Month: May 2005


  • Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

    Tim Havens, right, and Jan Vezikov in Manning Chapel at Brown University. Mr. Havens leads a morning prayer session in the chapel.

    May 22, 2005
    On a Christian Mission to the Top
    By LAURIE GOODSTEIN and DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

    For a while last winter, Tim Havens, a recent graduate of Brown University and now an evangelical missionary there, had to lead his morning prayer group in a stairwell of the campus chapel. That was because workers were clattering in to remake the lower floor for a display of American Indian art, and a Buddhist student group was chanting in the small sanctuary upstairs.

    Like most of the Ivy League universities, Brown was founded by Protestant ministers as an expressly Christian college. But over the years it gradually shed its religious affiliation and became a secular institution, as did the other Ivies. In addition to Buddhists, the Brown chaplain’s office now recognizes “heathen/pagan” as a “faith community.”

    But these days evangelical students like those in Mr. Havens’s prayer group are becoming a conspicuous presence at Brown. Of a student body of 5,700, about 400 participate in one of three evangelical student groups – more than the number of active mainline Protestants, the campus chaplain says. And these students are in the vanguard of a larger social shift not just on campuses but also at golf resorts and in boardrooms; they are part of an expanding beachhead of evangelicals in the American elite.

    The growing power and influence of evangelical Christians is manifest everywhere these days, from the best-seller lists to the White House, but in fact their share of the general population has not changed much in half a century. Most pollsters agree that people who identify themselves as white evangelical Christians make up about a quarter of the population, just as they have for decades.

    What has changed is the class status of evangelicals. In 1929, the theologian H. Richard Niebuhr described born-again Christianity as the “religion of the disinherited.” But over the last 40 years, evangelicals have pulled steadily closer in income and education to mainline Protestants in the historically affluent establishment denominations. In the process they have overturned the old social pecking order in which “Episcopalian,” for example, was a code word for upper class, and “fundamentalist” or “evangelical” shorthand for lower.

    Evangelical Christians are now increasingly likely to be college graduates and in the top income brackets. Evangelical C.E.O.’s pray together on monthly conference calls, evangelical investment bankers study the Bible over lunch on Wall Street and deep-pocketed evangelical donors gather at golf courses for conferences restricted to those who give more than $200,000 annually to Christian causes.

    Their growing wealth and education help explain the new influence of evangelicals in American culture and politics. Their buying power fuels the booming market for Christian books, music and films. Their rising income has paid for construction of vast mega-churches in suburbs across the country. Their charitable contributions finance dozens of mission agencies, religious broadcasters and international service groups.

    On The Chronicle of Philanthropy’s latest list of the 400 top charities, Campus Crusade for Christ, an evangelical student group, raised more from private donors than the Boy Scouts of America, the Public Broadcasting Service and Easter Seals.

    Now a few affluent evangelicals are directing their attention and money at some of the tallest citadels of the secular elite: Ivy League universities. Three years ago a group of evangelical Ivy League alumni formed the Christian Union, an organization intended to “reclaim the Ivy League for Christ,” according to its fund-raising materials, and to “shape the hearts and minds of many thousands who graduate from these schools and who become the elites in other American cultural institutions.”

    The Christian Union has bought and maintains new evangelical student centers at Brown, Princeton and Cornell, and has plans to establish a center on every Ivy League campus. In April, 450 students, alumni and supporters met in Princeton for an “Ivy League Congress on Faith and Action.” A keynote speaker was Charles W. Colson, the born-again Watergate felon turned evangelical thinker.

    Matt Bennett, founder of the Christian Union, told the conference, “I love these universities – Princeton and all the others, my alma mater, Cornell – but it really grieves me and really hurts me to think of where they are now.”


    The Christian Union’s immediate goal, he said, was to recruit campus missionaries. “What is happening now is good,” Mr. Bennett said, “but it is like a finger in the dike of keeping back the flood of immorality.”

    And trends in the Ivy League today could shape the culture for decades to come, he said. “So many leaders come out of these campuses. Seven of the nine Supreme Court justices are Ivy League grads; four of the seven Massachusetts Supreme Court justices; Christian ministry leaders; so many presidents, as you know; leaders of business – they are everywhere.”

    He added, “If we are going to change the world, we have got, by God’s power, to see these campuses radically changed.”

    An Outsider on Campus Mr. Havens, who graduated from Brown last year, is the kind of missionary the Christian Union hopes to enlist. An evangelical from what he calls a “solidly middle class” family in the Midwest, he would have been an anomaly at Brown a couple of generations ago. He applied there, he said, out of a sense of “nonconformity” and despite his mother’s preference that he attend a Christian college.

    “She just was nervous about, and rightfully so, what was going to happen to me freshman year,” Mr. Havens recalled.

    When he arrived at Brown, in Providence, R.I., Mr. Havens was astounded to find that the biggest campus social event of the fall was the annual SexPowerGod dance, sponsored by the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Queer Alliance and advertised with dining-hall displays depicting pairs of naked men or women. “Why do they have to put God in the name?” he said. “It seems kind of disrespectful.”

    Mr. Havens found himself a double outsider of sorts. In addition to being devoted to his faith, he was a scholarship student at a university where half the students can afford $45,000 in tuition and fees without recourse to financial aid and where, he said, many tend to “spend money like water.”

    But his modest means did not stand out as much as his efforts to guard his morals. He did not drink, and he almost never cursed. And he was determined to stay “pure” until marriage, though he did not lack for attention from female students. Just as his mother feared, Mr. Havens, a broad-shouldered former wrestler with tousled brown hair and a guileless smile, wavered some his freshman year and dated several classmates.

    “I was just like, ‘Oh, I can get this girl to like me,’ ” he recalled. ” ‘Oh, she likes me; she’s cute.’ And so it was a lot of fairly short and meaningless relationships. It was pretty destructive.”

    In his sophomore year, though, his evangelical a cappella singing group, a Christian twist on an old Ivy League tradition, interceded. With its support, he rededicated himself to serving God, and by his senior year he was running his own Bible-study group, hoping to inoculate first-year students against the temptations he had faced. They challenged one another, Mr. Havens said, “committing to remain sexually pure, both in a physical sense and in avoiding pornography and ogling women and like that.”

    Mr. Havens is now living in a house owned and supported by the Christian Union and is trying to reach not just other evangelicals but nonbelievers as well.

    Prayers in the Boardrooms

    The Christian Union is the brainchild of Matt Bennett, 40, who earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees at Cornell and later directed the Campus Crusade for Christ at Princeton. Mr. Bennett, tall and soft-spoken, with a Texas drawl that waxes and wanes depending on the company he is in, said he got the idea during a 40-day water-and-juice fast, when he heard God speaking to him one night in a dream.

    “He was speaking to me very strongly that he wanted to see an increasing and dramatic spiritual revival in a place like Princeton,” Mr. Bennett said.

    While working for Campus Crusade, Mr. Bennett had discovered that it was hard to recruit evangelicals to minister to the elite colleges of the Northeast because the environment was alien to them and the campuses often far from their homes. He also found that the evangelical ministries were hobbled without adequate salaries to attract professional staff members and without centers of their own where students could gather, socialize and study the Bible. Jews had Hillel Houses, and Roman Catholics had Newman Centers.

    He thought evangelicals should have their own houses, too, and began a furious round of fund-raising to buy or build some. An early benefactor was his twin brother, Monty, who had taken over the Dallas hotel empire their father built from a single Holiday Inn and who had donated a three-story Victorian in a neighborhood near Brown.

    To raise more money, Matt Bennett has followed a grapevine of affluent evangelicals around the country, winding up even in places where evangelicals would have been a rarity just a few decades ago. In Manhattan, for example, he visited Wall Street boardrooms and met with the founder of Socrates in the City, a roundtable for religious intellectuals that gathers monthly at places like the Algonquin Hotel and the Metropolitan Club.

    Those meetings introduced him to an even more promising pool of like-minded Christians, the New Canaan Group, a Friday morning prayer breakfast typically attended by more than a hundred investment bankers and other professionals. The breakfasts started in the Connecticut home of a partner in Goldman, Sachs but grew so large that they had to move to a local church. Like many other evangelicals, some members attend churches that adhere to evangelical doctrine but that remain affiliated with mainline denominations.

