Information wars: How will governments deal with the information revolution?
Empire (Al Jazeera)
Information is power and in the age of the information revolution, cyber and satellite communication is transforming our lives, reinventing the relationship between people and power.
New media, from WikiLeaks to Facebook, Twitter to YouTube, is persistently challenging the traditional flow of information, and cyber disobedience is exposing powerful governments.
Websites are now being treated like hostile territories; whistleblowers and leakers as terrorists, and hackers as insurgents.
Governments are scrambling to salvage their influence and take advantage of the new cyber and satellite media. From China to the Sudan, Egypt to Iran, despots and armies are tracking web activity and setting up Facebook accounts to spy on their citizens.
So is this the century of free information and expression as the cyber utopians predicted, or new methods of electronic oppression as the cyber sceptics warned?
Joining Marwan Bishara to discuss these issues are: Carl Bernstein, a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist; Amy Goodman, the host and executive producer of Democracy Now!; Professor Emily Bell, the director of digital journalism at Columbia University; Evgeny Morozov, the author of The Net Delusion: The Dark Side of Internet Freedom; Professor Clay Shirky, the author of Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age.
Our interviewees are: Daniel Ellsberg, the Pentagon Papers whistleblower; Charlie Beckett, the director of Polis at London School of Economics; Jeremy Goldkorn, the founder of Danwei.org, and Pink Ke, the co-founder of antiwave.net
|
|
|---|
Showing posts with label Twitter. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Twitter. Show all posts
Jacob Weisberg: Tech Revolutionaries -- The Arab Revolt shows that Google's and Twitter's corporate values are better than Facebook's
Tech Revolutionaries: The Arab Revolt shows that Google's and Twitter's corporate values are better than Facebook's.
By Jacob Weisberg
Slate
American technology companies have often faced tricky issues about how they operate in relation to authoritarian regimes in China, Russia, and elsewhere. But as revolution sweeps through the Middle East, three companies have found themselves central to the action in an unprecedented way. Google, Facebook, and Twitter are all confronting the kind of moral and political dilemmas that global corporations usually hope to avoid. Their differing reactions tell us a lot about their corporate values—in a deeper sense than that issue is usually talked about.
Google's response has been the most exemplary. From its earliest days, Google has asserted an unusual claim to ethical behavior—its slogan is "Don't Be Evil." The company has, on occasion, shown itself willing to forgo profits and take risks that others wouldn't to avoid violating its own principles. The best previous example was China, where Google pulled out of the search engine market instead of continuing to accede to government demands for censorship of results. There's a biographical explanation for this kind of corporate policy decision. The company's co-founder Sergey Brin's experience as a child of Jewish refuseniks living under Soviet tyranny has influenced the company's behavior.
In Egypt, Google went even further than it did in China by directly opposing an oppressive government. There has been no suggestion that Google authorized or encouraged Wael Ghonim to foster a revolution there. But, amazingly, Google did not distance itself from one of its executives trying to overthrow the Mubarak regime in his spare time. Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, said recently that he was "very proud" of Ghonim, and the company has made clear that it would welcome him back to his old job. This was not all Google did. When Mubarak cut off Internet access, the company developed a workaround that allowed users to send Twitter messages over phone lines. YouTube, which Google owns, also created a hub to promote videos from protestors in Tahrir Square. This sort of activism has provoked Glenn Beck—and the Russian government—to charge Google with being in league with the Obama administration in supporting Egyptian revolution. In fact, Google has walked a fine line on this point, providing tools to help undermine tyranny without directly embracing any particular group of revolutionaries.
You can contrast this response with that of Facebook. Facebook's platform played the bigger role in Hosni Mubarak's downfall. It was the "We Are All Khaled Said" page Ghonim set up in June to memorialize a businessman who died in police custody that became the cradle of the revolution. But Facebook the company, unlike Google, has hardly embraced the honor. Last fall, it removed the crucial page rather than allowing the administrator to protect his identity. Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois sent Facebook a letter requesting that it amend to its no-anonymity policy to protect democratic activists in the Middle East. Facebook said no. When the Tunisian government used a virus to obtain passwords of activists, Facebook couched its response in terms of protecting user privacy, not challenging a vile regime.
