MediaCynic.com

Archives
Homepage
Linking to Us
Recent Headlines




Add to MyYahoo

Add to MyMSN

Add to Bloglines

Add to NewsGator

Add to Pluck





Categories

2008 Election
George W. Bush
Dick Cheney
Bill Clinton
Hillary Clinton
Economy
John Edwards
Entertainment
Environment
Al Gore
Health Care
Immigration
International
Iraq
John Kerry
Media
Middle East
Miscellaneous
Plamegate
Politics
Polls
Religion
Condoleezza Rice
Donald Rumsfeld
Scandals
Science
Social security
Supreme Court
Taxes
Technology






MediaCynic.com Homepage | Technology

Pentagon Considered a Gay Bomb

Of all the insane ways that the U. S. government would like to spend taxpayers' money, this has to be in the top five. The Pentagon has confirmed that it seriously considered spending $7.5 million to create what is being called a "Gay Bomb." The Gay Bomb would be a chemical weapon laced with an aphrodisiac and some chemical that could instantaneously turn opposing troops gay. The theory was that the heretofore manly troops would drop their weapons to bat their eyelashes at that cute Marine fighting next to them. The idea did not receive funding, but was seriously considered.
A Berkeley watchdog organization that tracks military spending said it uncovered a strange U.S. military proposal to create a hormone bomb that could purportedly turn enemy soldiers into homosexuals and make them more interested in sex than fighting. Pentagon officials on Friday confirmed to CBS 5 that military leaders had considered, and then subsequently rejected, building the so-called "Gay Bomb."

Edward Hammond, of Berkeley's Sunshine Project, had used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain a copy of the proposal from the Air Force's Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio. As part of a military effort to develop non-lethal weapons, the proposal suggested, "One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior." The documents show the Air Force lab asked for $7.5 million to develop such a chemical weapon. "The Ohio Air Force lab proposed that a bomb be developed that contained a chemical that would cause enemy soldiers to become gay, and to have their units break down because all their soldiers became irrisistibly attractive to one another," Hammond said after reviewing the documents.

"The notion was that a chemical that would probably be pleasant in the human body in low quantities could be identified, and by virtue of either breathing or having their skin exposed to this chemical, the notion was that soldiers would become gay," explained Hammond. The Pentagon told CBS 5 that the proposal was made by the Air Force in 1994.

"The Department of Defense is committed to identifying, researching and developing non-lethal weapons that will support our men and women in uniform," said a DOD spokesperson, who indicated that the "gay bomb" idea was quickly dismissed. However, Hammond said the government records he obtained suggest the military gave the plan much stronger consideration than it has acknowledged.

"The truth of the matter is it would have never come to my attention if it was dismissed at the time it was proposed," he said. "In fact, the Pentagon has used it repeatedly and subsequently in an effort to promote non-lethal weapons, and in fact they submitted it to the highest scientific review body in the country for them to consider." Military officials insisted Friday to CBS 5 that they are not currently working on any such idea and that the past plan was abandoned.
So now the Pentagon assures us that it is not actively creating any more Gay Bombs. Not to be paranoid or anything, but remember Donald Rumsfeld and the Office of Disinformation? Rumsfeld told the press about the new department, which caused such a hue and cry that he later said that it had been disbanded. But had it really been disbanded? Or was that just the first order of business to deny its own existence? And is the Gay Bomb project really dead? If we suddenly get footage of well-dressed Iraqi insurgents who seem more interested in redecorating Baghdad than killing the troops of the Great Satan, it will be very suspicious.

Posted on June 11, 2007
Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati



The Googleplex Expands

Google continues to merrily expand. This time, the company is building its secret weapon: a giant supercomputing center housed in a building the size of two football fields, with twin four-storey cooling plants. The New York Times explains what the company is up to now:
The complex, sprawling like an information-age factory, heralds a substantial expansion of a worldwide computing network handling billions of search queries a day and a growing repertory of other Internet services. And odd as it may seem, the barren desert land surrounding the Columbia along the Oregon-Washington border — at the intersection of cheap electricity and readily accessible data networking — is the backdrop for a multibillion-dollar face-off among Google, Microsoft and Yahoo that will determine dominance in the online world in the years ahead.

Microsoft and Yahoo have announced that they are building big data centers upstream in Wenatchee and Quincy, Wash., 130 miles to the north. But it is a race in which they are playing catch-up. Google remains far ahead in the global data-center race, and the scale of its complex here is evidence of its extraordinary ambition. Even before the Oregon center comes online, Google has lashed together a global network of computers — known in the industry as the Googleplex — that is a singular achievement. "Google has constructed the biggest computer in the world, and it's a hidden asset," said Danny Hillis, a supercomputing pioneer and a founder of Applied Minds, a technology consulting firm, referring to the Googleplex.

