del.icio.us tags 05.25.07

Pretty Pictures. Flickrvision is like Twittervision (also from David Troy) except that, instead of inane comments that say absolutely nothing about what people who have too much time on their hands are doing, photos pop up. Still not as hot as the Flickr Related Tag Browser -- which is desperately in need of a better name.

Caught on Film. It's like Alberto Gonzales getting pissed at the Democrats for posting CSPAN videos of him testifying in front of Congress on YouTube. Except that Gonzales is the Croatian Interior Minister and the Democrats are the primary opposition party in Croatia. Read Boing Boing. Mrak will explain everything.

Whoever is Reading This. Remember those notes that your roommate posted on the refrigerator door, asking you not to eat their food, which they have now labeled with masking tape and a Sharpie? Yeah, there are more like it on the Passive Aggressive Notes from Roommates, Neighbors, Co-Workers and Strangers blog. Good stuff.

Truth is More Convenient. Mashable lists 10 social environmental sites, some of which have been listed here before. At least a couple of the sites are walking the talk and hosted on servers that are powered by renewable energy. Green is everywhere, folks.

I Meant to Do That. Andrea Learned posts — at Marketing Profs Daily — about new research from Packaged Facts about what it means to be single in 2007. We're older than you think and, yes, some of us actually choose to be this way. And, oh yeah, marketers might want to think about the fact that we have more money to spend than our younger singles and our married and parenting peers.

Fancy Name for Democracy. Business Week has launched a new blog — Next — about trends in innovation. One of the bloggers, Jessi Hempel, is looking for ideas from the crowd, coincidentally, on crowdsourcing. He wants to know which web sites are using crowdsourcing strategies in the most "promising" way. Help him out.

Come All Ye Faithful. MSNBC reported this past week on the new trend of religious social networks, including Xianz (Christian), Shmooze (Jewish) and Naseeb (Muslim).

Small Favors. Marketing Vox reports that China is not going to require bloggers to register with the government. A victory for free speech!

Not So Much. GM's Vice Chairman, Bob Lutz, wants to assure you that, no, he is not bored with blogging. He just has a day job, folks.

del.icio.us tags 01.27.07

In the world of politics . . .

• Jesse shared this great post from Blog P.I. about Senator Jim Webb's Facebook profile. What's your theory on why Webb has lost his faith?
• Hillary Clinton has taken the health care debate to Yahoo! Answers. Tell her what you think, she might just be president some day. As of this writing, 3,480 people already have.
  
• Micah Sifry at Personal Democracy Forum gives us his take on social media in the 2008 presidential campaign. The good news is that the Democrats are kicking a** and taking names if you go by the number of MySpace friends, inbound (web site and blog) links and Flickr photos they have.
• James Boyce at The Huffington Post uses Alexa to come to the same conclusion: Dems are ahead in the social media battle.
  
• Cristen Perk at EchoDitto has something to say about campaign sites as well. She admits to being a nerd due to her love for John Edwards' Mac OS X widget, but, Cristen, I think you landed in nerd-land when you used the term "blatantly Drupal" when she made reference to Dennis Kucinich's site.
• Speaking of EchoDitto, they pointed me in the direction of ThinkingBlue Search, a Google-powered vertical search engine "of all major politically progressive ideas and discussions on the web."

Digital Influence . . .

• No two ways about it, your company needs to monitor its brand. Andy Beal at Marketing Pilgrim speaks the gospel, "A great brand can take months, if not years, and millions of dollars to build. It should be the thing you hold most precious. It can be destroyed in hours by a blogger upset with your company." His toolbox is full.
  

More digital influence in Asia (John Bell leaves for Asia this week) . . .

• MySpace launches a version in China without any attempt to make it culturally appropriate, including leaving on a Japanese version of the user agreement. Seriously sloppy stuff.
• MySpace may be heading east, but Anastasia at YPulse says that Popteen, "the number one magazine for teen girls in Japan," is coming our way.
• China is trying to purge the Internet of all the bad stuff. Good luck.
  

Rock n' roll, hootchie coo . . .