    Other donors to the Christian Union are members of local elites across the Bible Belt. Not long ago, for example, Mr. Bennett paid a visit to Montgomery, Ala., for lunch with Julian L. McPhillips Jr., a wealthy Princeton alumnus and the managing partner of a local law firm. Mr. Bennett, wearing an orange Princeton tie, said he wanted to raise enough money for the Christian Union to hire someone to run a “healing ministry” for students with depression, eating disorders or drug or alcohol addiction.

    Mr. McPhillips, who shares Mr. Bennett’s belief in the potential of faith healing, remarked that he had once cured an employee’s migraine headaches just by praying for him. “We joke in my office that we don’t need health insurance,” he told Mr. Bennett before writing a check for $1,000.

    Mr. Bennett’s database has so far grown to about 5,000 names gathered by word of mouth alone. They are mostly Ivy League graduates whose regular alumni contributions he hopes to channel into the Christian Union. And these Ivy League evangelicals, in turn, are just a small fraction of the large number of their affluent fellow believers.

    Gaining on the Mainline

    Their commitment to their faith is confounding a long-held assumption that, like earlier generations of Baptists or Pentecostals, prosperous evangelicals would abandon their religious ties or trade them for membership in establishment churches. Instead, they have kept their traditionalist beliefs, and their churches have even attracted new members from among the well-off.

    Meanwhile, evangelical Protestants are pulling closer to their mainline counterparts in class and education. As late as 1965, for example, a white mainline Protestant was two and a half times as likely to have a college degree as a white evangelical, according to an analysis by Prof. Corwin E. Smidt, a political scientist at Calvin College, an evangelical institution in Grand Rapids, Mich. But by 2000, a mainline Protestant was only 65 percent more likely to have the same degree. And since 1985, the percentage of incoming freshmen at highly selective private universities who said they were born-again also rose by half, to 11 or 12 percent each year from 7.3 percent, according to the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles.

    To many evangelical Christians, the reason for their increasing worldly success and cultural influence is obvious: God’s will at work. Some also credit leaders like the midcentury intellectual Carl F. H. Henry, who helped to found a large and influential seminary, a glossy evangelical Christian magazine and the National Association of Evangelicals, a powerful umbrella group that now includes 51 denominations. Dr. Henry and his followers implored believers to look beyond their churches and fight for a place in the American mainstream.

    There were also demographic forces at work, beginning with the G.I. Bill, which sent a pioneering generation of evangelicals to college. Probably the greatest boost to the prosperity of evangelicals as a group came with the Sun Belt expansion of the 1970′s and the Texas oil boom, which brought new wealth and businesses to the regions where evangelical churches had been most heavily concentrated.

    The most striking example of change in how evangelicals see themselves and their place in the world may be the Assemblies of God, a Pentecostal denomination. It was founded in Hot Springs, Ark., in 1914 by rural and working-class Christians who believed that the Holy Spirit had moved them to speak in tongues. Shunned by established churches, they became a sect of outsiders, and their preachers condemned worldly temptations like dancing, movies, jewelry and swimming in public pools. But like the Southern Baptists and other conservative denominations, the Assemblies gradually dropped their separatist strictures as their membership prospered and spread.

    As the denomination grew, Assemblies preachers began speaking not only of heavenly rewards but also of the material blessings God might provide in this world. The notion was controversial in some evangelical circles but became widespread nonetheless, and it made the Assemblies’ faith more compatible with an upwardly mobile middle class.

    By the 1970′s, Assemblies churches were sprouting up in affluent suburbs across the country. Recent surveys by Margaret Poloma, a historian at the University of Akron in Ohio, found Assemblies members more educated and better off than the general public.

    As they flourished, evangelical entrepreneurs and strivers built a distinctly evangelical business culture of prayer meetings, self-help books and business associations. In some cities outside the Northeast, evangelical business owners list their names in Christian yellow pages.

    The rise of evangelicals has also coincided with the gradual shift of most of them from the Democratic Party to the Republican and their growing political activism. The conservative Christian political movement seldom developed in poor, rural Bible Belt towns. Instead, its wellsprings were places like the Rev. Ed Young’s booming mega-church in suburban Houston or the Rev. Timothy LaHaye’s in Orange County, Calif., where evangelical professionals and businessmen had the wherewithal to push back against the secular culture by organizing boycotts, electing school board members and lobbying for conservative judicial appointments.

    ‘A Bunch of Heathens’

    Mr. Havens, the Brown missionary, is part of the upsurge of well-educated born-again Christians. He grew up in one of the few white households in a poor black neighborhood of St. Louis, where his parents had moved to start a church, which failed to take off. Mr. Havens’s father never graduated from college. After being laid off from his job at a marketing company two years ago, he now works in an insurance company’s software and systems department. Tim Havens’s mother home-schooled the family’s six children for at least a few years each.

    Mr. Havens got through Brown on scholarships and loans, and at graduation was $25,000 in debt. To return to campus for his missionary year and pay his expenses, he needed to raise an additional $36,000, and on the advice of Geoff Freeman, the head of the Brown branch of Campus Crusade, he did his fund-raising in St. Louis.

    “It is easy to sell New England in the Midwest,” as Mr. Freeman put it later. Midwesterners, he said, see New Englanders as “a bunch of heathens.”

    So Mr. Havens drove home each day from a summer job at a stone supply warehouse to work the phone from his cluttered childhood bedroom. He told potential donors that many of the American-born students at Brown had never even been to church, to say nothing of the students from Asia or the Middle East. “In a sense, it is pre-Christian,” he explained.

    Among his family’s friends, however, encouragement was easier to come by than cash. As the summer came to a close, Mr. Havens was still $6,000 short. He decided to give himself a pay cut and go back to Brown with what he had raised, trusting God to take care of his needs just as he always had when money seemed scarce during college.

    “God owns the cattle on a thousand hills,” he often told himself. “God has plenty of money.”

    Thanks to the Christian Union, Mr. Haven’s present quarters as a ministry intern at Brown are actually more upscale than his home in St. Louis. On Friday nights, he is a host for a Bible-study and dinner party for 70 or 80 Christian students, who serve themselves heaping plates of pasta before breaking into study groups. Afterward, they regroup in the living room for board games and goofy improvisation contests, all free of profanity and even double entendre.

    Lately, though, Mr. Havens has been contemplating steps that would take him away from Brown and campus ministry. After a chaste romance – “I didn’t kiss her until I asked her to marry me,” he said – he recently became engaged to a missionary colleague, Liz Chalmers. He has been thinking about how to support the children they hope to have.

    And he has been considering the example of his future father-in-law, Daniel Chalmers, a Baptist missionary to the Philippines who ended up building power plants there and making a small fortune. Mr. Chalmers has been a steady donor to Christian causes, and he bought a plot of land in Oregon, where he plans to build a retreat center.

    “God has always used wealthy people to help the church,” Mr. Havens said. He pointed out that in the Bible, rich believers helped support the apostles, just as donors to the Christian Union are investing strategically in the Ivy League today.

    With those examples and his own father in mind, Mr. Havens chose medicine over campus ministry. He scored well on his medical school entrance exams and, after another year at Brown, he will head to St. Louis University School of Medicine. At the Christian Union conference in April, he was pleased to hear doctors talk about praying with their patients and traveling as medical missionaries.

    He is looking forward to having the money a medical degree can bring, and especially to putting his children through college without the scholarships and part-time jobs he needed. But whether he becomes rich, he said, “will depend on how much I keep.”

    Like other evangelicals of his generation, he means to take his faith with him as he makes his way in the world. He said his roommates at Brown had always predicted that he would “sell out”- loosen up about his faith and adopt their taste for new cars, new clothes and the other trappings of the upper class.

    He didn’t at Brown and he thinks he never will.

    “So far so good,” he said. But he admitted, “I don’t have any money yet.”

