It’s not all roses for the PS3 following further developments on the thriving PS3 hacking front today, as the group responsible for the Wii’s Homebrew Channel, going by the slightly counter-intuitive moniker of fail0verflow have turned their attention to Sony‘s pride and joy and have summarily proceeded to strip it of its secrets. If you go by their word, at least.
The hack apparently enables them to gain “full control of the PS3 system,” not as a means to illegally reduced video game expenditures you see, but solely in the interests of enabling every PS3 firmware and variant to run Linux. And here we were asking ourselves why it took four years for people to hack this thing. There’s probably a lesson here, somewhere, Sony. Something about giving people what they want or the ones who can will just take it. And never ever give them what they want, then take it away again, unless you want your “Private keys” in the press. Something along those lines.
Aaron Brazell notes, as many have, that it’s amusing to watch the apoplexy aimed at Julian Assange and WikiLeaks for posting stolen classified documents while his co-conspirators in the mainstream press publish them with next to no criticism. But Aaron moves from this to make a more novel argument, namely that Assange is threatening to topple what’s left of the traditional media business model.
[T]he media is on the sideline, their power usurped from this rogue operative with a rogue website. Instead of the New York Times or Washington Post benefitting from the receipt of leaked information as has been the case in their traditional past (see Watergate), an upstart “news organization” is stealing their thunder. Sure the Times and a variety of other media outlets were given the data eventually, but the arbiter of information was no longer them.
While the media wrings their hands over a contrived battle between the morality of publishing leaked, national security documents and preservation of national secrets, the bigger capitalistic battle is happening and that overshadows journalistic sense of responsibility.
The ability to be first is being tainted here. While Wikileaks promises to distribute new information, acting as a benevolent dictator, to news organizations, these news organizations are capitulating their responsibilities simply to make sure they have some crumbs off of Assange’s table.
No one, certainly, is suggesting that news outlets should become a lap-dog, as I have heard toss around, of the government, bowing to their every will and whim. Certainly not, lest we live in a Communist system. However, the media is expected to operate in a suitably responsible way.
In this case, the media knows that they are on the outs. In a last gasp of industry-pride, they have sacrificed themselves in a last-ditch effort to remain relevant. Put in another way, they have come to serve themselves instead of the people they exist to serve.
I’m not sure I agree with either part of this.
WikiLeaks and Newspaper Profits
First, it’s true that the Internet has been killing the old business model based on advertisements in printed copies. And WikiLeaks is to some extent furthering this. But, as it is, WikiLeaks is only important because hundreds of reporters from well established newspapers are sifting through the piles of mostly worthless documents to ferret out what’s interesting and distill it for their readership.
The upshot is that Assange is handing these papers mini-scoops and exciting stories to cover, thus boosting their bottom line. By contrast, I haven’t the foggiest notion of how Assange is making any money off of this.
Now, it’s conceivable that Assange could bypass the Guardian, Times, and others and simply dump them out there for crowdsourcing. Maybe Josh Marshall and the TPM gang or Arianna Huffington’s minions over at HuffPo would do the sorting, instead. But right now, the threat to the mainstream media is minuscule at best.
WikiLeaks and Journalistic Ethics
Is the press here ignoring the real risks of going public with classified documents that could ostensibly cause real harm to their publics? Maybe. Then again, this is hardly the first time. Leaks are the bread and butter of scoop journalism and they have been for some time.
Further, it appears — granted, we have nothing to go on but the publishers’ own accounts of the process — that the newspapers in question actually took the risks seriously, carefully vetting the information before going to press. The NYT, especially, seemed to bend over backwards to get commentary from the US Government and to pass along any objections and their own redactions to other papers who’d received the dumps.
Beyond that, once Assange made the documents publicly available on the Internet, the only thing the editors would have achieved by refusing to report on what was in them was to lose money. Someone was going to report anything of interest.
Turning full circle, I’d also note that there’s an important distinction between the conduct of the newspapers in question and of the WikiLeaks gang: The former didn’t encourage the commission of crimes by those entrusted to protect America’s secrets and set up an elaborate conspiracy to make doing so easier. Yes, they routinely cultivate sources with access to such information and happily abet legitimate whistleblowers. But they’re not out to create anarchy just for the hell of it.
robert shumake
Pink Floyd Re-Signs With EMI: Good <b>News</b> for the Band or the Label?
Progressive rock legends Pink Floyd have re-signed with their longtime record label EMI.
