

Debbie Marquez, an Edwards resident on the Democratic National Committee, doesn’t anticipate McCain ratcheting up the rhetoric on immigration anytime soon. “Republicans have used [immigration] as a wedge issue in the past and they’d like to do it again,” said Marquez, “But it ain’t gonna happen.” She cited anemic fundraising as one cause. “Right now the Republican 527s and ‘Swiftboat-type’ groups aren’t able to raise the money, and I think the country is just tired of it.”

Two Colorado coalitions opposed to illegal immigration also are dissatisfied with their options in November. Fred Elbel of Defend Colorado Now, wrote via e-mail, “McCain has [a] track record that is demonstrably open borders, and Obama had a D- grade on immigration.” Stanley Weekes, state director of The Colorado Alliance for Immigration Reform (CAIR), noted that his group focuses on local immigration concerns, but responded via e-mail, “It appears the primary candidates for the presidency are clueless to the desires of the majority of citizens and are pandering to a very narrow slice of enablers.”

Battleground issue or not?

This begs the question: If special interest groups aren’t gearing up for an election battle, will immigration policy be a deciding factor for mainstream voters?

It appears not.

A 2007 Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll shows that a solid 60 percent of voters nationwide are ambivalent when it comes to immigration reform. The Dallas Morning News suggests the remaining 40 percent of voters are split on either side of the debate, with an “unvarying 20 to 25 percent” of voters being “bitterly anti-immigrant” and “dominat[ing] the debate,” while an estimated 15 to 20 percent of voters are “sympathetic to immigrants,” but are “neither vocal nor intense.”

As it stands, the G.O.P. faces an uphill battle to woo Hispanic voters. In 2006, the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center estimated that 49 percent of Hispanic voters went Democrat while only 28 percent voted Republican. In 2007, the same study showed the margin increasing as 57 percent of registered Hispanic voters went Democrat, while 23 percent leaned Republican. Finally, when asked to choose between McCain and Obama, a Wall Street Journal poll from June 2008 shows Obama enjoying a 62- to 28-percent lead over McCain among Hispanics.

In short, Hispanic voters have moved en masse to the Democratic Party over the last few years. It has reached a point where it makes little political sense for either candidate to force the issue.

It appears immigration will remain on the back burner for the November election. While the subject will generate some talk on the campaign trail, a return to the polarizing rhetoric of the past is highly unlikely. McCain would rather not bring it up, as members of his own party have accused him of “flip-flopping” and “zig-zagging” on the issue. At the same time, Obama’s risky strategy of favoring driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants risks splintering his broader coalition.

Without special interest groups nipping at their heels, neither McCain nor Obama seem anxious to roll the dice on immigration reform. It is more likely each candidate will advance an appeasement strategy, and continue speaking in general terms about the need for immigration reform without straying too far from the middle.

WAKARUSA 2008
for the review & more photos, see the Jambase article

A Note About May Entries

I forgot I had this site until earlier today. There are a couple old (2006) entries when I first started J-School.

The first three or four posts are actually from May. The others are from the last year or so.

Unless otherwise noted, all future entries are comin'atcha LIVE AND UNCENSORED

Wilco al Fresco (5.14.08 - Downtown Lawrence)

(For more photos, see the original Jambase article)
Words & Images by: Nathan Rodriguez
Wilco :: 05.14.08 :: Downtown :: Lawrence, KS

The last time beer flowed on the streets of downtown Lawrence, Jayhawk fans were celebrating Mario's Miracle as Kansas went on to win the national championship. A little more than five weeks later, there was still cause for celebration: Wilco playing an outdoor show in the middle of downtown at 10th & New Hampshire.

There was no traditional "venue" but rather an open space that was converted into a scaled down Wakarusa - a Wilco-rusa, if you will. A local vendor set up shop slinging pizza slices, while a beer booth remained bustling throughout the evening.

The Retribution Gospel Choir opened. While not knowing anything about them, I quickly formed a general impression. A rock trio from Duluth, Minnesota wasn't exactly what I had in mind. The band played generally inoffensive, dirt-under-the-nails rock against a simple backbeat, sounding like a poor man's Crazy Horse. The crowd seemed ambivalent, with those close to the stage paying attention while others further away negotiated conversations over the music.

After about 45 minutes, Retribution Gospel Choir left the stage. Concertgoers streamed in from down the block, quickly adding to the few hundred people inside. The weather was ideal, in the upper 60s with clear skies and a subsiding breeze.