The design and even the nature of the Google center in this industrial and agricultural outpost 80 miles east of Portland has been a closely guarded corporate secret. "Companies are historically sensitive about where their operational infrastructure is," acknowledged Urs Holzle, Google's senior vice president for operations. Behind the curtain of secrecy, the two buildings here — and a third that Google has a permit to build — will probably house tens of thousands of inexpensive processors and disks, held together with Velcro tape in a Google practice that makes for easy swapping of components. The cooling plants are essential because of the searing heat produced by so much computing power.

The complex will tap into the region's large surplus of fiber optic networking, a legacy of the dot-com boom. The fact that Google is behind the data center, referred to locally as Project 02, has been reported in the local press. But many officials in The Dalles, including the city attorney and the city manager, said they could not comment on the project because they signed confidentiality agreements with Google last year. "No one says the 'G' word," said Diane Sherwood, executive director of the Port of Klickitat, Wash., directly across the river from The Dalles, who is not bound by such agreements. "It's a little bit like He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named in Harry Potter."
Inside company documents reveal that by 2011 the Googleplex will include 800,000 servers all connected by fiber optic cable simply brimming with information.
"Google is like the Borg," said Milo Medin, a computer networking expert who was a founder of the 1990's online service @Home, referring to the robotic species on "Star Trek" that was forcibly assembled from millions of species and computer components. "I know of no other carrier or enterprise that distributes applications on top of their computing resource as effectively as Google."
Apparently the super-secretive Google is having a bit of a culture clash with its friendly, folksy new neighbors. The local Chamber of Commerce wants to organize a press-filled ribbon cutting ceremony to celebrate the opening of the mysterious new computer center. But Google's answer is merely a Cesar Millan-like "SHHHHHHH."

Posted on June 14, 2006
Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati



Political Roundup 6-29-05

  • MSNBC.com reports that Democrats and Republicans alike are trying to persuade President Bush not to veto a new bill that would fun embryonic stem cell research. Bush has threatened to veto the bill which has already passed in the House. Republican Senator Orrin Hatch has been one of the loudest supporters of the bill:
    But Republican proponents such as Hatch and Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., argue that the stem cells used in research would come from embryos left over from in vitro fertilization programs, embryos that would be discarded anyway.

    On Wednesday Hatch praised the House-passed embryonic stem cell funding bill and urged the Senate to pass it as well.

    "It seems ridiculous to make the argument that we’re going to allow those 400,000 in vitro fertilization embryos to die by discarding them, but we can’t utilize them for the benefit of mankind," Hatch said.
  • President Bush's recent speech at Fort Bragg, N.C. to shore up support for the Iraq War has been criticized for once again linking the Iraq War to 9/11 despite the fact that there is no evidence to support such a link. A USA Today article detailed some of the reaction to the speech:
    House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi accused Bush of demonstrating a willingness "exploit the sacred ground of 9/11, knowing that there is no connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq.

    "The president's numerous references to September 11 did not provide a way forward in Iraq," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said. "They only served to remind the American people that our most dangerous enemy, namely Osama bin Laden, is still on the loose and al-Qaeda remains capable of doing this nation great harm nearly four years after it attacked America."
    Both Democrats and Republicans said that President Bush speech offered nothing new in the speech and that there are still not enough troops in Iraq to secure the country:
    Sen. John McCain, interviewed on CBS's The Early Show, maintained that "one of the very big mistakes early on was that he didn't have enough troops on the ground, particularly after the initial victory, and that's still the case."

    Sen. John Kerry, Bush's Democratic opponent in last year's presidential election, told NBC's Today show that the borders of Iraq "are porous" and said "we don't have enough troops" there.

    Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., appearing on ABC's Good Morning America, disputed Bush's notion that sufficient troops are in place.

    "I'm going to send him the phone numbers of the very generals and flag officers that I met on Memorial Day when I was in Iraq," the Delaware Democrat said. "There's not enough force on the ground now to mount a real counterinsurgency."

    Biden argued, "The course that we are on now is not a course of success. He (Bush) has to get more folks involved. He has to stand up that army more quickly."
  • The ScotusBlog has emerged as a popular blog with discussions on the Supreme Court's Ten Commandments and Grokster decisions. Many blogs and media outlets noted that there was no resignation announcement from Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

    The Washington Post sums up the Grokster decision in this article:
    Internet file-sharing services will be held responsible if they intend for their customers to use software primarily to swap songs and movies illegally, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, rejecting warnings that the lawsuits will stunt growth of cool tech gadgets such as the next iPod.