Social <b>News</b> Site Reddit Reports 200%+ Growth in 2010
Social news site Reddit posted year-end numbers this afternoon including January and December page view stats that climbed from 250 million pageviews to more than 3X that number, ...
Opinion: Can Oprah Help Restore Civility? - AOL <b>News</b>
Oprah began her new cable television network -- OWN -- at noon on New Year's Day, a network dedicated to the total and complete absence of mean-spiritedness.
robert shumake
Pink Floyd Re-Signs With EMI: Good <b>News</b> for the Band or the Label?
Progressive rock legends Pink Floyd have re-signed with their longtime record label EMI.
Social <b>News</b> Site Reddit Reports 200%+ Growth in 2010
Social news site Reddit posted year-end numbers this afternoon including January and December page view stats that climbed from 250 million pageviews to more than 3X that number, ...
Opinion: Can Oprah Help Restore Civility? - AOL <b>News</b>
Oprah began her new cable television network -- OWN -- at noon on New Year's Day, a network dedicated to the total and complete absence of mean-spiritedness.
robert shumake
It’s not all roses for the PS3 following further developments on the thriving PS3 hacking front today, as the group responsible for the Wii’s Homebrew Channel, going by the slightly counter-intuitive moniker of fail0verflow have turned their attention to Sony‘s pride and joy and have summarily proceeded to strip it of its secrets. If you go by their word, at least.
The hack apparently enables them to gain “full control of the PS3 system,” not as a means to illegally reduced video game expenditures you see, but solely in the interests of enabling every PS3 firmware and variant to run Linux. And here we were asking ourselves why it took four years for people to hack this thing. There’s probably a lesson here, somewhere, Sony. Something about giving people what they want or the ones who can will just take it. And never ever give them what they want, then take it away again, unless you want your “Private keys” in the press. Something along those lines.
Aaron Brazell notes, as many have, that it’s amusing to watch the apoplexy aimed at Julian Assange and WikiLeaks for posting stolen classified documents while his co-conspirators in the mainstream press publish them with next to no criticism. But Aaron moves from this to make a more novel argument, namely that Assange is threatening to topple what’s left of the traditional media business model.
[T]he media is on the sideline, their power usurped from this rogue operative with a rogue website. Instead of the New York Times or Washington Post benefitting from the receipt of leaked information as has been the case in their traditional past (see Watergate), an upstart “news organization” is stealing their thunder. Sure the Times and a variety of other media outlets were given the data eventually, but the arbiter of information was no longer them.
While the media wrings their hands over a contrived battle between the morality of publishing leaked, national security documents and preservation of national secrets, the bigger capitalistic battle is happening and that overshadows journalistic sense of responsibility.
The ability to be first is being tainted here. While Wikileaks promises to distribute new information, acting as a benevolent dictator, to news organizations, these news organizations are capitulating their responsibilities simply to make sure they have some crumbs off of Assange’s table.
No one, certainly, is suggesting that news outlets should become a lap-dog, as I have heard toss around, of the government, bowing to their every will and whim. Certainly not, lest we live in a Communist system. However, the media is expected to operate in a suitably responsible way.
In this case, the media knows that they are on the outs. In a last gasp of industry-pride, they have sacrificed themselves in a last-ditch effort to remain relevant. Put in another way, they have come to serve themselves instead of the people they exist to serve.
I’m not sure I agree with either part of this.
WikiLeaks and Newspaper Profits
First, it’s true that the Internet has been killing the old business model based on advertisements in printed copies. And WikiLeaks is to some extent furthering this. But, as it is, WikiLeaks is only important because hundreds of reporters from well established newspapers are sifting through the piles of mostly worthless documents to ferret out what’s interesting and distill it for their readership.
The upshot is that Assange is handing these papers mini-scoops and exciting stories to cover, thus boosting their bottom line. By contrast, I haven’t the foggiest notion of how Assange is making any money off of this.
Now, it’s conceivable that Assange could bypass the Guardian, Times, and others and simply dump them out there for crowdsourcing. Maybe Josh Marshall and the TPM gang or Arianna Huffington’s minions over at HuffPo would do the sorting, instead. But right now, the threat to the mainstream media is minuscule at best.
WikiLeaks and Journalistic Ethics
Is the press here ignoring the real risks of going public with classified documents that could ostensibly cause real harm to their publics? Maybe. Then again, this is hardly the first time. Leaks are the bread and butter of scoop journalism and they have been for some time.
