March 8th, 2006
One of the unfrequently mentioned costs of privacy is that you give up the ability to set your own frame. Or put more plainly, one of the benefits of blogging is taking control of your own story. (assuming you can manage the fairly minor feat of establishing yourself as credible source about you)
We don’t normally think in terms of the cost of privacy (other then as the operational cost imposed by one’s threat model), but it came up today, and I was intrigued. (See also Documentation in the Age of Google)
December 23rd, 2003
Hosting a project with Sourceforge is great. They provide bandwidth, CVS with anonymous access (something I never set up on my own boxes), and above all, a certain credibility. But they don’t provide good traffic analysis. There was some recent discussion if people were actually finding Magpie searching for PHP RSS parsing, or if they were simple searching for a picture of a magpie.
So here is a bit of Javascript that will fetch a remote image from your Sourceforge project home page and tack the original referer url to the image.
<script language="javascript">
var img = "http://example.org/bigbrother.gif"
var ref = parent.document.referrer;
document.write("<img src=\""+img+"?"+escape(ref)+"\">");
</script>
I imagine this is what someone like SiteMeter does.
July 20th, 2002
…real soon now! The first 2 artciles touch on same ideas we’re struggling with on online collaboration, and how to build a new credibility model. The last is nominally what I’m getting paid to do these days, and should probably know something about 
April 27th, 2002
Rabble recently said in
Indymedia, Credibility, & Covering Palestine:
The NY Times is the bastion of credibility, their stories always reinforce a hegemonic perspective
despite adherence to the ‘facts.’ Now many in alternative journalism want to out do the NY times,
using the same objectivity but just replacing it with another paradigm for viewing the world.
I don’t think this will work for two reasons. First off they have almost all the money.
Secondly we aren’t advocating the kind of world that will fit neatly in to one modernist perspective.
Unlike the Marxist-Leninist of old who had THE answer, today we have many answers and
even more questions. For a credible media to be created in this new networked, postmodern
if you like, world we need to fully reconstruct what we mean by credibility.
MediaGeek is also
talking about these ideas,
responding to this “surprisingly
fair and mostly accurate” article by the Washington Post.
WP:
in the end, crafting content requires selection,
shortening, simplification and even a mildly authoritarian editorial brain making decisions
MG:
Mainstream news organizations, like the Washington Post,
are very concerned with creating an air of authority and maintaining the illusion
that their reporting is utterly consistent, complete, fair and authoritative… regardless of how well a story is researched, reported and written, it cannot be singularly authoritative — any such appearance is the just the effect of style
that we have been trained to read as “objective” or “true.”
Yeah. Thats what I’ve been trying to say!
no comments