Shortly after 8 p.m., Wilco assembled, selecting the buoyant, ambling rhythm of Sky Blue Sky's "Walken" to open the show. The band was on-point, drifting next into "Hummingbird" before skidding into the synth-heavy preamble of "Shot In The Arm." The techno intro was pierced by the clarity of Mikael Jorgensen's piano work, while drummer Glenn Kotche bid his time to enter the fray. A propulsive beat anchored the song, which ended with an impressive sonic convergence checkered with electronic scratching effects.

By now, most of the crowd had started to gather around the stage. It wound up being a comfortable mixture of Boomers, Gen-Xers with toddlers and college students entering summer vacation. But, in addition to the 2,000 or so paying concertgoers (read: suckers), there were at least another 500 or so onlookers on neighboring balconies and rooftops, lined up along the fence and scattered throughout a three-story parking garage that happened to offer a direct, elevated view of the stage from about 100 yards away.

The crystal-clear acoustics lent a warm, intimate feel to the show, and may have contributed to a more talkative Jeff Tweedy. A melancholy beginning to "At Least That's What You Said" met a stomping clash of percussion. Kotche was stellar, establishing a comfortable pace and chasing the guitar, accenting riffs with a clash of the cymbals. "You Are My Face" followed, with beautiful harmonies that vaguely recalled CSNY. The band let the song breathe, and the beginning was spacious enough to double-check that all six members were still onstage. As it progressed, a yin-yang was established with the spacious cohesion of the beginning spliced and alternated with slices of filthy rock. A plaintive piano solo was later joined by ethereal guitar work, signaling the close to the song, which finished with a smattering of cymbals.

Daylight began to fade, and Tweedy took notice of the hundreds of onlookers in the parking garage: "I see a lot of people illegally downloading this concert. Yeah, I'm talkin' about you guys! We're gonna pass around a hat. Yeah, we see you! You too, old timers!" He shifted his gaze and tone to the people directly in front of him, saying, "Actually, don't YOU all feel ripped off for paying?"

"Pot Kettle Black" brought a few cheers with the line "Every song is a comeback / Every moment is a little bit better," but proved to be a better set-up for "Impossible Germany." A highlight of the show, Kotche's no-frills drum work provided an accommodating platform for guitarist Nels Cline to venture off a bit. One by one, the rhythm guitars kicked in and all three locked in around a single theme. Cline then broke things apart with some ridiculous fretwork before building the song to a crescendo.

"Couldn't be a more perfect night," said Tweedy, "I think we got lucky!" He noted all the songs in the set were online requests, but said before "Say You Miss Me" that "only one person requested this next song, so now is your time to hit the Port-a-Pottys." He laughed it off, adding, "It's actually a great song" before he led them into the pleading rocker from Being There. After noting that Cline recently acquired a new guitar in Des Moines, "Handshake Drugs" allowed him to justify the purchase with some impressive work creating frayed edges around the beat for an apropos frazzled effect.


Tweedy commented that he "got run over by a mountain bike" while hiking along the Kansas River earlier in the day before the band eased into "Jesus, Etc." The tender, dimly textured tune featured the haunting chorus, "Tall buildings shake / Voices escape / Singing sad, sad songs." Cline took "Too Far Apart" to the next level with a frenzied solo. The song ended with Tweedy's distant vocals repeating, "Couldn't be any closer to you," several times. Nearing the end, he paused to cough, deliver the line and finished by adding a falsetto tongue-in-cheek assessment: "Nailed it."

"Theologians" offered an off-kilter romp, ending in a sea of reverb and transitioning to the gritty swagger of "I'm the Man Who Loves You." After another pick from the archives with "Kingpin," Wilco launched into the aptly-titled "Kicking Television," which inhabits Television's sonic realm with staccato guitars.

After taking a bow, the band reappeared for an encore that was nearly half as long as the set. "Misunderstood" found some soft vocals murmured from the crowd, after which Tweedy advised, "If we play 'Heavy Metal Drummer,' well, we played it last summer in Columbia, Missouri and a girl actually took her shirt off. I'm just sayin'..." He was greeted with a burst of booing for making a comparison to the University of Missouri, and responded with a knowing grin, "I don't know if you guys are like, rivals or anything."

