Matt Drudge: world's most powerful journalist: Welcome to the world of the Drudge Report. A world in which the successor to Walter Cronkite and Bob Woodward is a loner with no university education or journalistic background. He is now surreptitiously courted by the media and political elites that once derided him but now fear he has the power to change the course of an American election.
Act.: não foi Drudge quem revelou a história do princípe Harry no Afeganistão: "The story was leaked first by an Australian magazine (on January 15th!), the German newspaper Bild, and by Drudge Report in the U.S."
Razões? Media's embargo on "Harry's war" sparks debate: In a series of meetings at the Ministry of Defence late last year, British media and selected international outlets agreed not to report Harry's deployment in exchange for getting regular pictures, video and text of his day-to-day activities once the planned four-month assignment was completed. [...]
Until the U.S. Drudge Report blog picked it up.
"Once Drudge had it, it went global and the agreement was basically over," the Ministry of Defence said on Friday.
Por cá: Adelino Cunha demitiu-se do cargo de director da revista Focus: O jornalista, que assumiu a direcção da Focus no final de Dezembro passado, resolveu deixar a revista e «mudar de vida», garantindo que «não houve nenhuma razão específica para deixar agora o cargo».
29 fevereiro 2008
Mais uma...
Acclaimed photo was faked: Chinese prizewinner merged two images.
An award-winning photograph of a herd of endangered Tibetan antelopes apparently undisturbed by a passing train on the controversial Qinghai–Tibet railway has been exposed as a fake. The image was widely hailed in China as a symbol of harmonious co-existence between man and nature and strong testimony against any adverse effect of the new railway on the animals.
[act.: aparentemente, a divulgação da fraude foi feita aqui, a 16 de Fevereiro]
Técnicas de persuasão para aumentar a produtividade
Employee's suit: Company used waterboarding to motivate workers: A supervisor at a motivational coaching business in Provo is accused of waterboarding an employee in front of his sales team to demonstrate that they should work as hard on sales as the employee had worked to breathe.
28 fevereiro 2008
Um continente de espiados
The most spied upon people in Europe: Germany's highest court has ruled that spying on personal computers violates privacy, but governments across Europe are under pressure to help their security services fight terrorism and organised crime.
Here, BBC reporters give a snapshot of the extent of surveillance across Europe.
"The threat of terrorism has forced the German government to take stricter measures"
Paul Kirby on Germany
"Privacy campaigners say the UK has some of the world's leading surveillance systems"
Dominic Casciani on the UK
"On the whole, the French are not big fans of surveillance equipment."
Emma Jane Kirby on France
"Italians are among the most spied upon people in the world, says the Max Planck Institute"
David Willey on Italy
"Greece has such strong constitutional protection against state sponsored spying"
Malcolm Brabant on Greece
"CCTV monitoring, while extensive in other parts of Europe, is not widespread"
Julian Isherwood on Denmark
Here, BBC reporters give a snapshot of the extent of surveillance across Europe.
"The threat of terrorism has forced the German government to take stricter measures"
Paul Kirby on Germany
"Privacy campaigners say the UK has some of the world's leading surveillance systems"
Dominic Casciani on the UK
"On the whole, the French are not big fans of surveillance equipment."
Emma Jane Kirby on France
"Italians are among the most spied upon people in the world, says the Max Planck Institute"
David Willey on Italy
"Greece has such strong constitutional protection against state sponsored spying"
Malcolm Brabant on Greece
"CCTV monitoring, while extensive in other parts of Europe, is not widespread"
Julian Isherwood on Denmark
Uma sugestão
Why let all of your ideas die with you? Current Copyright law prevents anyone from building upon your creativity for 70 years after your death. Live on in collaboration with others. Make an intellectual property donation.
Os custos da guerra no Iraque para os Estados Unidos
The true cost of war: Next month America will have been in Iraq for five years - longer than it spent in either world war. Daily military operations (not counting, for example, future care of wounded) have already cost more than 12 years in Vietnam, and twice as much as the Korean war. America is spending $16bn a month on running costs alone (ie on top of the regular expenses of the Department of Defence) in Iraq and Afghanistan; that is the entire annual budget of the UN. Large amounts of cash go missing - the well-publicised $8.8bn Development Fund for Iraq under the Coalition Provisional Authority, for example; and the less-publicised millions that fall between the cracks at the Department of Defence, which has failed every official audit of the past 10 years. The defence department's finances, based on an accounting system inaccurate for anything larger than a grocery store, are so inadequate, in fact, that often it is impossible to know exactly how much is being spent, or on what.
This is on top of misleading information: in January 2007 the administration estimated that the much-vaunted surge would cost $5.6bn. But this was only for combat troops, for four months - they didn't mention the 15,000-28,000 support troops who would also have to be paid for. Neither do official numbers count the cost of death payments, or caring for the wounded - even though the current ratio of wounded to dead, seven to one, is the highest in US history. Again, the Department of Defence is being secretive and misleading: official casualty records list only those wounded in combat. [...]
The figure of $3 trillion includes what it will cost to pay death benefits, and to care for some of the worst-injured soldiers that army surgeons have ever seen, for the next 50 years.
By way of context, Stiglitz and Bilmes list what even one of these trillions could have paid for: 8 million housing units, or 15 million public school teachers, or healthcare for 530 million children for a year, or scholarships to university for 43 million students. Three trillion could have fixed America's social security problem for half a century. America, says Stiglitz, is currently spending $5bn a year in Africa, and worrying about being outflanked by China there: "Five billion is roughly 10 days' fighting, so you get a new metric of thinking about everything."
This is on top of misleading information: in January 2007 the administration estimated that the much-vaunted surge would cost $5.6bn. But this was only for combat troops, for four months - they didn't mention the 15,000-28,000 support troops who would also have to be paid for. Neither do official numbers count the cost of death payments, or caring for the wounded - even though the current ratio of wounded to dead, seven to one, is the highest in US history. Again, the Department of Defence is being secretive and misleading: official casualty records list only those wounded in combat. [...]
The figure of $3 trillion includes what it will cost to pay death benefits, and to care for some of the worst-injured soldiers that army surgeons have ever seen, for the next 50 years.
By way of context, Stiglitz and Bilmes list what even one of these trillions could have paid for: 8 million housing units, or 15 million public school teachers, or healthcare for 530 million children for a year, or scholarships to university for 43 million students. Three trillion could have fixed America's social security problem for half a century. America, says Stiglitz, is currently spending $5bn a year in Africa, and worrying about being outflanked by China there: "Five billion is roughly 10 days' fighting, so you get a new metric of thinking about everything."
É bom pensar nisto
Free! Why $0.00 Is the Future of Business: Because free is what you want — and free, increasingly, is what you're going to get.
What Are You Worth in a Free Economy? Chris Anderson Explains How 'Freeconomics' Will Change the Media World
"Intellectual property" is a silly euphemism: If we're going to achieve a lasting peace in the knowledge wars, it's time to set property aside, time to start recognising that knowledge - valuable, precious, expensive knowledge - isn't owned. Can't be owned. The state should regulate our relative interests in the ephemeral realm of thought, but that regulation must be about knowledge, not a clumsy remake of the property system.
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)