Facebook is such a powerful organizing tool that the question of its attitude toward those who use its product is in some ways irrelevant. But it is worth pointing that the company has never shown any sign of having the kind of core commitment to liberty that Google does. Where Google voluntary pulled out of China, Facebook—which is blocked there—is desperate to get in. This, too, reflects the background and worldview of its founder. Mark Zuckerberg, a child of privilege, has never known a lack of political freedom. He has no obvious ideological leanings and his big outside investors include a radical libertarian and a junior oligarch. It is difficult to imagine Facebook—or most other technology companies, for that matter—passing up a major business opportunity because of concerns about human rights. Facebook's overriding objective is the much more typical one of expanding its market while avoiding bad PR and staying out of trouble with governments that set the rules.
To Read the Rest of the Essay
By Jacob Weisberg
Slate
American technology companies have often faced tricky issues about how they operate in relation to authoritarian regimes in China, Russia, and elsewhere. But as revolution sweeps through the Middle East, three companies have found themselves central to the action in an unprecedented way. Google, Facebook, and Twitter are all confronting the kind of moral and political dilemmas that global corporations usually hope to avoid. Their differing reactions tell us a lot about their corporate values—in a deeper sense than that issue is usually talked about.
Google's response has been the most exemplary. From its earliest days, Google has asserted an unusual claim to ethical behavior—its slogan is "Don't Be Evil." The company has, on occasion, shown itself willing to forgo profits and take risks that others wouldn't to avoid violating its own principles. The best previous example was China, where Google pulled out of the search engine market instead of continuing to accede to government demands for censorship of results. There's a biographical explanation for this kind of corporate policy decision. The company's co-founder Sergey Brin's experience as a child of Jewish refuseniks living under Soviet tyranny has influenced the company's behavior.
In Egypt, Google went even further than it did in China by directly opposing an oppressive government. There has been no suggestion that Google authorized or encouraged Wael Ghonim to foster a revolution there. But, amazingly, Google did not distance itself from one of its executives trying to overthrow the Mubarak regime in his spare time. Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, said recently that he was "very proud" of Ghonim, and the company has made clear that it would welcome him back to his old job. This was not all Google did. When Mubarak cut off Internet access, the company developed a workaround that allowed users to send Twitter messages over phone lines. YouTube, which Google owns, also created a hub to promote videos from protestors in Tahrir Square. This sort of activism has provoked Glenn Beck—and the Russian government—to charge Google with being in league with the Obama administration in supporting Egyptian revolution. In fact, Google has walked a fine line on this point, providing tools to help undermine tyranny without directly embracing any particular group of revolutionaries.
You can contrast this response with that of Facebook. Facebook's platform played the bigger role in Hosni Mubarak's downfall. It was the "We Are All Khaled Said" page Ghonim set up in June to memorialize a businessman who died in police custody that became the cradle of the revolution. But Facebook the company, unlike Google, has hardly embraced the honor. Last fall, it removed the crucial page rather than allowing the administrator to protect his identity. Sen. Richard Durbin of Illinois sent Facebook a letter requesting that it amend to its no-anonymity policy to protect democratic activists in the Middle East. Facebook said no. When the Tunisian government used a virus to obtain passwords of activists, Facebook couched its response in terms of protecting user privacy, not challenging a vile regime.
Facebook is such a powerful organizing tool that the question of its attitude toward those who use its product is in some ways irrelevant. But it is worth pointing that the company has never shown any sign of having the kind of core commitment to liberty that Google does. Where Google voluntary pulled out of China, Facebook—which is blocked there—is desperate to get in. This, too, reflects the background and worldview of its founder. Mark Zuckerberg, a child of privilege, has never known a lack of political freedom. He has no obvious ideological leanings and his big outside investors include a radical libertarian and a junior oligarch. It is difficult to imagine Facebook—or most other technology companies, for that matter—passing up a major business opportunity because of concerns about human rights. Facebook's overriding objective is the much more typical one of expanding its market while avoiding bad PR and staying out of trouble with governments that set the rules.
To Read the Rest of the Essay
~Thoughts Of This Bag Will Get Me Through The Fall And Winter Months...Ruthie Davis Spring 2011~
Follow my blog with bloglovin´
Meeting with Footwear News in an hour to show my NEW S2011 Collection of shoes and handbags!
Meeting with Footwear News in an hour to show my NEW S2011 Collection of shoes and handbags!