While the main set was very good, the encore was flat-out great. "Passenger Side" was a welcome treat, but "California Stars" was a perfect fit for the evening, with relaxed pipe organ and light, honky-tonk flourishes adding texture to the gorgeous pop ballad. A short but stellar four minutes, it wound up being another highlight of the evening.

Tweedy then toyed with the crowd, "You have time for some more? We have nowhere to be 'til tomorrow night." An impassioned "Hate it Here" followed the "What am I gonna do" refrain, echoing John Lennon's pleading, stretched-thin vocals on "God."

Tweedy addressed the crowd again, saying, "We've got a curfew tonight, so no more talking!" They leapt into "Heavy Metal Drummer," which brought a frenzied response. It seemed a bit bass-heavy in the first half, but wound up being a solid rendition. After the song, Tweedy broke his promise, saying, "I'm really proud of you, Lawrence. No one took their shirt off. Don't resort to that sort of objectification. I'm proud of you. I mean, it would have been NICE, but I guess Columbia loves us more." The crowd booed heavily, as Tweedy dryly acknowledged, "I always say the wrong things." Within seconds he glanced up after apparently being flashed, announcing, "You really do love us! Oh my God! It's a 12-year old? Gonna get arrested for that, but thank you so much!"

The start-stop rocker "The Late Greats" was then paired with a tasty "Red-Eyed and Blue," but it was the final two songs of the night that were particularly noteworthy. "I Got You" was a slam-fest, with raucous power chords matched by the racket coming from the drum kit. Cline had a hot solo before breaking down to the drum roll from "Heavy Metal Drummer" and then hopping back to polish off "I Got You." They had a seamless transition to the show closer, "Hoodoo Voodoo." The lyrics seem a byproduct of free association but the groove is infectious enough to make it a moot point. The song gained intensity with inspired, fiery guitar bursts that led to a minute-long duel before converging and leading back to the chorus. The song and the show ended with a bang at the stroke of 10:30.

Wilco al fresco wound up being one of the more enjoyable outdoor concert experiences in recent memory. Their playing at times flirts with effortlessness but it is that relaxed and crisp sound that defines their talent. They are, to paraphrase Mike Greenberg of Mike & Mike in the Morning, "sneaky hot, like Tina Fey." Their greatness may not necessarily knock you out on impact but after awhile it becomes difficult to ignore and eventually becomes pretty damn impressive.

Finding God at Gunpoint

Early in the morning, you gather the family to attend worship services. You put on your best attire, hop in the car and head down the road.

Approaching an intersection, a pair of fatigue-clad individuals armed with automatic rifles signal you to stop. They size you up, ask a few questions with a foreign accent, and finally wave you past. But not before handing you a coin.

Unfortunately, this coin has no monetary value.

One side reads “Where Will You Spend Eternity?” The other side quotes John 3:16.

No, this isn’t a case of overly aggressive Jehovah’s Witnesses terrorizing the townies. It happened in Iraq.

As the McClatchy papers reported, “The U.S. military has confirmed that a Marine in Fallujah passed out coins with a Gospel verse on them to Sunni Muslims.” The Marine was removed from duty and reassigned, and the incident is currently being investigated.

Naturally, McClatchy continued, the act angered many residents who were already displeased with the US “occupiers,” who felt that the troops were now becoming “Christian missionaries.”

This isn’t good.

In no way should this be construed as a commentary on the armed forces, or even the Iraq war itself. Candidly, a college buddy was a Marine involved in the fierce early battles in Fallujah.

No, what matters here is that this Marine was an ambassador of the United States who interacted with everyday civilians.

That this happened at a military checkpoint and not a street corner is disturbing because it is the apotheosis of a “captive audience.” If someone proselytizes in an open street, you generally have the option of “tuning him out” and ambling past. You don’t have that luxury at a mandatory stop.

For now, we’ll assume it was one individual behind the engraved religious coin operation. (I may revisit the issue with a “conshpeeerashy” angle after fashioning my tin foil hat). The point is this:

Dispensing oppositional religious coins at military checkpoints was at best a misguided altruistic act, and hopefully a limited one as well. But the damage to the image and credibility of the U.S. as a “hands-off” peacekeeping force is disconcerting to any reasonable observer.

Yet here the McClatchey story is, on page A16.

Al-Qaeda’s PR wing could not have fabricated a better anecdote. This is precisely the type of catalyzing event that generates interest in the Insurgency.