Further, it appears — granted, we have nothing to go on but the publishers’ own accounts of the process — that the newspapers in question actually took the risks seriously, carefully vetting the information before going to press. The NYT, especially, seemed to bend over backwards to get commentary from the US Government and to pass along any objections and their own redactions to other papers who’d received the dumps.
Beyond that, once Assange made the documents publicly available on the Internet, the only thing the editors would have achieved by refusing to report on what was in them was to lose money. Someone was going to report anything of interest.
Turning full circle, I’d also note that there’s an important distinction between the conduct of the newspapers in question and of the WikiLeaks gang: The former didn’t encourage the commission of crimes by those entrusted to protect America’s secrets and set up an elaborate conspiracy to make doing so easier. Yes, they routinely cultivate sources with access to such information and happily abet legitimate whistleblowers. But they’re not out to create anarchy just for the hell of it.
robert shumake
robert shumake
Pink Floyd Re-Signs With EMI: Good <b>News</b> for the Band or the Label?
Progressive rock legends Pink Floyd have re-signed with their longtime record label EMI.
Social <b>News</b> Site Reddit Reports 200%+ Growth in 2010
Social news site Reddit posted year-end numbers this afternoon including January and December page view stats that climbed from 250 million pageviews to more than 3X that number, ...
Opinion: Can Oprah Help Restore Civility? - AOL <b>News</b>
Oprah began her new cable television network -- OWN -- at noon on New Year's Day, a network dedicated to the total and complete absence of mean-spiritedness.
robert shumake
Pink Floyd Re-Signs With EMI: Good <b>News</b> for the Band or the Label?
Progressive rock legends Pink Floyd have re-signed with their longtime record label EMI.
Social <b>News</b> Site Reddit Reports 200%+ Growth in 2010
Social news site Reddit posted year-end numbers this afternoon including January and December page view stats that climbed from 250 million pageviews to more than 3X that number, ...
Opinion: Can Oprah Help Restore Civility? - AOL <b>News</b>
Oprah began her new cable television network -- OWN -- at noon on New Year's Day, a network dedicated to the total and complete absence of mean-spiritedness.
robert shumake detroit
According to Marlon Sanders, the first e-book written about Internet marketing was called The Amazing Formula written by Marlon himself. I found Marlon's comments in Success Secrets of the Online Marketing Superstars by Mitch Meyerson.
My attention is piqued by such a knowledgeable and preeminent author such as Marlon Sanders and I like to make sure I listen to what he has to say since he has been so successful making money on the Internet.
His favorite product is called Gimme My Money Now and he promotes it as being really simple because it tells you step by step how to make money the way he has done all these years. Here are the first few important steps of the program:
- Step 1 — Target a Niche Market — You can determine your niche market by figuring out your main interests, what you are good at, and/or passionate about
- Step 2 — Do a 12 Product Survey to find out what the market wants to buy. He details more about what to do in his book Gimme My Money Now.
- Step 3 — Assemble a sales letter and put it up on a simple 1-page web site. You can get a book about good sales letters from Yanik Silvers' web sites.
- Step 4 — Sell an initial supply of the prototype product — such as an information product — and test it out using Adwords or similar. The goal is to get at least 1% conversion of unique visitors to buyers (1 buyer for every 100 visitors). If you don't, go back to Step 1 with a new idea.
Marlon recommends rolling out your product with an affiliate program (where you give a commission to others who send you customers that buy your product). You can create your affiliate program at:
- E-junkie
- Clickbank
Source:
Mitch Meyerson, Success Secrets of the Online Marketing Superstars, Dearborn Trade Publishers
robert shumake
Pink Floyd Re-Signs With EMI: Good <b>News</b> for the Band or the Label?
Progressive rock legends Pink Floyd have re-signed with their longtime record label EMI.
Social <b>News</b> Site Reddit Reports 200%+ Growth in 2010
Social news site Reddit posted year-end numbers this afternoon including January and December page view stats that climbed from 250 million pageviews to more than 3X that number, ...
Opinion: Can Oprah Help Restore Civility? - AOL <b>News</b>
Oprah began her new cable television network -- OWN -- at noon on New Year's Day, a network dedicated to the total and complete absence of mean-spiritedness.
robert shumake
robert shumake
It’s not all roses for the PS3 following further developments on the thriving PS3 hacking front today, as the group responsible for the Wii’s Homebrew Channel, going by the slightly counter-intuitive moniker of fail0verflow have turned their attention to Sony‘s pride and joy and have summarily proceeded to strip it of its secrets. If you go by their word, at least.