    The unanimous decision sends the case back to lower court, which had ruled in favor of file-sharing services Grokster Ltd. and StreamCast Networks Inc. on the grounds that the companies couldn't be sued. The justices said there was enough evidence of unlawful intent for the case to go to trial.
    The Grokster decision is being heavily discussed online and HowToWeb has links to some news articles and blog posts about the Grokster decision.

  • Take it to Karl is a new blog that posts emails from military personnel who are mad at Karl Rove's recent comments about liberals.

  • Bloggers are organizing to fight the possibility of government regulation.

  • Military Casualties: Obleek uses Flash to show U.S. casualties over time and where they occured in Iraq. Icasualties.org has detailed information about military casualties in both Iraq and Afghanistan (Operating Enduring Freedom).

  • Several bloggers have formed BlogPac, an online political action committee. Bloggers on BlogPac's advisory board include: Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos, Jerome Armstrong of MyDD, Duncan Black of Atrios, Jeralyn Merritt of Talk Left, John Aravosis of AmericaBlog, Matt Stoller of BOP News, Anna of Annatopia, Jesse Taylor of Pandagon, Chris Bowers of MyDD and Steve Gilliard's News Blog

    Posted on June 29, 2005
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

  • Stem Cell Research Moves Forward in Massachusetts

    Stem cell research is undeniably popular with the majority of the American electorate, and politicians will ignore that reality to their peril. Governor Mitt Romney felt the wrath of his legislature, as they overrode his veto of a bill designed to make Massachusetts at the forefront of embryonic stem cell research.
    Under previous state law, scientists who wanted to conduct embryonic stem cell research in Massachusetts needed the approval of the local district attorney. The new law seeks to expand stem cell research by removing that requirement but giving the state Health Department some regulatory controls.

    The Republican governor vetoed the bill last week because it allows the cloning of human embryos for use in stem cell experiments — a practice Romney said amounts to creating life in order to destroy it.
    After California passed a stem cell research bill last year, it appears that other states want onboard. President Bush would do well to heed what just happened to Mitt Romney, because it could also happen to him.

    Posted on June 1, 2005
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    The Aging of the 18-49 Demographic

    The L.A. Times has an interesting article about advertisers' obsession with the 18-49 year old demographic, which may be changing. The over-50 crowd is less than thrilled with all the hip new products being marketed at 18 year-olds. After all, who do they think earned the money that the 18 year-olds are spending?

    Apparently, 50 is the new 30. Today's 50 year olds are just as likely or more likely to change brands and try new things as the under 30's. And some companies, like Apple, are smart enough to have noticed.
    One of the most successful products recently to tap into that individualism has been Apple Computer Inc.'s digital music player iPod. Apple set out to market the portable device, which can hold thousands of songs, to people of all ages.

    Last fall, its TV commercials featured a silhouette of a dancing Bono of the Irish rock band U2 singing "Vertigo." Apple was confident that younger consumers would see Bono -- who turned 45 today -- as the ultimate in cool: a hardened rocker who crusades for social and environmental causes. Apple was also betting that older consumers, whose fear of technology might have made them anxious, would feel reassured. If Bono, whom they'd listened to for more than two decades, could handle an iPod, so could they.

    "We have huge youth appeal," said Greg Joswiak, Apple's vice president of iPod marketing. "With this campaign, we tried to reach across several generations."


    Posted on May 10, 2005
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati



    Eliot Spitzer Goes After Spyware

    Wired reports on New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's new war on spyware. Spitzer, who is attempting to follow in the footsteps of Rudi Guiliani and a higher national profile, filed a civil suit against Intermix Medica of Los Angeles. Intermix is being sued over their installation of unwanted spyware and adware on unwary computer users.
    Spitzer said the suit filed in New York City against Intermix Media of Los Angeles combats the redirecting of home computer users to unwanted websites and its own website that includes ads, the adding of unnecessary toolbar items and the delivery of unwanted ads that pop up on computer screens. After a six-month investigation, Spitzer concluded the company installed a wide range of advertising software on countless personal computers nationwide.

    "Spyware and adware are more than an annoyance," Spitzer said. "These fraudulent programs foul machines, undermine productivity and in many cases frustrate consumers' efforts to remove them from their computers. These issues can serve to be a hindrance to the growth of e-commerce."

    Spitzer's civil suit accuses Intermix of violating state General Business Law provisions against false advertising and deceptive business practices. He also accuses them of trespass under New York common law.