    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Contact Us Back to Top
















  •  The Buzz Log – Search Spikes and Trends addtomyyahoo




    Dreaming With You
    Tuesday May 24, 2005 6:00PM PT





    Dreaming
    Dreaming
    When you lay your head down on the pillow tonight and close your eyes, there’s one sure thing. And it has nothing to do with snoring, although sleep apnea is a serious issue affecting millions. The sure thing about tonight’s bedtime is that at some point, you will lapse into REM sleep and begin to dream. While we have no idea what you’re dreaming about — it could be unicorns and rainbows for all we know — we do know what types of dream searches snooze their way onto the Buzz.

    Searches on “dreams” are up 53% over the last month, and dream searches are most vivid for younger Web surfers. A whopping 75% of “dreams” queries come from the under-24 demographic, perhaps indicating that no one over 24 has time to analyze and search for answers to their dreams. Or perhaps the dreams of everyone over 24 are broken and lay in a pile of regret by the dirty clothes. We’re hoping for the former!

    Those searching on “Meaning of Dreams” were overwhelmingly women, with 80% coming from ladies trying to puzzle together why Tom Cruise was jumping around a plushy couch like a maniac while they slept. Oh wait, that really happened? Oops. Before we hit the snooze button on this topic, we’d like to share a few top dream searches from the past week. Sweet dreams indeed…



  • LE REVE” – IMPERFECT DREAMS NEEDS
    TO BE PERFECTED
    by Judy Thorburn
    Entertainment Reporter and Movie Critic for The
    Las Vegas Tribune and owner/editor/writer of The
    Flick Chicks website at:
    http://www.theflickchicks.com

    Le Reve, which recently opened at Wynn Las Vegas
    Resort and Country Club, is the fourth Las Vegas
    production from Franco Dragone, the creative mind
    behind Cirque shows “O” and “Mystere” and Celine
    Dion’s “A New Day. This is a show that has great
    potential, but before it can live up to expectations it will
    have to undergo some changes, tweaking, and deletions.

    That isn’t to say that the show I experienced at the VIP
    opening didn’t evoke a sense of mystery, fantasy and
    artistry.

    The venue itself, a 2087 seat, fourteen-row theater in the
    round is beautiful with a domed ceiling adorned with
    mannequin figures in sensual poses gazing down upon
    a circular water engulfed platform stage and surrounding
    pool which serves as the central focus for the production
    that includes a cast of seventy five swimmers, acrobats,
    clowns and aerial performers.

    Every seat in the house allows for a great viewpoint, but
    those seated in front can expect some sprays of water
    during the live performance. This was a complaint by
    many who sat in the first few rows, and needs to be
    rectified by handy towels or a plastic cover up. Lucky for
    me I sat just a bit further back, and didn’t get drenched.
    But, on the other hand I had to deal with a quartet of
    rude French speaking attendees who could not keep
    quiet throughout the entire show.

    If you can recall, Le Reve was the original name for
    Wynn’s $2.7 billion property while it was in its planning
    stages. But things have changed since Wynn decided to
    self-title his mega resort. For Dragone to adapt the title
    of Le Reve (The Dream) to his new production, it seems
    a fit homage to Wynn. But, the accompanying subtitle
    “A Small Collection of Imperfect Dreams”, in its present
    form, unfortunately, says it like it is.

    It is obvious that Dragone is a man with a vision. And
    that vision has brought to life a multi media show filled
    with stunning visual effects, imaginative costumes and
    the well-suited accompanying ethereal music by Cirque
    veteran composer/music director Benoit Jutras (“O”,
    “La Nouba, “Mystere”).

    The result is an eye-popping spectacle. But, there are
    problems with the unclear storyline and theme.
    According to the program, Le Reve revolves around the
    fight between Mephistopheles and Angels for the soul
    of Everyman, represented in this case by an Average
    Joe (Wayne Wilson), all within a series of dreams,
    where the subconscious has no boundaries. That is all
    well and good. However, it is executed in a fashion that
    interprets as more confusing than comprehensible. I, nor
    anyone I spoke with afterwards, really had any idea what
    the storyline was about.

    Through a series of breathtakingly beautiful sequences the
    audiences gets to experience both ground and aerial
    ballets and acrobatics (with the use of harnesses), water
    dances, high flying dives and gorgeous imagery. It is all
    very surrealistic and utilizes symbolism, which is mostly
    ineffective.

    Various sequences are more memorable than others.
    One whimsical, very entertaining routine has red high
    heeled legs emerge upside down from the water to do a
    synchronized dance number. But, my favorite
    performance piece takes place on the center stage
    platform that rises with surrounding waterfalls. In the
    middle several ball headed, bare chested, Vin Diesel
    look-alike men wearing Asian inspired red skirts engage
    in an innovative mixture of dance, martial arts, and yoga.
    Another sequence has an airborne, grapevine adorned
    gazebo and attached tables and chairs that turn and
    create a trapeze device for an acrobatic display.

    Other characters consist of women in white body clinging
    dresses wearing Jean Harlow wigs, a devil character who
    parades along the sidelines but doesn’t do much else, a
    water emerging monster who looks like he came from the
    black lagoon, a whip yielding pregnant woman, other
    pregnant ladies (what’s that all about?) and four annoying,
    unfunny white suited “angels” who break up the rhythm
    of the show whenever they appear as the so called “
    comic relief”. These characters are a detraction, and can
    easily be omitted so as to allow a more compelling flow.
    I would also do something more with the mechanical
    swan that occasionally gets the spotlight as it maneuvers
    around the pool. I was expecting it to eventually transform
    into something that had a deeper meaning, but that never
    happened. Like too many of the other props and
    characters, it was disposable.

    There is more than a splash of occasional imaginative
    brilliance. Towards the end of this ninety-minute show,
    figures in raincoats and umbrellas descend from above
    like a group of slow motion Mary Poppins, which can also
    be seen as homage to the surrealistic paintings of Rene
    Magritte.

    Like many other productions, sometimes it takes a while
    for a show to evolve into its finalized version. As it stands,
    Le Reve, “A Small Collection of Imperfect Dreams” needs
    some retooling before those imperfect dreams become a
    perfect show.

    ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
    Judy Thorburn is a former rock music journalist,
    associate editor for Hit Parader Magazine, and publicist
    from New York City. For the past five years Judy has been
    covering the entertainment scene as reporter and featured
    film critic for the Las Vegas Tribune, a weekly newspaper
    distributed throughout Las Vegas. As The Flick Chick,
    Judy’s movie reviews and articles on the motion picture
    industry can also be found at her interesting website at:
    http://www.theflickchicks.com
    where she is owner/editor and writer along with other
    respected and notable movie critics. She is also a
    freelance writer who has contributed to magazines such
    as “Where” and numerous entertainment related websites


     


  • Weekly Shredder 39:
    The Energy Task Force Court Ruling
    by James Norton


    On the topic of secrecy, James Madison once wrote:


    Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.


    If there’s one classic quote from the founding fathers that the Bush administration grasps intuitively, it’s this.


    Unfortunately, they’ve gripped it in reverse:


    Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a political faction which means to destroy its rivals and rule without question, must deny its opponents the power which knowledge gives.


    Once upon a time, the judiciary might have put the reins on an executive branch dangerously hepped up on legislative PCP. But the courts recently handed the Republicans another resounding victory in their quest to prevent the public from knowing what government is up to.


    A recent lawsuit by Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club was shot down this week. The suit was over access to details of the secret Dick Cheney-chaired energy task force.


    SCENE ONE:


    [Setting: The Oval Office, January 29, 2001]


    PRESIDENT BUSH: Dick, put together a task force to formulate a national energy policy.


    CHENEY: I know just the folks.


    SCENE TWO:


    [Setting: A swank Washington conference room.]


    CHENEY: Any ideas, boys?


    ENERGY EXECUTIVE 1: Uh… more oil?


    EXEC 2: Weaker anti-pollution regulation?


    EXEC 3: Panda-burning SUVs?


    CHENEY: Excellent.


    SCENE THREE:


    REPORTER: Can we see some transcripts of the energy task force meeting?


    CHENEY: No dice. It’s not in the public’s interest for the president to have to account for the advice he’s given.


    It is, of course, more complicated than that.


    If you set the wrong kind of precedent on secrecy, you open the door to terrorists — or terror sympathizers, such as, say, the ACLU, the Sierra Club or the March of Dimes — using the US court system to compel the disclosure of documents that would present a national security risk.