• Coming to me to via PSFK, this post from CScout TrendBlog has an amazing list (with profiles) of music recommendation sites. So many to choose from. I've tried MOG, but it screwed up my computer. I've tried Pandora, but the recommendations didn't rock my world. I've been checking out Hype Machine lately, but I think I'm going to try out Last.fm, ILike.com and Music Favor. I'll get back to you on this one.
• Discord has a new web site. I've suggested that they equip it with an RSS feed. Let's see if they follow my suggestion.
• Speaking of Dischord, Ian MacKaye is doing his part to save all ages shows in DC. Just like the folks in Seattle did. (I wrote about it in How to Get Stupid White Men out of Office, if you're interested.)
  

And other stuff, just 'cause . . .

• Tastespotting has amazing photos for foodies. Yummy.
• My friend Tim started a blog this month called Just a Minute, featuring "occasional ramblings and rants on international health development". Tim knows how to rant (and how to make me smile), so I'll be a regular reader.
• Fellow Hampshire grad Josh Rubin over at Cool Hunting posts about Globarati, a new "luxury travel" site.
• Teachers are blogging, says David Krug at 901am. Another great example of how blogging technology can be used.
• Lee at Marketing.fm has been keeping a list since October of mobile-friendly web sites.
  
• Donald Crowdis is a 93 year old Canadian and Don to Earth is his blog. Maybe reading Donald will help me to remember to look at the tops of trees . .
  

del.icio.us tags 12.22.06

• Tagged this article on "Caring for Your Introvert" after being sent over by Nedra at Spare Change. Everything is beginning to make sense. By the way, I'm signing up for Nedra's Next Generation Social Marketing Seminar when she is in DC in March.
• Not everyone loves Product(Red). INSPI(RE)D thinks raising awareness of AIDS in Africa is a fine goal, but they're not big fans of conspicuous consumerism. Paint your old iPod red and make a donation to an AIDS organization of your choice. They're encouraging people to send in photos of products that they have coveREd with information about the donations they have made, but it doesn't look like they're getting many takers. Maybe they're out maxing their credit cards just in time for Christmas?
• John is meant to be heading to Asia early next year to evangelize about 360 DI, but I'm relegated to tagging articles about digital influence on the continent, like this post from The Big Switch about bloggers building communities of cool or this article from Tech2.com India about Mazooki!, a new video sharing site specifically for Asian users. And, according to Paul McGregor, YPulse's resident global youth marketing expert, reports on the South Korean government's decision to clamp down on mobile technology use by young people, allowing parents to set limits on use. Will this new legislation challenge South Korea's position as the global standard bearer for media and communications?
• If you're thinking of doing any blogger outreach, read this first -- and take notes. Don't "pitch" bloggers. They (we) have very strong bullsh*t detectors and they deserve better. And while we're on the topic of ineffective social media marketing, listen to Eric over at Common Sense PR. Stop asking, "How can we get on Digg? How can I get on Oprah? How can I get my company featured in Fast Company?," says Eric. Instead, you need to be asking yourself, "What about my company would my potential customers be interested in, and how can I get that story in front of them in way that has impact?" In other words, if you have a good story, they'll listen. If you have a way to tell it that is remarkable, they'll tell their friends. And, most importantly, if you have a good product (item, service, candidate or cause), they'll buy it.
• Colin Delany over at e.politics lists some Outstanding Advocacy Web Sites. I commented on the post when I first read it, but for some reason it's not on there. I just wanted to tell him about Green My Apple.
  
• 10 Downing Street, Britain's White House, has a new web site for kids -- Number 10 -- that aims to provide young people with an insider's view on the life and work of the Prime Minister.
• TJ Mahoney at Compete has a really smart post about WalMart's tough year in PR. He looks at the launch and growth of two anti-WalMart web sites. But he also looks at the meteoric rise in traffic at WalMart's own site, Walmartfacts.com: "for every one person that reads a jab on wakeupwalmart, about 4.5 others will read a sunshine report on walmartfacts. Obviously, Mahoney is making a strong argument for brands to doing what they can to make sure that their side of the story is out there. It's crisis management 101. Don't leave a vacuum to be filled in by your opposition.
• While SMS still rules in terms of penetration, Enid Burns at ClickZ says, as more and more people are buying mobile devices with the ability to share images and video and carriers recognize how much cash they can rake in from advertisers, mobile marketing campaigns may be on the rise.
• Finally, Travelocity has a new blog. Cardinal Sean has had a blog since September. If you're looking for other Catholic Blogs, here's the site for you. If you're trying to find a new blog to add to your aggregator, check out Feeds that Matter.