    The company is accused of download ads and software that directs ads to a computer based on the user's activities. Spitzer's investigators said the downloads then attach to computers, often slowing their operation and crashing the computers as well as interfering with use of the computer through pop-up ads. Often the downloads were made without notice when a user visited a website, played a game or accepted a screen saver. Sometimes the user was asked permission through an often vague reference in a lengthy licensing agreement which could be misleading or inaccurate, investigators said.
    This is only the beginning, says Spitzer. He believes that spyware, adware and identity theft are eroding consumer confidence and slowing the growth of e-commerce. And I couldn't agree more. More power to him.

    Posted on April 28, 2005
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    Upgrading the Army

    The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated how badly our armed forces are in need of a major upgrade. The problem is that it's going to cost so much to whip the Army into a high-tech fighting force that even hawkish Republicans in Congress are blanching at the price tag. The first phase of the complex restructuring will be called Future Combat Systems (sounds like a new XBox title, doesn't it?) will cost $145 billion. The New York Times reports:
    That price tag, larger than past estimates publicly disclosed by the Army, does not include a projected $25 billion for the communications network needed to connect the future forces. Nor does it fully account for Army plans to provide Future Combat weapons and technologies to forces beyond those first 15 brigades.

    The Army is asking Congress to approve Future Combat while it is fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan whose costs, according to the Congressional Research Service, now exceed $275 billion. Future Combat is one of the biggest items in the Pentagon's plans to build more than 70 major weapons systems at a cost of more than $1.3 trillion.
    That giant sucking sound you hear is fiscal conservatives trying to speak in outrage and failing miserably. Say it with me now, "$1.3 trillion dollars." But, as always, we can rely on Donald Rumsfeld to put things in perspective for us. Last month, he testified at the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee about the joys of fighting two wars and trying to completely restructure the Army at the same time.
    "Abraham Lincoln once compared reorganizing the Union Army during the Civil War to bailing out the Potomac River with a teaspoon," he said. "I hope and trust that what we are proposing to accomplish will not be that difficult."


    Posted on March 28, 2005
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    John Edwards Embraces Podcasting

    Former Democratic Vice-presidential nominee John Edwards is embracing the new podcasting technology, with his first podcast scheduled for tomorrow (Wednesday, March 23, 2005). So what is a podcast, you might ask? Basically, it's a free download of someone speaking. I like to think of it as Tivo-ing a favorite radio show. Basically, you just install either the free iPodder or Dopper software, then download the MP3 file and hit Play. Senator Edwards has a handy FAQ for the podcast-impaired. You can also submit a question for Senator Edwards on the FAQ page. Podcasting is like radio without the federal government regulation--so far, at least. Naturally, anyone with a great speaking voice will do very well with podcasts. John Edwards has such a reassuring, upbeat, yet soothing voice that his broadcast would probably be a handy file to pull up in a stressful moment. Hey, I just thought of a great fundraiser. Perhaps for a donation to his favorite charity, he'd podcast you a personal and inspiring message. Or, if you're more of a Neocon, you could get Senator Bill Frist to record a message where he provides you a medical diagnosis of a relative whose photo you emailed to his secretary. I wonder how that would fit into the McCain-Feingold rules?

    Posted on March 22, 2005
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati



    Will Your Vote Count in November?

    With all the media coverage being accorded to the Vietnam-era activities of President Bush and Senator Kerry, there is another -- much more important -- story simply falling through the cracks. After the voting debacle of the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election, you'd think that our government would have taken steps to ensure that yet another one million African American votes aren't mysteriously "lost" in Florida or elsewhere, for that matter. But you'd be dead wrong if you thought that.

    As Election Day approaches, most voters are unaware that approximately 50 million votes cast in this upcoming election will be made on voting machines which give no paper receipt or have any way to verify what votes were cast. The major vendor of these voting machines, Diebold Inc., makes cash registers -- you know, the kind that give you a receipt after you buy your groceries? Or buy gas? But for some reason, Diebold decided that there was no need to leave any paper trail or tangible record of how people cast their votes.

    Election officials from a number of states have pooh-poohed the idea that a receipt or paper trail is needed in case of a recount. Unfortunately, those election officials have neglected to mention their cozy relationship with the voting machine industry. According to the New York Times, California's Secretary of State, Bill Jones, left office in 2003 to take a cushy job with Sequoia Voting Systems, as did the assistant Secretary of State. And now the former secretaries of state from Florida and Georgia have signed on as lobbyists for Election Systems and Software and Diebold Election Systems. How nice for them!