    Anyone, of course, who has seriously studied Islamo-fascist terror groups knows that one of their primary tactics is the filing of FOIA requests, nuisance lawsuits and amicus briefs.


    To quote former counter-terrorism director Richard Clarke: “Al Qaeda’s bloodthirsty fanaticism is matched only by its respect for the fairness and efficiency of the American judicial system.”


    Oh, wait. Clarke didn’t say that. I just made it up. The last goddamn thing Al Qaeda cares about is the sort of information you can slowly pry out of the government by following established procedure.


    Obviously, however, some government secrecy is needed. But how much?


    Like all arguments along these lines, there’s a black area, and a gray area and a white area. Let’s consider this in the abstract, at a high level of simplification.


    Should all government activities be classified in order to prevent our enemies from exploiting America’s vulnerabilities? Of course not. That would be paranoid, inefficient and akin to the operating style of the Khmer Rouge or the Taliban.


    Abominable things multiply in the pitch blackness of total secrecy.


    Democracy cannot function where information is scarce. The founding fathers protected the press explicitly. And Madison, in the Federalist Papers, linked clashing factions and thriving liberty (fed, implicitly, by good public information):


    Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an ailment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.


    Word. That’s what democracy is all about. You can effectively crush your political opponents by suppressing all damaging government reports and data, but only at the expense of liberty itself.


    Therefore: Should all government activities be public? Probably not a great idea, either. Disclosing the president’s security protocols, or sensitive negotiations with foreign governments or the operating budgets and frequent flier mile accounts for the CIA’s secret hit squads might have a very negative impact on national security.


    However, when you look at this sort of critical national security information as a percentage of the overall information generated by government and critical for Americans to participate actively and intelligently in their own government, it’s a tiny drop in a big, big lake. For every secret Kill Bin Laden 2005 task force (which, some might argue, should be overseen by Congress at the very least), there are 1,000 national energy task forces — projects that all of us have a right to understand.


    It’s this balance that makes the finding of the D.C. circuit court — which decided that the industry executives who participated in the task force were not part of the task force, thus making it effectively secret — so disappointing.


    In light of the severe separation-of-powers problems in applying [the Federal Advisory Committee Act] on the basis that private parties participated in, or influenced, or were otherwise involved with a committee in the Executive Office of the President, we must construe the statute strictly. We therefore hold that such a committee is composed wholly of federal officials if the President has given no one other than a federal official a vote in or, if the committee acts by consensus, a veto over the committeeÕs decisions.


    Congress could not have meant that participation in committee meetings or activities, even influential participation, would be enough to make someone a member of the committee.


    This is completely ridiculous, and tragic. Ridiculous because the dictionary definition of “member” is “one of the individuals composing a group.” Industry officials met with the task force, contributed information to the task force and helped shape the task force’s agenda and report. True, they didn’t vote — but is it possible to reasonably deem them members?


    Yes. Thus the tragedy: If the court had erred on the side of being more generous with “membership” — saying that industry consultants vital to a task force’s meetings and final report are part of the task force — it would have busted the door open on government. It would have checked the power of the executive branch. It would have let the sunshine in.


    It would have given the government pause for thought before stacking a meeting with only members of the interest group the meeting will be affecting — and no independent observers or advocates for contrary (in this case, conservationist) viewpoints.


    America was founded as a country of checks and balances, and as a country of open, transparent government.


    The US Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. doesn’t seem to understand this. Or, more cynically, it doesn’t seem to care.



    E-mail James Norton at jim@flakmag.com.



    graphic by Derek Evernden (derek@ocellus







    Also by James Norton:
    McCain Smiles
    The Sherman Dodge Sign
    The Legal Helpers Sign
    Mocking a Guy With a Hitler Mustache
    Annals of London
    Baseball is Just Baseball
    Before and After: Stories from New York
    Rural Stories, Urban Listeners
    More by James Norton ›







     


  • Blogged
    by Alex Hinton


    “I got blogged!”


    As blogging explodes, such idioms are fast entering everyday speech, a marker of our times just as “you’ve got mail!” marked the late 1990s.


    There are more than 10 million blogs active on the Web, with thousands more appearing each day. As they proliferate, more of us are getting blogged. “Blogged” is a passive term, suggesting a lack of agency in the moment, an act revealed in the past tense.


    For some, being blogged can be exciting and fun, a momentary step into the public light and warmth of an e-community. For others, it calls to mind another phrase that begins “I got….”


    I got blogged recently after writing an op-ed that appeared in the Christian Science Monitor about the 30th anniversary of the Khmer Rouge revolution.


    The op-ed considered the lessons we might take away from the Cambodian genocide as we now live in a world of war and terrorism, and warned about the dangers of fanaticism, political paranoia, torture, stereotyping, euphemistic language, displacing responsibility and desensitization. By learning from the past, I argued, we could become “more self-aware, humble, tolerant and … willing to act in the face of evil.”


    Given the current political climate, it’s not surprising that the essay elicited strong messages of both support and disagreement, but I was surprised by the abrasive tone of a few of them. Then a likely source suggested itself.


    One of the messages indicated the piece had been picked up by Power Line, perhaps the most popular conservative blog, averaging more than 69,000 visits a day. Power Line, run by three lawyers, has the distinction of being named “Blog of the Year” by Time, largely because of its role in raising doubts about the authenticity of the documents involved in the “Rathergate” scandal.


    The post about my op-ed, written by Paul Mirengoff (a.k.a. “Deacon“), one of the Power Line trio, was entitled “A Very Sick Professor.” According to Mirengoff, my op-ed argued that the US government’s war on terrorism was “causing us to become like the Khmer Rouge.” It described my purported stance as “obscene” and “off-the-chart lunacy,” while noting that I was “far from the only leftist to have compared Bush to Hitler.” It concluded: “The hatred of folks like Hinton for the US knows no discernible bounds.”


    The posting had the amusingly over-the-top tone of a North Korean propaganda tract. However, it’s disturbing that such a well-regarded blog would publish a post that not only distorted what I’d written, but did so in a hateful and dehumanizing manner.


    This was precisely the sort of thing my op-ed warned against. Mirengoff’s use of an illness metaphor (“A very sick professor”) was particularly unsettling; this sort of language pervades the ideological rhetoric of hate groups and has been taken to its extreme by those who have incited genocide.


    Not only is such language dehumanizing, it legitimatizes attacks on another person or group since, by implication, illnesses are threats to the health of the body politic. It was precisely this sort of authorization that was likely behind the vitriol of a few of the messages about my op-ed, which echoed the tone and content of Mirengoff’s blog.


    It was particularly disheartening to find such things written by a lawyer who, one would hope, would adhere to a higher set of ethical principles and hesitate before maligning another person (nowhere, for example, did I compare President Bush to Hitler nor indicate that I hated the United States). Mirengoff completely missed the point off my op-ed.


    More broadly, the Power Line post raises several important ethical questions about blogging. First, should there be a bloggers’ code of ethics? Blogs are particularly fascinating because they blur the lines between the public and the private, occupying an intermediary position not subject to ordinary standards that govern public speech and writing.


    For political bloggers such as the Power Line trio, who presumably aspire to a sort of journalistic credibility and would like to avoid charges of hypocrisy, a code of ethics is crucial as they criticize “mainstream media” for their shortcomings. Perhaps the blogs deeply committed to ethical blogging could post or provide a link to the code of ethics to which they subscribe. One site, Cyberjournalist.net, has already proposed such a code, based loosely on a journalistic code of ethics. Alternatively, political bloggers might form a professional association and develop their own set of ethical guidelines and an ethics awareness program.


    Bloggers committed to ethical blogging and voluntary self-regulation could then display a related insignia on their site — just as businesses signal that they are members of the Better Business Bureau. Debates about these issues have begun, but a great deal more discussion is needed. Honesty, accuracy, accountability and humaneness are among the key issues that should be considered.


    Second, to what extent, if any, are political blogs like Power Line beholden to special interests? Do they serve as paid consultants to political groups? Do they receive contributions from political campaigns? Who are their advertisers? If such political bloggers criticize mainstream media for bias and influence, they would do well to reveal any financial relationships that might skew their own blogging. Power Line does not provide such information (at least not in a readily visible place) though the blog’s broad political orientation is suggested by the ads it accepts, which display slogans like: “Annoy a Liberal,” “COUNTER THE LIBERAL AGENDA!” “ACLU: Enemy of the State” and “PEACE THROUGH SUPERIOR FIREPOWER.”