Update: Colin at e.politics sent me an email to ask me to resend my comment, so I did. Thanks, Colin.

del.icio.us tags 11.20.06

I promise that I won't let this blog turn into a link blog. When I have something to say, you have to know that I'm going to say it.

I head up to Burlington, VT this afternoon to spend the week with my aunt and her husband (which would, I guess, make him my uncle, but they only got married a couple of years ago and when you're as old as I am . . . )

Vacation is hard. I want to check my email. I want to cross things off my to-do list. Yesterday, in an effort to wrap things up before shutting down for the week, I worked for 11 hours. On. A. Sunday. But I'm working on letting things go. My version of letting things go.

Anyway, here are my del.icio.us tags for today:

• There was a full page ad in yesterday's Washington Post for this new blog from Newsweek/WashingtonPost.com, On Faith. No URL in the ad and less than spectacular organic search results, but I found it. They'll learn. (Who does an ad about a web site without including the link?)
• Stephanie Quilao at Back in Skinny Jeans explains RSS feeds "the Oprah way".
• Kira sang "Come Rain or Come Shine" to Timothy -- in front of a room filled with his family and friends -- at his 40th birthday and made me cry.
• My friend David started the True/False documentary film festival a couple of years ago with his friend/business partner, Paul. I managed to make it out there (Columbia, MO) in 2004 and 2005, but let work get in the way in 2006. Not this year. If you're looking for me between March 1-4, 2007, that's where I'll be.
• EchoDitto tagged this Financial Times article about Danah Boyd, "high priestess of Internet friendship" and so did I.
• John (who is also on vacation this week) posted about Curbly.com, which led me to PocketTable.com. I don't have a table because I don't have the room, so I want one. Now.
• According to The Village Voice (and Mark Fiore) I have been diagnosed with DemoGlad.
  

two more

There are two more articles worth noting from this morning's Post.

Interesting article about faith-based groups (normally the darlings of the current GOP leadership) freaking out about new immigration legislation that makes it a crime to "direct or assist" an individual who has entered the country illegally.

And, here's a question about the news that Democrats have negotiated a delay in the vote on Alito's nomination. Apparently they want to deny the White House the victory for as long as possible prior to the President's State of the Union speech later this month. But I would think that a "fresh" victory -- mere days before the speech -- would be more damaging than would a victory that has the time to peter out.

ugly sweaters

There was a story on the MSNBC site yesterday about the fact that a whole lotta Christians are getting pissy about the hesitance to say "Merry Christmas" -- whether you're President Bush or Macy's. In other words, they think it's about time to put the Christ back in Christmas.

Okay. Separation of church and state. Sure. If the president is sending out a card for the holidays and taxpayers are footing the bill AND the recipients are not all Christian, then the card should say "Happy Holidays".

Fair.

But, beyond that, I am one hundred percent behind the idea of putting the Christ back in Christmas. Haul the manger in from the garage. Go to church. Tell a story about the three wise man. Wear your ugly sweaters with the applique of Mrs. Claus on the front. (You hear me, Grandma, I'm talking to YOU.)

Why? Because, as a Jew, I would love Christians to stop asking me, "What are your doing for Christmas?" And I would love for my Jewish friends and family to put their stupid little plastic fir trees into the closet and remember that this sh*t has nothing to do with us.

CHRISTmas. Happy birthday, big guy.

proving a negative

In graduate school, when applying for financial aid, we needed to prove that were financially independent from our parents for something like five or seven years. It seemed pretty arbitrary and, well, unfair. Most of my friends, if only because of their age and the help they had received from their parents in paying for college, could not meet this standard and received little to no aid. The tool for demonstrating economic independence was our parents' 1040 tax forms. If we weren't claimed for five (or seven, I really can't remember) all was good.

Well, if there's a similar form for sexual activity, all is well for gay men looking to enter the priesthood. According to ABC News, the Vatican states that, if they can prove they haven't partaked in a little boy on boy for three years, they can enter the priesthood.