Many Americans are proud of their religious tradition, and hold it dearly. But even the math (five times a day versus once a week) lends credence to the suggestion that religion plays just as large a role, if not more so, in the daily lives of many Iraqis.

My hunch is many Americans would not view Jehovah’s Witnesses in the same light if they were suddenly armed while making their conversion pitch. If, after more than five years of daily interaction, they leaned into car windows with a finger on a trigger while making a religious pitch, some people might become resentful. On the other side of the coin and on the other side of the globe, we have a lone U.S. soldier clouding his assigned mission with actions more fit for a Christian soldier during the Crusades. Let’s just hope that the residents of Fallujah are not as predisposed to violence as a solution as we seem to be.

Stories like these on page A16 go a long way in explaining why the stories on page A1 read the way they do.

A few photos from Colorado

Photo taken from the Buena Vista campsite





Growing among the rocks on Ruby Mtn. outside of Buena Vista
(at our campsite)

Between Avon and Leadville

Notes on a Scandal

Everything is bigger in Texas, including the non-stories.

Naturally, the headline “Report: Arthur’s Grades Altered” on KUSports.com gave many Jayhawk fans mild arrhythmia.

The story is this: a Dallas TV station, in performing its solemn duty as a watchdog, talked to a local algebra teacher, Winford Ashmore, who claimed Darrell Arthur had his grades altered by the principal and basketball coach to ensure his eligibility. This is nothing new for Oak Cliff high school, as it has forfeited games in the past few years due to academic irregularities.





The Dallas station, WFAA, clearly had a well-documented, polished news package. But it lacked a news peg.




So it got a little creative, played loose with the facts and raised all-in. The video montage evolves from shots of Arthur playing at Oak Cliff to Arthur soaring for alley-oops in a Jayhawk uniform and hoisting the national championship trophy. WFAA closed the broadcast with a statement dripping with suggestion: “the NCAA rules state that if a player is ineligible, a penalty can be forfeiture of any and all games.”




Bravo. I nearly had to change my pants.




Until, that is, I regained my senses. The one answer that seemingly devastates the story is that the NCAA declared Arthur eligible to play for KU. It is not the responsibility of any collegiate coach to perform his own investigation to double-check the NCAA. As long as there are no fingerprints on this story from the KU athletic department, it will eventually waft into the ether.




But it does bring up an interesting topic: Is it really that bad that Arthur had a little help on the way to achieving his dream?




Now before you saddle up the high horse, I’m not advocating special treatment for anyone. I certainly don’t feel that all athletes should be given a free ride due to their ability outside of the classroom.




But we’re talking about a one-in-a-million type of talent in this situation. Would you have denied Mozart a spot in music class because he was borderline in home ec? Face it, you don’t want Mozart serving you crème brulee any more than you want Darrell Arthur working a shuttle launch at Cape Canaveral.




So what would have happened if Arthur’s principal and coach had not intervened? Winford Ashmore would have gotten his jollies by making Arthur hate algebra more than anything on earth. Arthur would have lost the one thing that mattered, the one thing at which he was unparalleled. He may have persevered and developed into a well rounded student athlete. Or he may have become frustrated, withdrawn, and yet another depressing story about wasted talent.




But we’re starting to get off-track.




What’s surprising about this grade-changing scandal is that it’s actually called a scandal in Dallas. Dallas, Texas. Home of 40,000 seat stadiums that are virtual shrines to pubescent athletics.

There is something fundamentally troubling about sports culture today. 8th graders are now declaring their allegiances to colleges. O.J. Mayo appears to have more or less struck an agreement with an agent before half-heartedly skipping off to USC for a year. The game has gotten so big, the paychecks so large, that “the next best thing” seems to be getting younger and younger each year. There’s too much money involved for there not to be corruption.




Arthur’s story isn’t nearly as dispiriting as Mayo’s. With Mayo, it was about money, and it was about 40-year old men stalking teenage boys in gymnasiums for 15% of their future income.




It looks now like Arthur had some people in his corner, in that his coach and his principal—either for him or for the school—wanted to see him succeed in that at which he excelled. They got two state championships in the process, but part of me is naïve enough to believe that they also wanted to see doors remain open for him at the next level.




Whatever the case may be it is unfortunate that the story comes out now. Winford Ashmore should have said something about Arthur’s eligibility issues before he left Oak Cliff. Instead, he decides to wait until Arthur declares for the NBA? Very odd.