    Nick Coleman, a columnist for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, has hammered Power Line for failing to disclose fully its political ties, arguing that, while the blog portrays itself as an independent alternative to mainstream media, Power Line has close ties to the Minnesota Republican party and to the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank that recently gave an award to Rush Limbaugh.


    In a Dec. 29 column, Coleman called the Power Line trio “reliable partisan hacks” who pursue a right-wing agenda cooked up in conservative think tanks funded by millionaire power brokers. “They should call themselves Powertool,” he writes. “They don’t speak truth to power. They just speak for power.”


    Power Line, which has had a series of sharp exchanges with Coleman and Jim Boyd, the Star Tribune’s deputy editorial page editor, responded vigorously to these suggestions of influence.


    Still, concerns that political blogs might serve as fronts for political campaigns has grown enough that the Federal Election Commission has considered requiring more disclosure. But the government would not need to interevene if bloggers self-regulated by adopting a code of ethics that required such disclosure.


    And, third, just as we must be sure to defend the free speech of bloggers, so too should we consider how to protect the rights of the blogged.


    For, they are, by the nature of blogging in a disadvantageous position. The blogger controls the blog, so the blogged has little recourse to counter a libelous blog. For political blogs, in particular, a commitment to rigorous fact-checking might prevent some of the problems. When Power Line and other blogs make this type of a mistake, they would do well to note it on a prominent corrections page. Such blogs might consider providing some sort of forum, such as a “rebuttals” link, for the blogged to respond to the accusations of the blogger — much in the way that some blogs provide space for commentary and newspapers and magazines accept critical “letters to the editor.”


    A commitment to providing such recourse — as well as to fact-checking, making corrections and avoiding libel and dehumanization — could also be incorporated into a bloggers’ code of ethics, providing a degree of protection to the blogged.


    Lacking such alternatives, I did three things after I got blogged by Power Line. First, I wrote this essay. Second, I established my own website with links to my original op-ed, Mirengoff’s blog, and this essay. And, third, I sent an e-mail message to Mirengoff voicing my objections to his blog, particularly his use of an illness metaphor.


    Not surprisingly, instead of an apology I received a curt reply in which Mirengoff stood by his blog and demanded that I refute his accusations.


    In response, I invited him to a debate in a neutral written forum. I’m still waiting for a reply.



    Alexander Hinton is an anthropologist and author of “Why Did They Kill? Cambodia in the Shadow of Genocide.” E-mail him at alexlhinton at hotmail dot com.



    graphic by Chip Van Dyke (comics at chipv dot com)



  • General Electric is testing an unconventional online advertising campaign that uses a virtual seed. It sprouts and can be e-mailed to friends.


    Illustration by The New York Times

    May 23, 2005
    Advertisers Want Something Different
    By STUART ELLIOTT

    BBDO Worldwide in New York, General Electric’s longtime advertising agency, was not getting the message.

    The agency had been offering G.E. its panoply of traditional marketing ideas, leaning heavily on the standard 30-second television spot. But Judy Hu, general manager for global advertising and branding at G.E., demanded something daring. What she eventually got fit the bill: an online campaign with a virtual sprouting seed that computer users can tend and send to people they know by e-mail.

    “They kept bringing us what they thought we wanted,” said Ms. Hu of her exchange with BBDO a couple years ago. “It took a while to make them believe we wanted something different.”

    The world of advertising turns upside down when the advertisers – not the agencies – are the ones pushing the envelope. But that is what has been happening.

    The advertising business is undergoing an upheaval, forcing executives to radically change how they do business. Marketers are trying desperately to stay ahead of the technological innovations that are changing how consumers view their messages – and are putting pressure on their agencies to adapt.

    The ad firms are more eager to please than ever. The major public agencies face shrinking profit margins and sagging stock prices, leading to a shakeout and a frenzied effort to cut costs.

    It’s unclear if the traditional agencies will be nimble enough to halt a slow decline. Already, many famous names are vanishing: N. W. Ayer; Bates; Bozell; D’Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles; Earle Palmer Brown; Lintas; Warwick Baker O’Neill.

    The big agencies also face a throng of hip new rivals, which have pounced on the opportunity and are looking to steal business. Those boutiques use their oddball names – like 180, Amalgamated, Mother, Nitro, Soul, StrawberryFrog, Taxi and Zig – as branding devices to signal they are not about business as usual.

    “Clients are looking at the results they’re getting and they’re not happy,” said Miles S. Nadal, chairman and chief executive of MDC Partners in Toronto, the parent of innovative, creatively focused agencies like Crispin Porter & Bogusky and Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners.

    “Historically, agencies pushed clients,” Mr. Nadal said. “Today, clients are pushing the agencies. The same-old, same-old is not being accepted.”

    But some agencies may be moving too slowly.

    “There’s an incredible ability to cling to what’s been done because there’s a comfort in that,” said Ian B. Rowden, executive vice president and chief marketing officer for the Wendy’s brand at Wendy’s International in Dublin, Ohio.

    “There’s a lot of talk but less action,” said Mr. Rowden, who has also held senior marketing posts at Coca-Cola and Callaway Golf. “The old model still drives a lot of things.”

    The origins of the industry’s current problems are many: the dot-com bust, the fallout from 9/11 and the explosive growth of technologies that help consumers avoid ads – like digital video recorders, iPods and satellite radio. Madison Avenue is still trying to regain its footing. Industry employment, which peaked at 496,500 in 2000, fell 14.4 percent, to 424,900, last year, according to the Labor Department.

    “The onus is on the agencies to make sure they have the right creative talent,” said Lauren Rich Fine, an analyst who follows the ad industry for Merrill Lynch, but “I suspect that’s more difficult than ever,” she added, after the “massive layoffs of the last few years.”

    Ad spending in the United States, which once grew reliably year after year, declined in 2001 for the first time in four decades – and by the largest percentage since the Depression year of 1938. While ad spending has rebounded since then, the growth rate is slower than during its heyday of the 1990′s.

    “I used to think the agencies were capable of double-digit revenue growth” each year, Ms. Fine said, but “now I look at them as mid-to-high single digits.”

    Worse yet for agencies, profit margins have been shrinking significantly as clients, facing relentless competition and consolidation in categories like automobiles, fast food and telecommunications, are anxiously squeezing every nickel of waste from their ad budgets.

    “In the 80′s, we used to fight with clients over creative. In the 90′s, it was about strategy. Now, it’s only about money,” said Jonathan Bond, co-chairman of Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners in New York.

    So in a trend-conscious industry, economizing is the new black. For instance, when Kirshenbaum Bond recently filmed a commercial for the Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, retelling the tale of the Trojan horse, “instead of building a massive set, we used miniatures,” said Rob Feakins, vice chairman and executive creative director.

    That saved about $150,000, or about 10 percent of the budget for the commercial, he estimated.

    Also, when planning a campaign that calls for several commercials, “we try to ‘gang up the shoots.’ Do two a day,” Mr. Feakins said. “And we always think of shooting them on one location with a minimum of crew moves, because the crew moves kill you.”

    Some cost-conscious marketers are even turning over responsibility for agency relationships to procurement departments. “The corporate world, reacting to recessions and Wall Street pressures, is challenging the agencies,” said Alan Krinsky, principal at Alan Krinsky Associates in New York, which advises agencies and advertisers on issues like procurement. “Accountability is still a gray area.”

    The stock prices of the giant holding companies that own almost all the big agencies have been weak. The shares of the world’s largest agency company in revenue, the Omnicom Group in New York, parent of BBDO, are down 8.1 percent from their 52-week high and 13.8 percent from their five-year peak. For the WPP Group, which owns agencies like Young & Rubicam and is the No. 2 agency company behind Omnicom, the share price is down 11.7 percent and 29.1 percent, respectively.

    The third-largest agency company, the Interpublic Group of Companies, which owns agencies like Deutsch and McCann Erickson, has suffered accounting problems that have led to an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission as well as the loss of large clients for creative and media-buying assignments. The company’s shares are down 15.7 percent from their 52-week high and 73.7 percent from their five-year peak.