For folks who were up in arms about the Vatican denying gay men from entering the priesthood, regardless of whether or not they were celibate, this is a victory. But it's a qualified victory, yes? How do you prove a negative? And what if it's been two years and seven months?

What's the point?

macho congregants

Read the piece in today's New York Times about the beloved Father Mychal Judge, who died on September 11, 2001 when he was struck by falling debris after giving last rites to a fallen firefighter.

With his new effort to ban gay men from the priesthood, if the Pope had his way, Father Mychal would not have been accepted to the priesthood because, despite adhering to his vow of celibacy, Father Mychael was gay.

The article has a great quote from Andrew Sullivan, who knows macho when he sees it, "The idea that gay priests somehow cannot serve straight congregants, when you have this priest working with one of the most stereotypically macho organizations - and he gave his life to them - captures some of the cruelty and bigotry we see in the Vatican now."

witch hunt

Back when I was in high school, there was a priest who was told by the bishop that he was not allowed to preach to Dignity, which was a gay and lesbian Catholic organization. The priest defied these orders, continued to preach to the group and then, eventually, came out as a gay man on the front page of a major newspaper in an effort to draw attention to the issue. He explained that, while he identified as a gay man, he had -- just as straight priests had -- taken a vow of celibacy and had been faithful to that vow.

I had great respect for this man, not only for the way he stood up for his principles in this situation, but how he did so in other situations and for the support and confidence that he gave to me. Almost twenty years later, I am able to recognize the role that he played in helping me to become who I am today.

I inevitably think of him (from what I understand, he is no longer a priest) when I hear of the Vatican's orders to hunt down homosexuality within the seminaries in the United States. Why just the U.S.? Well, as opposed to doing any real soul-searching, the Vatican has chosen to blame the childhood abuse scandal in the U.S. Catholic church on the presence of gay priests versus the presence of sick men who want to have sex with children because of their own inadequacies and need for power.

The victims deserve better, the church deserves better and Father Richard deserves better.

horse f*cker

I told you a while back about the crazies who have been protesting military funerals, saying that the deaths are punishments from G-d for our permissive society.

Considering their line of reasoning, it's not much of a surprise that the disaster in Katrina is now being blamed on the same. Specifically, thousands of people are dead now because of gay marriage, the recent Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and horse f*cking.

Yeah. Horse f*cking. A guy in Washington state recently died after taking it up the tuchus from a horse (oww) and the cops couldn't do anything about it because there's no law against bestiality in the state.

And as far as Rick Scarborough is concerned, G-d's pissed.

pot.kettle.black

If you have any interest in the stem cell debate or even just in the role of faith in politics, you should check out Dana Milbank's column this morning in the Post. It starts out with a bit about how Orthodox Jews disagree with President Bush in regard to his stance on stem cell research. As Milbank points out, Orthodox Jews have been in sync with Bush -- and with conservative evangelical Christians -- "on the Terry Schiavo case, public displays of the Ten Commandments, opposition to assisted suicide and same-sex marriage, and more federal support for religious charities."

However, as far as Orthodox Jews are concerned, the "potential to save and heal human lives is an integral part of valuing human life," and therefore stem cell research is morally justifiable. Providing further explanation, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America explains, "the traditional Jewish perspective does not accord an embryo outside of the womb the full status of humanhood and its attendant protections."

Okay, that makes sense.

About a week after the 2004 election, when everyone was talking about the role that "moral values" had played in the outcome, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America's public policy director, Nathan Diament, wrote a piece about how Orthodox Jews had come out solidly in support of Bush. (Seventy percent voted for Gore/Lieberman in 2000, while seventy percent vote for Bush/Cheney in 2004 -- a turnaround that obviously had something to do with Gore having selected an Orthodox Jew as a running mate.) Diament attributed this to the "moral values" question, but then goes on to explain that, as Milbank quotes, "Orthodox Jews are not merely evangelicals who read the Bible right to left." They, unlike conservative Christians, are in support of stem cell research and, with the same goal of saving lives, believe that abortion should be available in cases where the mother's life is at risk.

Again, that's all all good. It makes sense.