Until you consider that it’s Sweeps Week.




Then it begins to make a little more sense. WFAA was hurting for a story, and finally had some semblance of a news peg with KU winning the championship. Ashmore (putting on my psychologist cap here) may have been bitter about devoting his life to the quadratic equation, as Arthur, who can put a ball in a basket, will become a multi-millionaire in a couple weeks. Who knows?




Everything is bigger in Texas, especially the non-stories. This non-story came during baseball season, which was enough to make me lose half a morning tilting at windmills.

The Bittersweet Symphony of YouTube Politics

“Obama said what? Why would he say something like that?”

Now I’m bitter.

The last few election cycles have illuminated and exacerbated political gaffes like never before. In the past, politicians were able to speak more freely in closed-door fundraisers, assured that their comments would only fall upon favorable ears.

It seems that the “Macaca” incident may have only been the first of many YouTube blunders in American politics. Had George Allen’s comment been reported in print or relayed second-hand, it would have quickly evaporated into the ether. But in the instant-gratification era of YouTube politics, his invective reigns in perpetuity and – with a click of the mouse - shadows his legacy.


YouTube offers the (voting) public an entirely new source of information: politicians unfiltered through the lens of the journalist-as-middleman. With unambiguous clarity, the nuances and context of an event resonate with greater immediacy and intimacy. Everyone now has the opportunity to personally evaluate tone, delivery, facial expressions, and crowd response. And this is why Allen’s racially-charged comments clung to his candidacy: they were not fleeting, but deliberately delivered, staring directly at the camera, before mockingly remarking, “Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia,” which in a sense removed any confusion about his intent.

Fast-forward to the current kerfuffle over Obama’s “bitter” comment. In less than 48 hours, a search for “Obama Bitter” on YouTube yields 482 videos—or a new one every six minutes--which have collectively been viewed millions of times. Naturally, many videos have been edited to either increase or reduce context, depending on the political proclivities of the person uploading the feed.

It is here that many mainstream media outlets have shirked responsibility. Most television stations may play a sound bite of a sentence or two, and close with the remark that the “bitter” comment could hurt Obama’s election hopes. Politico’s Carrie Brown has an article entitled “Barack Obama’s Flip Side Revealed,” a moniker better suited for the checkout aisle of a grocery store rather than a respected site of political information. Even the renowned commentator George Will devoted an article to what he terms “Obama’s Bitter Liberalism.”

The problem is not that members of the media are reporting the issue, but rather the lackadaisical and pedestrian method in which it is discussed. Journalists try to deliver “the truth and nothing but the truth so help them, God,” but neglect the all-important “full truth,” which begs the question:

Do we even concern ourselves with providing context anymore?

It seems that the emphasis on sharpening a good “news peg,” against a deadline has dulled our collective sensibility and responsibility as journalists. We report the headline or the sound bite, and it is looped ad nauseam rather than opening the door for a more in-depth discussion.

The infamous line from Obama’s fundraising speech in San Francisco that appears in nearly every article is, “It is not surprising then they get bitter.” Unfortunately, almost across the board, there is little explanation of the word “then” in the sentence. “Then” signifies the extension of a previous line of thought. To wit, Obama discussed the problems of a stagnant economy and decades of broken promises at length, before offering the afterthought that “it’s not surprising then they get bitter.”

Certainly, some of the more responsible political commentators have bothered to do their homework and investigate the context of Obama’s utterance. But far too many are content to target the easy story, the headline, the sound bite—and in doing so, boldly flirt with journalistic negligence.

In an era where technology enhances convenience, pajama-clad bloggers and anonymous message board users amplify the shortcomings (spurred by budget cuts) of traditional media outlets. An arm’s-length detachment from the process of newsmaking often allows for a more “meta” or nuanced interpretation of both the event, and the reporting of the event. Traditional avenues for disseminating information have changed, and with YouTube and online press releases, the playing field has leveled for credentialed and non-credentialed members of the media.

What many people are coming to realize is that this leveling of the journalistic playing field has resulted in bloggers getting the story “right” at a pace that rivals—and even eclipses—that of more traditional outlets. The challenge for established media, simply put, is to “step its game up.” It no longer suffices to parrot back the headline from a press release. It is no longer acceptable to target the easy story instead of the thoughtful one. You can still get a “passing” grade for handing in such “work” by the end of the day – but it translates into readers and viewers “passing” by your work to get to the heart of the matter. What is at stake is no less than the survival of news media as we know it today.

