Building trust in media

National Press going along with Transparent Deception: NYTimes’ David Sanger

by

However, national press going along with the transparent deception is a lot less forgivable. We’re headed toward a major war and not telling the population the reasons for it. New York Times writer David Sanger for instance knows better than to look into a CNN camera and say, hoping to be taken seriously, that it’s hard to imagine others with a significant motive. That such an experienced reporter would pretend he didn’t live through ten years of American politicians screeching demands to stop the pipeline tells you the extent to which government and media have merged. There’s no discernible difference now between the Sangers and Chuck Todds of the world and the craggy-faced retired CIA flacks the networks bring on as guests. The media performance on this one was and is as bad as it gets.

Original article: Who Blew Up the Nord Stream Pipelines? “Russia, Russia, Russia!”

On Left Straussianism

by

We might therefore say that the left intellectual becomes the left Straussian when they decide that, in addition to sometimes filtering their own public speech to advance an ideological agenda, they’re additionally responsible for “protecting” the public from being exposed to conversations not disciplined by political strategy. To the extent that their own ideas are not already disciplined by such a strategy, they limit discussion of them to close friends and sympathetic colleagues.

And:

In each case, thoughtful criticism of an author’s argument—for being confused, or incomplete—was overshadowed by the left-Straussian assertion that, regardless of whether the argument was true or reasonable, it was “irresponsible” for the author to make it in public.

And:

Those who engage in such tactics would never endorse Strauss’s hard distinction between the elect few and the unthinking many—at least not explicitly. But the care they take to pre-screen intellectual material indicates that they share his dark foreboding about the “costs” of public intellectual conversations reflecting rather than repressing the complexities of private ones. Attempting to marginalize or disqualify intellectual arguments itself implies a gap between the commentator, who trusts themselves to evaluate the arguments in question, and their imagined audience, who is assumed to lack either the tools or the ability to do so unaided. Left Straussians may not believe that they are philosopher-kings but they repudiate, in practice and increasingly even in theory, the possibility of the philosopher-reader.

The Dan Wang year-end letter

by

This year I want to discuss mostly science and technology. First, some thoughts on China’s technology efforts. Then I’ll present a few reflections on science fiction, with a focus on Philip K. Dick and Liu Cixin. Next I’ll discuss books I read on American industrial history. I save personal reflections for the end.

What to think about Modi these days

by

The Modi administration has also done a better job than previous governments in pushing big anti-poverty initiatives, such as building 100 million toilets to help stop open defecation and the spread of deadly disease.

An Easier Way Ken can Showcase “the Receipts”!

by

When I told my Mom I was trying to contact

Ken Klippenstein. She remarked “That sounds

like a Russian-Mennonite name!” I told her

he’s a nepo baby, but I don’t care because he

brings the receipts.

Building Reader Trust

I’m working on an App to help writers to build

trust with readers who are skeptical of their

journalism, but persuadable.  The App showcases

the context of their sources in a visible way,

differentiating their work from “mainstream” media.

The App doesn’t require the reader to leave the

existing article and visit a new page to read the

documentation or video. The App reads

YouTube video transcripts and enables

writers to include an unlimited number of citations

per article, whereas there is limited space to embed

videos or document within an article.

Jack Nicholson: Familiar Quotes!

Besides bringing the receipts, writers can also

use the tool expressively:

Imagine citing a Jack Nicholson quote that

(many) people are already familiar with:

You can’t handle the truth!

Electronic writing has added emoticons,

animated GIFs, audio and video to the new writing

medium.

I’m seeking to get feedback from readers and from

writers. I’m especially interested in hearing

from Ken because his practice of journalism

already brings “the receipts” and has someone

edit his work. 1

About me

I’m a computer programmer and History major, (and Russian-Mennnonite) working on a citation tool I call CiteIt .

 

Short Video for Ken: (1 min 22 sec)

Here’s a short video I made for you, Ken:

The Design Features of CiteIt: It does not require:

  1. Readers having to go to a new page, which introduces page-flipping friction and requires the reader to locate the quote start within the document and
  2. Writers having to limit the number “receipts” they post within an article to conserve space, as there is limited space within an article to display videos and document
  3. Putting “the receipts” at the bottom of the page where they are only visible after an article has been read.
  4. Copying the Quote context.  CiteIt looks up the context, given a link URL.
  5. Computer Programming to script the popup windows.

Examples:

 

This page: https://demo.citeit.net/2024/05/25/bring-the-receipts

  1. I have 5 interview questions for Ken.  An important part is understanding whether I need change anything to take into account his Workflow and Editorial process.↩

Emoticons

by

The corporate media is happy for more money in politics, but most American voters are disgusted. 🤮