Tuesday, January 15, 2008

 

What didn't happen

Something didn't happen this week. In an important non-incident, there were speedboats in the Strait of Hormuz, there was a radio transmission, there were U.S. Navy vessels a few kilometers away that didn't take action. There was at least one attempt to jack up the hype on national TV, and Bush said, "Iran's actions threaten the security of nations everywhere . . . [we must] confront this danger before it's too late."

But now the whole thing is, like, failing to get any traction. I wonder, if we depended only on a newspaper or two and the nightly news, the way we did in August, 1964, would the U.S. now be launching bombers on Iran? Did the free flow of information and citizen news analysis (e.g. this, this, and about 2,167 others) that the Internet enables help avert a Tonkin-style attack? What is the sound of one hand applauding wildly?

Technorati Tags: , , ,


Comments:
A very important point, that's not taken up enough (for obvious reasons):

Disintermediation is both a feature *and* a bug: the speed with which "information" (it's not "news" until it's been through the judgement of a reporter and a couple of editors -- Journalism school doesn't *only* teach you to write coherently) gets from source to reader can be just as much of a troublemaker as it is a freedom-enhancer.

Alas, it's tragedy of the commons: smart people these days don't have to be as smart, because I'm pretty sure a 100 IQ doesn't go as far as it used to...
 
Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?