With the “Macaca” gaffe in 2006, bloggers created such a cacophony that mainstream media was essentially coerced into reporting the event. With increasing budget cutbacks, members of the traditional press would do themselves a favor by reducing their recalcitrance against mining non-traditional sources of information.

By digging a little deeper, visiting YouTube, or reading a blog or two, many mainstream political pundits could have gotten the full story behind Obama’s “bitter” comment correct on the first draft. If Obama’s supposed gaffe did have overtones of being “out of touch,” those overtones unfortunately characterize those reporting the event.

It is not surprising, then that I am bitter.

I Saw Samuel L. Jackson Today

I saw Samuel L. Jackson today on 42nd Street, posing for a picture with a fan. It looked like they were in front of a theater – probably promoting an upcoming movie.

He was smiling, seemed happy enough to be there. I’m not sure who is taking the picture, but across from him are five or six people armed with low-grade digital cameras.

It’s too late to go around the photogs. I’m in their midst with a throng of pedestrians tailing me. I can’t just “stop short” and turn around. I make a truly half-assed attempt to duck and turn around mid-stride, my face contorted into an apologetic “my bad.”

They don’t seem to notice or care and were focused intently on the famous actor five feet in front of them.

I decide to look back at Samuel L. Jackson for a couple more seconds, you know, to drink in the moment. It was definitely him. Pretty cool.

It was about that time that I noticed he wasn’t talking to the person requesting the photo. And there was a really short line of people there, considering the circumstances. He also hadn’t moved much, if at all during the fifteen seconds this all transpired.

I glance up to see the name of the theater. It was then that I considered wearing glasses again, as the name “Madame Tussauds Museum of Wax” appeared overhead. I took a deep breath, pondering my own mental faculties and curious if I was going to tell anyone about this.

Blogs are the New Hip-Hop

Blogs are the new hip-hop

Blogs are to media today what hip-hop was to music twenty years ago: misunderstood, edgy, a blend of old and new. But beyond merely confusing and frightening the uninitiated, blogs and hip-hop seem to share so many commonalities that – hey, indulge me here – it’s worth reviewing.

There are certain things you can dismiss with good reason: Mike Tyson’s latest statement that he’s a changed man, for example. But very few things are dismissed out of hand as quickly as blogs and hip-hop. These uninformed repudiations generally come from the “old guard,” or someone with a vested interest in seeing the “fad” fail. “It’s not even real music.” “Blogs infringe on true journalism.” Without any further investigation, the mediums are castigated and discarded as substandard.

Both blogs and hip-hop tend to sample previously produced material. A DJ may select a few seconds of a beat, loop it and toss some effects on top, but the rapper usually adds completely new lyrics to complement the selection. A blogger generally utilizes the beat of the beat writer: the highlight of a story, supplementing that with their own interpretation or commentary. At the same time, blogs and hip-hop can be completely original creations that don’t redeploy any previously-produced work.

Both blogs and hip-hop are almost assumed to be static monoliths, when the reality is far more indefinable and fluid. The mediums are being stretched, tested, and at times co-opted. They are far from a singular entity. Within hip-hop, there are different rap styles – “conscious” and “gangsta” among them – as well as a variety of genres sampled, from classical to funk, soul and rock and roll. Blogs may be political, spiritual, sports-related or personal. They each cover more ground and specialize in more areas than detractors care to admit or realize.

Then there’s style. For bloggers and rappers the list is similar: style, flow, sense of rhythm and humor are all desirable commodities. One blogger actually fancies himself as the blogosphere’s Jay-Z, quoting a Hova tune: “I lead the league in at least six statistical categories – best flow, most consistent, realest stories, most charisma, I set the most trends and my interviews are hotter.” There’s something to be said for having a bit of swagger. Anyone can blog and anyone can rap, but not everyone is worth listening to.

Both blogs and hip-hop are slightly ahead of the curve in some respects. The Journal of Black Studies and a number of other sources have argued that rappers had essentially predicted--or at least issued warnings prior to--the Los Angeles riots of 1992. Similarly, some in academia argue that bloggers often act as tipsters and trendsetters, lighting the way for mainstream media to follow.

