"@TheSmallgGay The pathetic little bloggers, the losers who only have internet radio shows, the nobodies with the phone cameras will save this nation."

TSG is small in many ways. He misses the idea that some of us like freedom of choice and to be free of corporate/political/manipulative control. The pathetic little bloggers can say what they think without an editor, a publisher, an advertiser or anyone else censoring them. The losers who only have internet radio shows don't have to answer to a program director or anyone else over what they play, be it music or talk. I had a radio show on a major L.A. college station, and they main thing the station program director was concerned about was emulating KCRW fundraising and getting a high rating so they could get more CPB (IIRC that is the Corporation for Public Broadcasting) funding as it was based on ratings. The only show that didn't use a station generated playlist was mine as they had no library of surf-instro music. When I'd sub for their other shows they'd demand that I search through their CD drawers and dig out the CDs for the playlist they'd hand me. I'd search but I never was able to find all the ratings-based selections they'd make, so I'd pollute their controlled selections with my idea of what music listeners might like to hear, such as Robert Fripp's "Babies on Fire" and The Mahavishnu Orchestra's "Meeting of the Spirits." I think when I interspersed dialog ("You dropped acid? Far out Man") from the soundtrack CDs of "Apocalypse Now" as Willard took his journey up the river with surf-instro tunes related to killing, and then did a live-from-the-stage interview with Dick Dale's drummer, Dusty Watson, on the phone that was the end for me, especially as I said that at the stroke of midnight on January 1, 2000 I'd play King Crimson's "21st Century Schizoid Man."

TSG is right that the phone cameras will help save the nation though, as once again you can't control the people with cameras any more now that just about every person has one. It's too bad the quality sucks, but what do you expect from those who think MP3s sound good.

The ones who will save this nation are the ones who will refuse to give up their First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. As well as those who will not go quietly. I'll be one of 'em.

Jay, I think TSG's use of "pathetic," "losers," and "nobodies" was sarcasm.. a verbal middle finger to people who actually think that bloggers are pathetic, internet radio shows are for losers, and that people with the cameras are nobodies.

I think maybe you missed the idea? Or perhaps I'm reading you/TSG wrong. Sorry if that's the case.

> I think TSG's use of "pathetic," "losers,"
> and "nobodies" was sarcasm.

Yes.

Without knowing the context of a one sentence tweet it could just as likely be serious and not sarcasm. That's the problem talking about the tweet generation -- lack of clarity. A problem with internet radio shows that play music is that even for a non-sponsered site royalties have to be paid (which is proper), unlike the totally controlled over-the-air radio spectrum. I think only a ham radio based show would be free of royalties for the average Joe to play uncensored/uncontrolled music, but the lack of quality/stereo would suck as well as the lack of listeners. Where else could you hear The Fugs "CIA Man?"

"The ones who will save this nation are the ones who will refuse to give up their First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. As well as those who will not go quietly. I'll be one of 'em."

Make that any natural right, whether enumerated or not by the Constitution. Remember, the Constitution and Bill of Rights do not grant any rights, just list major ones that governments will trample on the way to transforming Citizens to Subjects.

JJH, you might be surprised, but I actually heard Mahavishnu Orchestra on an FM radio station in Orlando - in 1973. During the day!

Since then, payola is back, big time. You'll never hear The Last Dance, Collide, Ego Likeness, or Friends of Jimmy Century on a radio because they don't pay the chain-station executives. It's very rare, but I have heard of Cruxshadows and Celldweller on the air. They must have been college stations.

If any of you are of a musical bent and get a chance to see John McLaughlin play (Mahavishnu) - GO. I've had a seat ten feet away, and couldn't tell how he was playing the ridiculously complex things he does. Then I found out that Al DiMeola couldn't tell either!

> That's the problem talking about the
> tweet generation -- lack of clarity.

Joking, right?

Few venues reward concision as well as twitter.

One, andanother

Another and another.

Another and another.

I could keep this up for a very long time.

Thanks, Cridster - long day's journey into deadline. I needed those.

A couple more girly ones.

Another and another.

Sometimes the women seem to be best at this.

Another, and we'll end (for now) with something appropriate.

PS Regarding the theme of your post— I started writing a long comment about it, but you probably could guess how it went

Crid, I don't have time to read tweet novels nor tweet news. And no, I have no idea how any comment you might have made went. I can't RTFM so tweet it to me, wait, you can't as you'd have to WTFM to tweet it to me. The horror.

> no, I have no idea how any comment
> you might have made went.

That particular part was a response to Amy, not to you... Late last week a mutual acquaintance of hers and mine at a major media outlet was terminated, and he was perhaps the most internet-savvy personality that company had ever known. So she'd have understood what I was getting at. And the David-vs-Goliath battle in 21st century media is frequent topic of comments here anyway. (Hint for next time: "posts" are from bloggers, while their visitors offer "comments". We confuse these things sometimes, yet proprietors alone should be accountable for the tone of their websites.)

But I'm always receptive to new spasms of resentment, Jay. So, like, feel what you need to feel.

And call it dumb luck, or credit my nearly clairvoyant capacity to assess character through electronic communication— You follow exactly, exactly the path I was going to describe. So now I gotta follow through on the long-ass comment.

There are two kinds of people who are getting all upset about the new media landscape. The first kind is the professionals who are losing their jobs and having their incompetence plainly exposed. (And to Hell with them.)

As regards the second kind....

> I don't have time to read
> tweet novels nor tweet news.

We got that same vibe from this:

> Without knowing the context of a one
> sentence tweet it could just as
> likely be serious and not sarcasm.

This is, um, wrong. Sometimes you have to think about stuff a little bit, and think about which parts are plainly stated and which might have some wrinkles in their meaning. It's the same with tweets as in any text. But at least with tweets, you're only dealing with 140 characters: How many tricky allusions and flops of logic could fit in a tweet? How tough can it be?

Hitchens has said this different ways in different contexts: "The literal mind distrusts the ironic mind." (That doesn't just happen between personalities, it happens within them. But for now....)

There's a certain kind of spudlike character out there who demands that things be simple and understandable and sincere and helpful. These spuds don't wanna hafta do no thinkin' while they're trying to think. Even if they're reading a blog, FOR FREE, they want to not have to work too hard to find the value.

Such people are bad in bed. I presume.

The universe and her lessons really, really don't work that way. Sometimes you can be certain something is going in one direction, and then it goes the other way at the last minute, and you gotta be totally ready to deal with it. That's not just our culture: that's the natural world, too.

When you compare [A] having everyone in the world free to express themselves as they see fit against [B] a limited number of non-confrontational careerist assholes in charge of a small number of media outlets, it's no contest. So as regards the comment from @TheSmallgGay (a person I've never heard of): Yes, giving the power of communication to EVERYONE will indeed make things better.

I haven't read the new book from Welch and Gillespie yet, but apparently one source of their libertarian optimism is the internet itself... It's a roiling, uncontrollable, explosive realm of surprise fulfillments. None of us who've extracted meaning or comfort from this thing will ever again let our government tell us that there should be no uncertainties... Or that innovation must be administered by the Department of Motor Vehicles, or some other hideous office.

If you can't feel that in your own heart, or even recognize how profoundly this is changing our culture for young people, then frankly, fella, you're fucked. And in the present context, you are unlikely to be entertained.

And now, just two pair more examples to demonstrate the magic of insincerity.

While the best of tweets from women often have at least a sarcastic element of cruelty, it turns out that...

...it turns out that the best tweets from men do, too.

Okay, maybe the 'white shorts' thing wasn't actually cruel, or even cynical. How about this or this?