Last Post, Time to Reveal Our Identities

I started out with the first post, and I guess now I'll be the last. It's been an interesting experience posting on this blog, and now it's time to find out who we've been talking to all this time. We discussed in a prior class that the internet allows pretty much complete anonymity, and that even people posting on blogs may not be who they presume to be. So, with that aside, let's get the experiment rolling. As per the agreement made in the beginning of the year, the moment the course ends, our identities should be revealed. Here it is:
*
*
*
*
*
The_Question is none other than Albert Ko.

Let's see who else other people are. Come on, let's go!

Study Group

I never got the e-mail about the study group. Does anyone know what is going on with that ? Please let me know jdrew2@uwo.ca

I would just like all of you to know...

That Stephane Dion has facebook.
And yes, he is now my (facebook) friend.
(I received an email from young Liberals notifying me that he has facebook. I swear I didn't just search for random famous people).

For curiosity's sake, I searched Stephen Harper, and it turns out he has facebook too.

Response to "Rosie O'Donnell..." criticism

The idea that you all understood my comment as a support for the war in Iraq and the policies of the Bush administration just goes to show a kind of naive politicization of what constitutes the "truth".

First, the only reason why Rosie O'Donnell was able to say what she did, most likely without consequence, is because Americans want to see more Bush-bashing. The big networks are giving people what they want, not what they need. If they truly wanted to show quality information they would have had good people arguing good policies on how to move forward by way of good, acceptable ideas. They chose, however, to show a loudmouth comic to spout her opinion which does more to feed the flame of partisan hatred in the US.

Second, I am aware of "alternative publics" and believe very much that outside media oganizations have proven themselves able to inform willing citizens to understand what is truly happening in the world. My problem, however, is with all the commentors on this page praising O'Donnell as if she is giving Americans a gospel to which they can base their perceptions of the war in Iraq on. Her proclamation may have been correct (albeit I agree with some of it), but the way in which she said it adds nothing to the discussion of how furture policies should be drafted. It only consisted of "I can't believe this happened", "don't you all hate the President", "he is such a redneck", "If I were running things, the world would be so much safer"! Are you honestly telling me that this is what the world needs right now?

Third, the last comment by pnm_blogger shows a perfect example of "elitist high culture". Essentially what you did was say that the blond girl was stupid, probably becase she is an actress and has no "proper" education, that she is naive and that you are smarter becuase you are in a politics course. Promoting yourself as a quasi-accademic simply because you may know a little more political trivia and talking points is not a good idea. YOU'RE AN UNDERGRAD AT UNIVERSITY!

Maybe all the commentors on "Rosie O'Donnell is about 90% Right in this Clip" should stop crying "witch" at all those who disagree with them. My purpose was to show that it is sad that 'The View' is a major source of news and opinions for a lot of people.There are so many more possible sources one could use to attack Bush's policies, but too often we just focus on the "sound bite" attacks that merely illegitimize our arguments. By attacking my percieved "narrow views", however, you have shown only your own ignorance.

Update on Danny Williams Attack Ads

Last week in class, I brought up the topic of the attack ads that the Premier of Newfoundland, Danny Williams, recently launched against Prime Minister Harper. Today, when Harper was at a local legion in Kitchener announcing the new Bill of Rights and ombudsman for veterans, a journalist in the crowd asked the PM if he would be launching ads to counter Williams' arguments. Harper relplied that he intended on setting the story straight, implying that he would be creating his own ads, and felt confident that using tax payer dollars to do so would be justified. If these ads come to fruition, this will mark the first time in history that a PM has ever launched a campaign of ads attacking a provincial premier. My question to you is should the PM be allowed to use tax payer money to counter ads employed by Premiers, or does this only create an unnecessary, further divide and strain between federal-provincial relations?? If the PM is supposed to be the unifying figure of the nation should he be obliged to, at least publicly, refrain from segregating regions of the country?

Coerced Confessions? Since When Do We Care?

Article: A

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - 4 Years in U.S Custody (6 Months in Guantanamo Bay)

Confessed to everything imaginable, with many proven to be outright false.

Vs.

Article: B

Couple of Weeks?

Confessed to passing a disputed border line on the Sea

Both are unrealiable, especially the first one. But each time the alleged sailer confessions are mentioned, they are always disputed for being under "duress" or "coercion," and each article I read so far always puts the sailors confessions in quotes (ex: British Sailors "Confessed")

But the media had no problem eating up Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's confessions. Never once did they publish an article where it said (ex: Mohammed "Confessed" about 9/11)

Although there are obvious biases here involved and what not, but I still find it hilarious.

Rosie O'Donnell is about 90% Right in this Clip

I can't believe im agreeing with Rosie! Man she has guts. She basically said everything right, except the part about invading countries for oil and money. Those "War for Oil' slogans are just there to distract the left-wing mob from concentrating on the real reasons why America is invading Middle-Eastern countries. Rarely do you hear in the media why America invaded Iraq and why Iran is next. There was this one documentary from the "Passionate Eye" on CBC that explained why this is happening. The documentary was called "The World According to Bush." I remember watching it for the first time and my jaw dropped to the ground. I could not believe what the CBC was showing on air. What was more surprising was that they actually repeated the airing of the documentary. That documentary broke some many "unwritten rules" when it comes to North American media.

The Psychology of Blogging

Thinking about the discussion in class today, I actually went and did a follow up on Jason Kottke's blog, as well as look on several random others. Like we discussed, they really do seem to follow the same theme: namely a central figure who makes the blog, usually cynical, who manages to win a fandom of suckups and mindless followers. This reminds me of the phenomenon of MMORPG (Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games) games and the sort of digital escape world it creates. In games such as World of Warcraft and Eve Online, relative nobodies who are "losers" in real life are able to obtain great fame, popularity, and political clout in a "world" which allows them to excel. Just like the Underground Man mentioned by Prof. Gibson who writes notes because he is bored, people who blog do it also because they are bored, with the additional factor of potential popularity increase. In Notes from Underground, no one ever read the protagonist's writings, except the reader. However, for blogs, the potential audience is simply staggering. Thus it seems, that many of these bloggers blog simply for attention and to please their fanbase in order to boost their own self-confidence, and perhaps feel like a big shot. Maybe I'm wrong. Thoughts?