    “It’s almost accepted that the model is broken and it’s time for a new approach,” said Carl Johnson, a longtime executive at traditional advertising agencies like TBWA Worldwide. He and four other high-profile refugees from mainstream agencies are now partners in a creatively focused New York boutique named Anomaly.

    “No one comes to us for more of the same,” Mr. Johnson said. “Our last resort is an ad, if we can’t think of anything else.”

    Anomaly works with the wireless licensing group of ESPN, part of the Walt Disney Company, on not only marketing but also “some product and content development,” Mr. Johnson said. The agency shares in the revenue by keeping an equity stake in whatever is produced.

    “This way, we get paid for the quality of our output,” he added, “not the quantity of our input.”

    Anomaly is among a rash of boutiques that have started up to capitalize on the desire among marketers to do things differently – and the inability of many bigger agencies to accomplish that.

    In some instances, traditional agencies are diversifying, forming units to specialize in nontraditional tasks. The Kaplan Thaler Group in New York, for instance, opened a division called KTG Buzz to focus on, well, marketing that generates buzz.

    “Creativity used to be, ‘Think inside the box.’ Then it was, ‘Think outside the box.’ Now, there’s no box,” said Linda Kaplan Thaler, chief executive of Kaplan Thaler, part of the Publicis Groupe.

    BBDO responded to G.E.’s pressure by devoting more attention and resources to units like Atmosphere, specializing in interactive campaigns, playing down its decades-long concentration on producing big-budget television commercials.

    Under a new chief executive, Andrew Robertson, the agency even dismissed its most senior creative leader, replacing him with an executive from another agency known for a slick, successful series of long commercials on the Web, known as BMW Films, which won much acclaim – and revved up BMW sales.

    Ms. Hu of G.E. is pleased with BBDO’s response. “I feel they’re stepping up to the plate,” she said, adding that Mr. Robertson “is trying very hard to change the direction of that agency.” For instance, she said, a top BBDO New York executive, Brett Shevack, now plays host to regular brainstorming sessions known as Project Inspire, where people from the agency, G.E. corporate and G.E. business units meet “to brainstorm a particular problem.”

    The meetings “can sometime lead to wild and wacky ideas that might have not been considered before,” Ms. Hu said. “And that’s a good thing.”

    Online marketing at G.E. is by far the fastest-growing part of the ad budget, scheduled to increase 97 percent this year from 2004, Ms. Hu said. She declined to provide dollar amounts, citing company policy.

    And in research last fall to gauge response to a previous viral campaign, she added, 80 percent of respondents said the G.E. ads they saw online made them think of the company as “innovative,” and 94 percent agreed the online ads made G.E. seem “more appealing.”

    So besides the virtual seed, which is being tested this week by G.E. employees, there will be more unconventional campaigns to come, Ms. Hu said, including ads made available on cellphones and an online game, played with virtual windmills, to encourage energy conservation.

    Mr. Robertson said the changes he is making at BBDO for G.E. and other clients like FedEx, PepsiCo and Visa are wrenching but necessary.

    “It’s getting easier and easier for consumers to switch from things that aren’t engaging them to those that will,” Mr. Robertson said. “And they are.”

    “You can look at that and say, ‘Oh, my God! The sky is falling,’ ” he added, “or you can look at it as a huge opportunity to create content for your clients that does engage.”

    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Contact Us Back to Top


  • Marissa Mayer of Google says it has no plans now to track users’ behavior

    May 23, 2005
    E-COMMERCE REPORT
    With Its Home Page, Google Could Get a Bit Closer to Its Users
    By BOB TEDESCHI

    WILL Internet users get personal with Google?

    The company began testing a service last week that lets users build a customized Google home page filled with news, stock quotes and other features that crowd similar pages on popular portals like Yahoo and MSN.

    As part of this effort, Google is offering headline feeds from a narrow selection of information sites like BBC News and, in the future, it will allow users to add feeds from their favorite sites. The customized pages can also list local movies and weather, stock market quotes and driving directions, and can display a preview of a user’s in-box from Google’s Gmail service.

    The service gives Google another potential entry point in the battle to deliver ads tailored to a user’s stated or implied tastes or product searches – ads that marketers have been willing to pay far more for than they do for standard banners displayed to everyone who visits a site.

    Google says it has no immediate plans to display advertisements based on, say, the user’s location or clicking habits while using the service, but analysts say that such a move is not necessary, at least in the near future, for the company to capitalize on it.

    “This is all about getting better search results, to keep people coming back to the site,” said Charlene Li, an analyst with Forrester Research. “Right now, Google knows nothing about their users. But if they can get the user’s permission for this, and give them better search results based on what stories they’ve read or e-mails they’ve gotten on the site in the past, that’s where it pays off.” In that respect, Ms. Li said, the personalized pages are closely aligned with another recent Google initiative, My Search History, which, with the user’s permission, keeps a record of previous Google queries in an effort to deliver better search results.

    Web search ads from Google, Yahoo and others represented baby steps in the direction of personalized advertising, giving marketers the means to reach prospective customers when they searched for words related to the company’s products. But those ads only go so far, because Internet users who type in “Ford trucks,” for instance, could be history buffs, not prospective buyers.

    Google’s new approach could help marketers solve that problem, by following the logic of both users’ reading habits and searches on the site. If users add a feed of car reviews to their home page, and swap e-mail messages with friends about buying a new truck, for instance, Google’s search results could be customized to focus on that activity. Car manufacturers, meanwhile, would be far more interested in reaching those searchers, and would likely bid higher for the right to show them ads.

    The idea that Google would be analyzing the content of e-mail messages to place relevant ads next to them sparked controversy when the Gmail service was introduced. The service’s privacy policy indicates that the ads are chosen based on keywords found in the currently displayed message, not on past messages. The home page effort follows closely on the heels of another Google project, the Web Accelerator, which could help it deliver highly personalized ads in the future. With that service, which the company began testing earlier this month, users download software that stores copies of popular Web pages, or pages the user repeatedly visits, on their own computers.

    When users type in the address of one of those pages, it loads instantly, because it does not have to travel over the Internet to get to the computer. Because Accelerator tracks the user’s surfing activity, it could be used to discern potential commercial interests and display relevant ads, perhaps in tandem with the home page service. Marissa Mayer, Google’s director of consumer Web products, said the company had no immediate plans to commercialize the Accelerator service, or any of the other services that track a user’s behavior.

    “Thinking long term, my gut sense is that, yes, there will be a search engine that knows more about me and as a result does a better job than Google does today,” Ms. Mayer said. “It’s my hope that that search engine is us, but it’s a further-reaching thing.” But trends in the marketplace suggest that advertisers could put increasing pressure on the company to offer such services sooner. Claria, formerly known as the Gator Corporation, earlier this month said that it was developing a service that would allow any site to offer personalized Web pages, using their own content or that of other publishers.

    With that service, called PersonalWeb, a site like Yahoo could allow its visitors to receive material from various online publishers or from within a publisher’s site, without forcing them to be specific about which articles and sources they want to see. Instead, the service would track the users’ surfing habits and automatically generate pages that reflected what they typically read. Ads, based on the user’s overall surfing activity, would be shown on the user’s home page, and revenues would be split between Claria and the Web site.

    According to comScore MediaMetrix, an Internet statistics firm, 26 million people, or 23 percent of Yahoo’s visitors in April, used its customized page service, known as My Yahoo. The service’s users spent more than twice as much time at the portal as the average Yahoo visitor does, and viewed more than twice as many pages. Put another way, comScore said, My Yahoo users account for 23 percent of all Yahoo visitors, but they represent 49 percent of total time spent and 51 percent of pages viewed. Yahoo would not disclose how much advertising revenue My Yahoo brings in.

    Claria said “tens of millions” of Internet users allow it to track their Web surfing – or, at least, the surfing of whoever uses their computer. The privacy policy for Claria’s advertising products promises that it will never associate a user’s name with surfing activity, and because the company only tracks the clicks on a computer, it cannot necessarily know who is visiting different sites from one hour to the next.