Hip-hop was born in braggadocio: rappers participated in battles with peers in front of an audience. Part of the attraction is improvising (or at least rehearsing) a variety of put-downs to enhance one’s stature at the expense of another. At stake is perceived status and respect. A motivation for entering either a rap battle or the blogosphere may be a simple desire to be heard and make the statement “I’m here.” Vitriolic ad hominem attacks are expected on many blogs– the content of which isn’t too far off the mark from what might be said in any run of the mill rap battle.

Hip-hop is more than music. It is a social and cultural phenomenon. Is blogging more than just the blogs themselves? It’s probably too early to say, given the amorphous nature of the blogosphere. Then again, the Pajamas Media crew may be the start of the online commuter revolution.

It took a solid decade or so before the majority of mainstream listeners accepted hip-hop as more than just a fad. Some of the biggest names in the established media have claimed that blogs have already enjoyed their day in the sun, and will soon fall by the wayside. Perhaps it will take a few more “slip-ups” of the mainstream media reported by bloggers before the blogosphere becomes a generally-accepted branch of the media.

One final note about the future of the blogosphere, as seen through the historical lens of hip-hop. Hip-hop—or at least the songs on the radio—was co-opted by the music industry a couple decades ago. As soon as it became evident that albums would be purchased, industry executives wanted in. Clothing styles and slang went mainstream. A similar fate may await blogs. Leading bloggers are basking in the newfound glow of acceptance, and some vanguards of the old media brigade are now offering a seat at the table. Losing this “outsider” status could rob some blogs of their soul. Just as Eminem’s well-worn claim that nobody respects him can sound hollow after selling tens of millions of albums, the personal and intimate nature of blogs may also begin to evaporate after corporate interests filter and sanitize the thoughts of the author. Or, maybe they won’t censor blogs in the future at all – they can just slap on a warning label instead. I’ve got an idea for one: “Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics.”

I Pity the Fool!

Only fools believe they have all the right answers.

A more pragmatic approach to dealing with any problem is to either consult an expert or read up on it before you shoot from the hip and land in arrears.

It’s interesting to watch—in a twisted social experiment sort of way—how some major newspapers are tilting at the online windmill in an attempt to relive the glory days of the industry.

“Maybe we should charge for online access?” they think. Think again. Kids these days don’t like paying when they don’t have to. It may have become cliché to claim that the “younger generation” doesn’t read newspapers. That doesn’t mean they aren’t tuned in, they’re simply going elsewhere. And, chances are, they get their information free of charge. Making the decision to charge online readers for content won’t win many eyeballs, let alone the hearts and minds that sustain online communities.

Instead of staring backwards at the past for answers, or shaking down Generation X and Next for loose change—that’s like trying to squeeze blood from a turnip—progressive or fiscally-minded news organizations should look at some successful online companies for answers.

Jambase is one example of an online company that "made it big." It was started from scratch in 1998 and now has more than half a million unique visitors a month, and around 2 million page views each week. The site is free of charge for all users, and offers a variety of ways to personalize the site for each visitor. Despite not charging anyone for content, the company is still making decent coin: good enough for a little over a dozen people to work full-time in a downtown San Francisco office.



Online monetization isn’t really that complicated. More clicks equal more ad revenue. That’s it.
The difference between what Jambase experienced and what the newspaper industry is facing is significant: newspapers actually have a head start with product placement. Instead of thinking about “print” and “online” like oil and water, news organizations should embrace online evolution as a natural outgrowth of the industry. Get the smart folks at the company in the same room, brainstorm about hyperlocalism for a solid hour or two, and then get crackin’ on the website: if you build it, they will come.



A defeatist attitude about progress accomplishes nothing. Maybe a little Churchill will inspire, then: “The pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”



Online journalism today isn’t just about bloggers sitting in their parents’ basement, doing haphazard drive-by’s on mainstream media. It’s about scratching an itch that no one else can quite reach.



It’s not that the pajamas media is any better or different than the printed word folks either. They just happened to figure it out first...out of necessity.



Newspapers that are thinking of charging for online content are inhabiting a fool’s paradise. The past is gone, and it took its economic model back with it.



Mr. T may be known for saying "I pity the fool," but he also said "It takes a smart guy to play dumb." Once again, Mr. T saves the day. Let's just hope the big wigs tuned in.



News organizations need to suck up their bloated sense of pride and take a couple notes from the proven online heavyweights. You can still claim that the idea came from your conference room: just leave out the part about turning on the computer.