Now here's where things go off the tracks with conservative Republican hypocrisy/spin. It's like when Senator Frist (R-TN) said that Democrats were playing partisan politics with the filibuster debate with a straight face. Right, Bill, politics has NOTHING to do with trying to rewrite Senate rules in order to stifle the voice of Democrats in Congress.

Anyway, so The National Review published a piece last week from Eric Cohen of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, in response to Diament. The jist of which is to explain, "why Judaism is WRONG (my caps) on stem cells."

Cohen says that Orthodox Jews' views on stem cell research are "morally unconvincing," "irresponsible," "disingenuous," and "misguided".

Okay. Lively debate. No one says we all need to agree. I have used "irresponsible" on more than one occasion when describing the policies and opinions of those on the right: withholding condoms and preaching abstinence to a continent where millions of people are dying of AIDS, for example.

But here's that special pot.kettle.black moment from Cohen. "Jews seem to have forgotten even the minimum liberal wisdom of tolerance -- the wisdom of not trampling on the moral opinions of their fellow citizens, like pro-life Christians, who believe embryo destruction is not only evil but the gravest evil." That's the quote from Milbank. If you read Cohen's piece, he continues by suggesting that it is wrong to force "pro-life" Christians to pay for this research through their taxes. That would work if many taxpayers weren't opposed to having their money pay for imposing the death penalty, fighting unjust wars, sending innocent people to jail, and so on.

Either way. It's more of that conservative hypocrisy/spin at which they excel. Blabbering on about having your moral opinions trampled on while not bothering to look down at the moral opinions of others, upon which you just trampled.

Maybe you don't need to read the Milbank column now . . . No, go ahead. Check out the bit about the multiple choice test answers people gave when asked what a filibuster is. It's pretty funny stuff.

thursday afternoon

Slate's David Edelstein has a piece today about cinematic couplings that just don't work and those that do -- despite the odds.

I'm particularly fond of his deft analysis of Ms. Lopez. I thought she and George Clooney were hot together in Out of Sight, but she hasn't come anywhere close to that since then.

Recent favorite onscreen pairing? Topher Grace and Laura Linney in P.S. I'm not sure they qualify as being a particularly odd coupling, beyond their age difference. He had already proven his acting chops in Traffic, so it's not even that he is a sitcom actor playing with one of the queens of independent cinema. Anyway, they're HOT together.

You should also read David Brooks' column in The New York Times about the alliance of social liberals and socially conservative evangelical Christians who want to fight poverty in the developing world. Downright hopeful.

Award for dumbest headline goes to CBSNews.com:

"Jury Won't See Jackson's Privates"

Alternative title under consideration:

"Jackson's Finally Going to Keep His Dick in His Pants"

pickled peppers

The New York Times has an interesting article about the growing alliance between evangelical Christians and Catholics, centered on a mutual belief in the value of human life.

(As a Jew, I don't give a toss about human life. I am much more fond of squirrels. Yeah. I like squirrels. Especially the kind with really fuzzy tails. I mean, if the Jews don't, who's going to stand up for the squirrels?)

In case you are under the impression that this is something that's been going on for a while now, the article points out that, historically, Catholics and evangelicals have been at odds with each other. As recently as 1960, when John F. Kennedy was running for President, Protestant pastors took to their pulpits (to pick a pack of pickled peppers) to warn their flock about the danger of electing a Catholic President. (Despite their efforts, Kennedy went on to be the first -- and only -- Catholic elected to the White House.)

Anyway, the article points out that a big distinction between Catholics and evangelicals -- which I pointed out the other day -- is that Catholics extend their "pro-life" stance to include an opposition to the death penalty.

Definitely worth reading.

(Jake must have been busy today at work. He didn't send me the article. I had to find it all by myself.)

you'll never be rich

This morning the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) announced that Winnie Stachelberg, the organization's long time Political Director, was being appointed to the newly created position of Vice President. According to the press release (HRC, by the way, is a little press release happy. Someone over there farts and they send out a press release.), one of Stachelberg's first big projects is something that they call the "Religion Project", the point of which is to "research and develop the language and messages to more effectively discuss GLBT issues with people of faith".

It's official, I've had it.

Folks on the left are jumping all over themselves in this pathetic attempt to appeal to those mysterious folks in the middle of the country who believe in G-d. They make me think of those sad people you see in Las Vegas who think that they are going to become rich and fancy if they win a million dollars from a slot machine. No, you are always going to be tacky and trashy and you have NO IDEA what rich means if you think it has anything to do with sticking quarters in a machine and getting a million dollars.