    Claria’s users agree to the tracking in exchange for free software that helps them fill out forms automatically or gives weather information, among other things. Assuming Claria attracts publishers willing to offer its PersonalWeb service, the incentive for users will merely be a more customized Web experience.

    The same goes for Google’s home page service. But some privacy advocates say they believe that as Google entices users to agree to surveillance of their online activities, it must do more to prove it deserves their trust. Ari Schwartz, a policy analyst at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a research firm, said it gives Google a pretty good picture of what people are doing online.

    Mr. Schwartz said that the company had been “above the board” when disclosing privacy issues raised by some of its products. Ms. Mayer of Google pointed out that when the company released its desktop search product last year, it asked administrators of computers with multiple users – like those in cybercafes – not to download it lest they inadvertently gather their users’ surfing activity. But, Mr. Schwartz added: “They need to do a better job at educating people about how this could impact their privacy.”

    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top

  • May 23, 2005
    LINK BY LINK

    Are Bloggers Setting the Agenda? It Depends on the Scandal

    By TOM ZELLER Jr.





    IN the spring of 1712, the British essayist Joseph Addison rambled from pub to parlor seeking the pulse of his countrymen regarding rumors (false, it turned out) that the king of France, Louis XIV, had died. The St. James coffeehouse, Addison reported in The Spectator, was “in a Buzz of Politics.”


    In the 18th century, “buzz” was part of what social theorists called the emerging – and powerful – bourgeois public sphere. In the 21st century, the buzz is in the blogosphere.


    Or at least, that’s the popular mythology. As a result of their influence in incidents like the “60 Minutes” episode in which CBS was duped by forged documents related to the president’s National Guard service, bloggers have taken on the role of agenda-setters – citizen scribe-warriors wresting power from a mainstream media grown fat and lazy.


    But according to a preliminary study – the first rigorous look at the influence wielded by political blogs during the 2004 presidential campaign – bloggers are not always the kingmakers that pundits sometimes credit them with being. They can, it seems, exert a tremendous amount of influence – generate buzz, that is – but only under certain circumstances.


    Buzz is potent stuff.


    “Buzz can alter social behavior and perceptions,” wrote the authors of “Buzz, Blogs and Beyond,” published last week by the Pew Internet and American Life Project and the market research firm BuzzMetrics. “It can embolden or embarrass subjects. It can affect sales, donations and campaign coffers. It can move issues up, down and across institutional agendas.”


    To analyze Web log buzz, the study zeroed in on a few dozen political blogs, from left-leaning forums like Daily Kos and AmericaBlog to conservative ones like Instapundit and Power Line, as well as middle-of-the road sites like BuzzMachine and Wonkette. All were “filter blogs,” or blogs that comment on – and link to – content found elsewhere on the Web, according to an emerging taxonomy of the form.


    BuzzMetrics tracked the frequency with which “buzz topics” – Mary Cheney, the Osama bin Laden tape and so forth – appeared in the last two months of the campaign, not just on blogs but also on other “channels”: the mainstream media, official campaign statements and other Internet forums like newsgroups. The resulting “fever lines” charting the results on a graph, the study’s authors suggest, offer a glimpse into which channels set the agenda and which react in response.


    Whether that methodology proves sound after other researchers have had a chance to digest the findings remains to be seen, and the study’s authors caution that their findings are still being fine-tuned. Comparing buzz in the cheap and limitless space of the Web against buzz generated in the finite and expensive news space on television and in newspapers is, after all, fraught with pitfalls.


    Still, on issues like Iraq, weapons of mass destruction or the military draft, the Pew study found the chatter profile to be mixed, with buzz originating from several information channels. In instances in which blogs took the lead, such as the mysterious bulge that appeared on President Bush’s back during the first debate (a radio receiver, some liberal blogs posited), they were often unable to get other channels to follow.


    The CBS News scandal, in which the network based a critical report on President Bush on what turned out to be forged Vietnam-era documents relating to his National Guard days, was another story. In that case, the researchers suggest, the conditions for a broad-based scandal – and potent blog buzz – were ripe.


    Although left and right diverged on theories of who might have been behind the fake memos, there was broad agreement that political dirty tricks were involved, and the blogosphere lighted up with detective work and theorizing.


    The high name recognition of CBS News and Dan Rather helped, as did the fact that the network and the anchor initially defended the memos, creating grand targets for the longbowmen of the blogosphere. And both the timing and the high stakes made for fertile buzz territory.


    “This was not a cold or distant case,” the study suggests. “The election was weeks away, and the candidates’ service records during the Vietnam War had been a major topic of discussion for months.”


    For all that, though, the most crucial factor contributing to blog influence in that issue may have been the smoking gun: digital copies of the 1970′s-era documents and their impossibly modern fonts.


    These became powerful totems because they could be relentlessly examined, tinkered with, traded and discussed online by blogs of all political stripes, each with its own agenda and each contributing to a buzz that ultimately could not be ignored.


    In the absence of such a totem, the ability to generate buzz in the blogosphere, at least for now, appears diminished. (That may change as the number of blogs – now at 10 million, according to the blog search firm Technorati – continues to grow.)


    Applying the same methodology last week to the recent Newsweek crisis, in which an apparently incorrect item reporting desecration of a Koran by American military interrogators sparked riots abroad and claims of journalistic incompetence (and political bias) at home, the researchers found blog buzz much slower to develop, despite widespread coverage in the mainstream media.


    Why? Perhaps because there was no smoking gun to pass around.


    “The blogosphere is half forensic lab and half tavern,” said Michael Cornfield, an adjunct professor at the Graduate School of Political Management at George Washington University and the chief author of the study.


    “The magic of the Internet is you can be looking at evidence, at direct documentation, while you’re talking,” Mr. Cornfield said, referring to the fake memos that turned blogs into influential buzzmakers. “It would be as if the Nixon tapes were available in MP3 format during Watergate.”



    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | RSS | Help | Back to Top



  • Michael Nagle for The New York Times

    Maritza Crespo leans under the police tape to leave flowers at the site where the small plane crashed onto the beach in Coney Island



    JoBeth Marie Gross, 18, left, and Danielle Block, 18, were classmates at Bishop Donahue High School in McMechen, W.Va.


    May 23, 2005
    In Victims’ Hometown, Sadness at Promising Lives Cut Short
    By KIRK SEMPLE
    They simply appeared, moved by grief, faith and a deep sense of community.

    News of the accident had traveled fast through the northern panhandle of West Virginia: two students from Bishop Donahue High School in the small town of McMechen, and the father of one of them, had died along with the pilot in a plane crash in New York City.

    Within a few hours, scores of students, parents and teachers converged spontaneously on the school on Saturday night seeking succor.

    In an impromptu hourlong ceremony in the cafeteria, they read Scripture and reminisced about the victims. “We’re very small, so it’s family,” the school’s principal, Brother Rene D. Roy, said yesterday. “It’s literally like losing members of the family.”

    The students, JoBeth Marie Gross, 18, and Danielle Block, 18, and Danielle’s father, William Courtney Block, were the only passengers in the small sightseeing plane that crashed on the beach in Coney Island on Saturday afternoon.

    The pilot, Endrew Allen, 32, of Jamaica, Queens, also died in the crash.

    An official for the National Transportation Safety Board, speaking during a news conference at Floyd Bennett Field in Brooklyn yesterday afternoon, said that an inquiry into the crash was under way and that investigators expected to produce a preliminary report by the end of the week and a final report in six months to a year.

    The official, Todd Gunther, an air safety investigator for the safety board’s Office of Aviation Safety, refused to speculate on why the plane had plunged into the sand, and in response to questions he said that he did not know whether the four-year-old plane, a single-engine Cessna 172S, was flying above the recommended weight or whether its gas tank was full at the time of the crash.

    The accident tore a hole in the fabric of the close-knit West Virginia community connected to Bishop Donahue High School, a Roman Catholic school that draws students from around McMechen, a coal-mining town just south of Wheeling between the Ohio River and the Appalachian foothills.

    The town, with a population of fewer than 2,000 people, has suffered from the decline in the region’s steel and coal industry. The rusting hulk of the long-abandoned Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel plant squats at its northern edge.