8:19 AM Aug 10th via web
- @Ruthie_Davis Tweet
Sweet Jesus... A handbag to match the shoes that I have no trouble describing as "legendary"...omg. Hurry up spring...hurry the hell up!!! Ruthie Davis, designer of my beloved "Spike" will be introducing a handbag line in Spring 2011...the bags will be decked out in all things I love such as spikes, studs, glitter, nuts and bolts...etc...AND have a inner compartment for shoe storage!!! F*cking brilliant.
A preview:
Read All The Details on WWD
Kisses Bitches...
Glamour Whore...xoxo
~Regarding Rihanna... Sit Down, Shut Up And Listen Bitchesssss~
Follow my blog with bloglovin´
"A competent and self-confident person is incapable of jealousy in anything. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity." -Robert A. Heinlein
The past few weeks I was on an unplanned summer hiatus during which I only surfed the net via my Blackberry...which is remarkable for a phone but still a "light" version of the web and all of it's activity at best. After purchasing a new laptop and returning from my summer break I was back to speeding on the Information Super Highway...which apparently leads to Jealously Heights. Yeah, I said "Jealousy Heights". Y'all are some catty ass bishes...
All weekend while reading blogs and my Twitter timeline all I have seen are catty (and not all that witty) insults directed at Rihanna's hair color of the moment... Which in my opinion looks FLY.
Are you bitches serious?! Really? You brought this on yourself... Ready? Too bad I'm about to go in regardless...
Let's get some things straight here. The fact is Rihanna is a BAD bitch...period. That is first and foremost. Most of you however are probably not. She's young, talented, rich and a style icon. Most of you are definitely not. And that's your problem...isn't it? I am quite sure that most of the women blogging and tweeting insults at Mz.Fenty are sitting at your PC in flat ranch house in the burbs drinking coffee while the kids are at school. You get your hair cut by your local superstar hairstylist and buy your makeup at Sephora so you think your a beauty/style expert. And since you go into your closest big city during the holidays you think your cultured and worldly. Your not. If you were actually pounding the pavement on the streets of a major city daily or actually working in beauty/fashion in the entertainment industry (instead of merely writing about it) you would know that Riri's current hair color isn't actually all that outlandish. But that's another problem isn't it? Rihanna pushes the limits but never travels past the realm of fashion possibility like say Lady Gaga (whom you all exalted because she was so cartoonish she wasn't a threat to your self esteem), Rihanna reminds you that you're not as young, sexy, famous, fashionable, trendy or rich as she is and it bugs you. Get over it... I"m way past Rihanna's age, will never have her wardrobe or glam squad and would kill for half her talent but I don't seethe in cattiness and jealously...I ADMIRE and COMPLIMENT. Try it...it won't kill you.
Emma Watson cut off all of her hair this week, a poor choice but has anyone said anything about that? No. Why? Because Emma just made you all feel better about yourselves...so she's safe from the Internet bashing. It's twisted. we have to do better as females...
This post is not aimed towards people who do not care for her hair color. I'm not saying you have to like it. This geared at bitchiest of bloggers and tweeters who know their opinion is formed from jealously and who look a mess their damn selves...peace
The Eminem/Rihanna "Love The Way You Lie" video just to bug you...
Kisses Bitches...
Glamour Whore...xoxo
~By Request: Gianmarco Lorenzi. Dedicated To My Princess~
"Your shoes are your glory." -Qiana Markham
As you all know, I am not only a Glamour Whore but I am also a out loud and proud Shoe Slut. Yup...I'm a dirty lil shoe slut and I don't care who knows. As a matter fact I prefer my friends not only know about my lust and desire for an amazing shoe but are also shoe sluts themselves... Birds of a feather.
That being said...let me tell you about my fabulous friend Nora (AKA @ThaArabPrincess ...follow her. She is a divine Glamour Whore) She is sexy, sassy, smart and silly...and a huge shoe slut...and I ADORE her.
Since she resides in Miami and I am in the NY/NJ/CT area, we use our Twitter pages to twitpic each other shoe porn. She tweeted a fabulous pair of Gianmarco Lorenzi shoes today and informed me that she had just recently became familiar with his work. She was SPRUNG!! I have been a long time GML admirer and I adore my Nora so when she tweeted me: "Can u blog about this designer next?" My response was: "I got u Mama!!" And I do...
This post is filled with all of his best creations past and present and is dedicated to my fellow Glamour Whore, my gorgeous friend Nora. Here you go Girl...enjoy!! xoxo
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Kisses Bitches...
Glamour Whore...xoxo
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)