This morning President Bush attended the annual National Prayer Breakfast. The folks on CNN were commenting that people of faith not only believe in G-d, they BELIEVE that Bush is sincere when he speaks about the role that G-d has played in his life and they BELIEVE that he is one of them. Putting together "projects" to figure out how to talk to THOSE people reeks of insincerity and makes it oh so clear that you (the HRC, and everyone else who think that G-d is a political strategy) are not "one of us".

anti-christian hollywood

Apparently, conservative Christians have their panties in a bunch yet again. This time it's because The Passion of the Christ has been "snubbed" by the Academy Awards. Although it received three nominations in minor categories, the film itself was not nominated for Best Picture and Mel Gibson, who won the award for Best Director for Braveheart, was not nominated for the same award this time around.

"It's well know that the Hollywood community has been anti-Christian for many years," says the head of the American Family Association, Tim Wildmon. In case you're a little slow, this is code for "We all know a bunch of Jews run the entertainment industry."

Have any of these folks considered for a moment that the movie just wasn't that good? Or how about the possibility that there were 557 movies released in the United States in 2004 and there are quite a few of them that did not get one of the five nominations for Best Picture? Do they realize that just because it was the third highest grossing film of the year (after Shrek 2 and Spider Man 2) that this does not warrant a "Best Picture" nomination? Do they know that Martin Scorcese, Stanley Kubrick, Orson Welles, Terrance Malick (my favorite), Federico Fellini, Francois Truffaut, David Lynch, Brian De Palma and Alfred Hitchcock have never won the Academy Award for Best Director and that Mel Gibson HAS and for that reason alone he should not have been nominated again?

not what we meant

Senator Wayne Allard, a Republican from Colorado, thinks that the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage might just have a chance in Congress after all.

Following the 2004 elections, Democrats have been wringing their hands trying to figure out how they can break up Republicans' monopoly on moral values.

Allard seems to think that this might include reconsidering their current opposition to the amendment.

"I know the Democrats are reevaluating their position on a number of social issues, and I'll bet this is one of those issues."

Yeah, that's not what we meant.

Lefties got pretty bent out of shape when Dems started talking about embracing morality and religion as a strategy for winning more elections. Lots of blather about the need for the separation between church and state. Lots of anxiety that suddenly the Dems were going to do just what Allard seems to think they are -- abandoning their principles.

That's not what it is about. Soon after the election, Rabbi Michael Lerner wrote, "Imagine if John Kerry had been able to counter George Bush by insisting that a serious religious person would never turn his back on the suffering of the poor, that the Bible's injunction to love one's neighbor required us to provide health care for all, and that the New Testament's command to 'turn the other cheek' should give us a predisposition against responding to violence with violence."

Jim Wallis has a similar message in his new book, God's Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It.

Some of the Left's biggest heroes — Dr. King, Gandhi, Jimmy Carter — have spoken eloquently about the role that their faith has played in their views on social justice. I'm with them. It's not about letting the Right define morality. It's about making it clear how the things that we believe in are moral.

learned it on vh-1

Apparently Pink likes to have her nipples tweaked right before she goes onstage because it helps her to put on a better show. According to the fine folks at VH-1, there is a scientific basis for her reasoning. Apparently, when someone tweaks your nips, there is a release of a hormone called "oxytocin" that makes the tweakee feel better about themselves.

I checked it out on Google (I must know MORE) and the first site that came up was this one called The Marriage Bed ("Sex and Intimacy for Married Christians"). Well, apparently I can find some brief respite from the eternal damnation that I will experience as a non-believer (in Christ, that is) by tweaking my nips, but the pleasure is going to be fleeting.

I'm not making this up to be a Christian-basher. I don't think all Christians are inclined to condemn those that don't believe and I also don't have anything against someone who believes Christ is their savior. I just don't believe that he is mine. But I'm less than giddy when someone writes ""Got Jesus? If not, none of this matters." And then tells me, "If you have not made Jesus the Lord of your life, your future is not something we want anyone to suffer for eternity."

G-d bless oxytocin.