    The victims were members of a small group from the area, three students and three parents, who were on a weeklong trip to New York, and the victims had expected the plane ride to be a highlight of their visit.

    They were seniors, in a class of 18 and a school of about 80, and were looking forward to graduation tomorrow. Brother Roy said that Danielle Block’s mother has asked that the graduation go forward.

    The two young women had originally been accompanied on the plane by another classmate and friend, Melissa McCulley, 18. But after takeoff from Linden Airport in New Jersey, Ms. McCulley got sick, and the plane returned to the landing strip and let her off. Mr. Block took her place.

    The crash also involved a chilling coincidence. According to Sister Teresa O’Connor, a teacher at Bishop Donahue, Mr. Block’s brother, Douglas Block, 38, who lives in Brooklyn, watched the plane as it flew over Coney Island and crashed, yet he had no idea his brother and niece were on it.

    When contacted at his home in Wheeling, William Block, the Block brothers’ father and the grandfather of Ms. Block, said he was too distraught to speak.

    Robert Gross, the father of Ms. Gross, was taken to the hospital on Saturday out of concern that the stress of the tragedy was aggravating his high blood pressure, Sister O’Connor said. Mr. Gross lost his wife to cancer about a decade ago, the teacher said.

    At Coney Island, debris from the plane had been cleared by yesterday morning and the sand raked clean. The crash site was encircled by police tape, and a bouquet of flowers and a pink teddy bear marked the spot where the plane had hit the ground.

    Andrew Guddahl, 17, of Bay Ridge, Brooklyn, a former student of Mr. Allen’s, was among those who stopped by the site yesterday. He said he had been training with Mr. Allen to get certified for solo flights and had flown with him as recently as Wednesday.

    In McMechen, faculty members at the school said Ms. Gross and Ms. Block had been outstanding members of the school community.

    Ms. Gross was the only pitcher on the school’s softball team and led her squad to the regional semifinals this year. Ms. Block participated in a Catholic community service organization and was a member of the school’s softball, volleyball and basketball teams. Both women acted in school plays.

    Faculty members and friends say the two women had been part of an inseparable quartet that included Ms. McCulley and a fourth friend, Katie Beiter. They became known as the Four Musketeers.

    “If you could pick how you want your girls to turn out, I’d say: be like JoBeth and Danielle,” said the school’s softball coach, Jason Hanson, who gathered with others in front of the school yesterday, where two votive candles sat alongside a softball bat and a ball signed by team members.

    “The rest of this year is going to be rough,” said Samantha McGlumphy, a member of the softball team, who stood in front of the school with another teammate, Lauren Cook.

    “So is next year,” added Ms. Cook.

    Reporting for this article was contributed by Ann Farmer, Janon Fisher and Matthew Sweeney, in New York, and Rick Steelhammer, in West Virginia.

    Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections RSS Help Contact Us Back to Top

  • May 23, 2005

    L.A. Existential




    Los Angeles


    NO one here even knew there was an election last week. Elections in Los Angeles just happen, like expensive new buildings suddenly happen. Frank Gehry has said that the bureaucracy of architecture in Los Angeles is “under the radar,” so extraordinary structures can go up without anyone knowing until it’s done. Elections are under the radar as well, no matter how much they get written about. But unlike the architecture, the results are usually singularly and spectacularly unspectacular.


    In Los Angeles, when you read about local elections, no matter which elections they are, even the word “county” acquires a preternaturally creepy pallor, and it is as if you are gloomily scanning a parallel universe, or as if you have fallen into a huge wormhole, or are reading a defunct paper, not The Los Angeles Times but The Herald Examiner. It is a curious effect. It is literally as if they are not happening or have not happened or as if you are reading a story, not to be pretentious, by a dimwitted, civic-minded Inland Empire cousin of Borges.


    The mayors of Los Angeles are an eerily bland cortege of men who are out of time. I remember Sam Yorty because he lived up the street from us when I was a boy. I remember Tom Bradley because he was a sweet walking dead person. At least he was hip enough to live in the giant mayor’s house in Hancock Park. Still, those two could smile.


    And then there was Richard Riordan, who could really smile. Some people I knew had heard of him, and everyone liked him because he was rich, way rich like Michael Bloomberg and David Geffen, and it’s always fun when someone is incredibly rich. It’s fun when Arnold Schwarzenegger, whom everyone I know has heard of, says he has so much money he could never be bought or sold. But at least Richard Riordan was a sweet, fuzzy fat cat who loved books so much that he had an entire library that he kept at his house. I think he had more books than Karl Lagerfeld, and that’s a lot. You could imagine him having brunch with Ray Bradbury before dropping in on an AIDS walkathon.


    Jim Hahn, soon to be the ex-mayor, is among the most gloriously breathtaking ciphers in the political history of the known world. He was nearly an antigravitational force, formed from a rib that the former governor Gray Davis broke off from his own body. (Gray Davis was another natty, zombified politico in a long, distinguished gray line of Walking Dead.) I think Jim Hahn had a father named Kenneth, who is invariably described as a “giant” among politicos. It is always played respectfully but is nonetheless bizarre. I have a dim memory of the former Govs. Pat Brown and Jerry Brown, and while it would be a stretch, you could lay a They Might Be Giants rap on them. But to lay it on the Hahns, well: such men seem to exist in a netherworld, like characters in a comic book written by osteopaths or periodontists or outsider artists whose work will never surface to be catalogued, celebrated or exhibited, except perhaps in the odd, blandly disjointed dreams people have while resurfacing in recovery rooms after – the pun is inadvertent – elective surgery.


    Anyway, everyone I know is still confused over just what happened with Gray Davis. No one knew who Gray Davis was, or even why he was governor. He thankfully had big hair and appeared, at least in demeanor, to be a sort of mildly buff Jim Hahn or Kenneth Hahn on watered-down steroids but still, in one’s imaginings anyway, capable of rage, which was at least a comfort. An android who one day might violate the Asimovian Code, thereby necessitating his destruction by human caretakers. I thought that was something to like about him. But everyone I know could never fathom the mechanism behind Gray Davis being elected, nor could they fathom the mechanism behind his impeachment or recall or whatever term they employed.


    No one I know has ever heard of Jim Hahn. Some people I know have heard of our new mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa. I myself read about him giving a speech where he was apologizing for his not-great fluency in the Spanish language. I thought that was charming. Other people I know confuse him with the actor whom Glenn Close replaced on “The Shield” or the guy under house arrest on “Desperate Housewives.” He has a kind of rascally charm and is way more sexy than the silvery, flat-jowled Dead Hahn Walking.


    Some people I know became aware of the candidates when they were visiting the churches of African-Americans. Some people I know became aware of them when they made pit stops at Jewish assisted-living centers and Hispanic trade schools. It was obvious from the beginning that Mr. Villaraigosa was going to win because no one knew why or how Jim Hahn had become mayor or even what becoming mayor meant or even why Los Angeles needed a mayor and, anyhow, Antonio Villaraigosa had that Eau de Alpha Predator. But even so the newspapers kept acting as if no one really knew who would win, as if it were a real horse race, and the papers kept doing that thing where right before the actual election they say it almost looks like the incumbent’s a shoo-in, but then of course Mr. Villaraigosa won by a landslide.


    Jim Hahn and most Los Angeles mayors are like that ghostly caretaker in “The Shining.” Whenever there’s a new mayor, the old one says to him, just as the ghost caretaker said to Jack Nicholson in the lavatory: “You are the caretaker. You have always been the caretaker.”


    I read somewhere that Jim Hahn said he is planning on running again or doing something absolutely psychotic like that, but no one knows how he would even do that or why he would, and as I am writing this I am even forgetting who he is and I am trying to remember who Antonio Villaraigosa is – I keep giving him the name “Vargas” in my mind, like the illustrator who used to do those pin-up paintings for Playboy, Alberto Vargas – but now I am remembering that he’s the new mayor, I either dreamed that or it’s true, and all any of us can do is hope that he will do something terrible or scandalous or flat-out crazy so we may always remember who he is and not think we are seeing his picture in a group photo in “The Shining” or starting to read about him in a newspaper that no longer exists and is crumbling in our hands before we can even finish.


    Bruce Wagner is the author of “Force Majeure” and “The Chrysanthemum Palace.”