The hack apparently enables them to gain “full control of the PS3 system,” not as a means to illegally reduced video game expenditures you see, but solely in the interests of enabling every PS3 firmware and variant to run Linux. And here we were asking ourselves why it took four years for people to hack this thing. There’s probably a lesson here, somewhere, Sony. Something about giving people what they want or the ones who can will just take it. And never ever give them what they want, then take it away again, unless you want your “Private keys” in the press. Something along those lines.
Aaron Brazell notes, as many have, that it’s amusing to watch the apoplexy aimed at Julian Assange and WikiLeaks for posting stolen classified documents while his co-conspirators in the mainstream press publish them with next to no criticism. But Aaron moves from this to make a more novel argument, namely that Assange is threatening to topple what’s left of the traditional media business model.
[T]he media is on the sideline, their power usurped from this rogue operative with a rogue website. Instead of the New York Times or Washington Post benefitting from the receipt of leaked information as has been the case in their traditional past (see Watergate), an upstart “news organization” is stealing their thunder. Sure the Times and a variety of other media outlets were given the data eventually, but the arbiter of information was no longer them.
While the media wrings their hands over a contrived battle between the morality of publishing leaked, national security documents and preservation of national secrets, the bigger capitalistic battle is happening and that overshadows journalistic sense of responsibility.
The ability to be first is being tainted here. While Wikileaks promises to distribute new information, acting as a benevolent dictator, to news organizations, these news organizations are capitulating their responsibilities simply to make sure they have some crumbs off of Assange’s table.
No one, certainly, is suggesting that news outlets should become a lap-dog, as I have heard toss around, of the government, bowing to their every will and whim. Certainly not, lest we live in a Communist system. However, the media is expected to operate in a suitably responsible way.
In this case, the media knows that they are on the outs. In a last gasp of industry-pride, they have sacrificed themselves in a last-ditch effort to remain relevant. Put in another way, they have come to serve themselves instead of the people they exist to serve.
I’m not sure I agree with either part of this.
WikiLeaks and Newspaper Profits
First, it’s true that the Internet has been killing the old business model based on advertisements in printed copies. And WikiLeaks is to some extent furthering this. But, as it is, WikiLeaks is only important because hundreds of reporters from well established newspapers are sifting through the piles of mostly worthless documents to ferret out what’s interesting and distill it for their readership.
The upshot is that Assange is handing these papers mini-scoops and exciting stories to cover, thus boosting their bottom line. By contrast, I haven’t the foggiest notion of how Assange is making any money off of this.
Now, it’s conceivable that Assange could bypass the Guardian, Times, and others and simply dump them out there for crowdsourcing. Maybe Josh Marshall and the TPM gang or Arianna Huffington’s minions over at HuffPo would do the sorting, instead. But right now, the threat to the mainstream media is minuscule at best.
WikiLeaks and Journalistic Ethics
Is the press here ignoring the real risks of going public with classified documents that could ostensibly cause real harm to their publics? Maybe. Then again, this is hardly the first time. Leaks are the bread and butter of scoop journalism and they have been for some time.
Further, it appears — granted, we have nothing to go on but the publishers’ own accounts of the process — that the newspapers in question actually took the risks seriously, carefully vetting the information before going to press. The NYT, especially, seemed to bend over backwards to get commentary from the US Government and to pass along any objections and their own redactions to other papers who’d received the dumps.
Beyond that, once Assange made the documents publicly available on the Internet, the only thing the editors would have achieved by refusing to report on what was in them was to lose money. Someone was going to report anything of interest.
Turning full circle, I’d also note that there’s an important distinction between the conduct of the newspapers in question and of the WikiLeaks gang: The former didn’t encourage the commission of crimes by those entrusted to protect America’s secrets and set up an elaborate conspiracy to make doing so easier. Yes, they routinely cultivate sources with access to such information and happily abet legitimate whistleblowers. But they’re not out to create anarchy just for the hell of it.
robert shumake detroit
Pink Floyd Re-Signs With EMI: Good <b>News</b> for the Band or the Label?
Progressive rock legends Pink Floyd have re-signed with their longtime record label EMI.
Social <b>News</b> Site Reddit Reports 200%+ Growth in 2010
Social news site Reddit posted year-end numbers this afternoon including January and December page view stats that climbed from 250 million pageviews to more than 3X that number, ...
Opinion: Can Oprah Help Restore Civility? - AOL <b>News</b>
Oprah began her new cable television network -- OWN -- at noon on New Year's Day, a network dedicated to the total and complete absence of mean-spiritedness.
robert shumake
robert shumake
No comments:
Post a Comment