    A bipartisan bill to require a paper trail for the new machines stalled out in the U.S. Senate. According to Wired magazine, saner heads have prevailed in California and Nevada, where laws have been passed to require a paper receipt for electronic votes. But has Florida, Ohio or Pennsylvania passed such a law? Not a chance. But, don't worry. Walden O'Dell, the CEO of Diebold, Inc. (a major contributor to President Bush) wrote in a Republican fundraising letter to potential donors that he is "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president." Diebold is based in North Canton, Ohio.

    Thank goodness! For a minute, I was beginning to worry that there might be something crooked going on.

    Posted on September 10, 2004
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    Gmail and Orkut: Hi Tech Status Symbols

    It was bound to happen sometime. The innocence of the fledgling Internet was shattered only two years or so after its creation as a tool between academics as a medium for communication and sharing of information. As soon as big business figured out that the Net was a fantastic way to sell people things, that put an end to privacy and the joy of an email box with no spam in it. But, as with all living organisms, the Internet is changing once again.

    The latest incarnation of the Web, for the young and hip at any rate, is its usefulness as an exclusionary social tool. Witness the growth of the hot new social networks, such as Friendster and Orkut. Orkut is owned by Google, the search engine giant that's about to go public and whose motto is "Don't be evil." Orkut is like thousands of other online communities in that it brings together groups of people with like interests to chat about life, the universe and everything. But there is a difference with Orkut -- not just anyone can join. You have to be invited to join. Instantly, Orkut became a status symbol, with people frantically searching for someone who could recommend them as a member. The old negative sell works once again. A brilliant marketing tactic, I must say.

    And now, the guys at Google have generated an interest in Gmail that borders on hysteria. After a barrage of initial negative publicity about Google's proposed new email service (due to privacy concerns over the fact that all emails are retained forever by Google), Gmail is the hottest email address to have. Why, you might ask? Well, you can't just sign up for the free service. It's in beta test mode, so you have to be invited to join. People are frantically searching for invites to open a Gmail account. In fact, they are listed on ebay right now for around $5.00 U.S. Google sends free invites to certain current Gmail members, who can pass them on to friends. Figuring that your chances of getting your first choice email address at gmail.com will be slim to none if you wait until the service launches, people are buying the rights to a free email account, or offering amazing services in trade.

    Will Gmail and Orkut last? Will they be status symbols next year? Beats me. But one thing's for sure. The guys at Google are very, very smart. And that bodes well for the future of their company.

    Posted on July 2, 2004
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    DUP: Driving Under the Influence of Porn

    The Washington Post is reporting that a bizarre new crime is on the rise: driving while watching porn. Apparently, those tv screens in the minivans and Mercedes aren't just being used to play cartoons to keep the kids amused on long drives. Nope. People are loading up the porn in the old DVD player and driving off to work. Other motorists, pedestrians and even kids are getting an eyeful at stoplights.

    Is this what we've come to? People can't even drive to the grocery store without making sure their favorite porn movie is keeping them company? Keep it off the streets, folks. It's bad enough that the number one cause of car accidents today, acording to AAA, is people not paying attention to the road because they're talking on a cell phone or changing a radio station. Now we have to deal with drivers who are watching snuff films while driving, forcing everyone else at the stoplight to share their taste in erotica.

    Remember the traffic grid in Minority Report where a computer controlled all vehicular traffic in the city? Where you just get in and tell the computer where you want to go? I think that is one futuristic idea whose time has come.

    Posted on March 11, 2004
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    Orrin Hatch Contracts Foot in Mouth Disease

    Senators and congressmen with no programming experience and little understanding of either intellectual property law, our Consitution's prohibition against unlawful takings and/or the amazingly stupid things kids do on the computer when they are unsupervised would do well to learn from the unfolding Orrin Hatch debacle. I am, of course, referring to Senator Hatch's outrageous comments endorsing the destruction of any computer whose owner illegally downloads a music file. The music industry has been lobbying hard to get Congress to pass some Draconian penalties against anyone who uses Kazaa or other Napster-like file swapping services. Now they want to destory someone's computer with a deadly virus if they -- even accidentally -- illegally download software. It's the new "Two Wrongs Make a Right" theory of legislation, I suppose.

    Let's explore a hypothetical scenario, shall we? Your stupid high-school age student (who is currently suffering from testosterone poisoning of the worst description) illegally downloads the latest Brittany Spears single (out this fall, in case you are not keeping up with pop culture). Under Senator Hatch's scenario, your computer will be destroyed. Your Turbo Tax program with this year's taxes -- gone. Didn't back up that important work project? Too bad, it's gone too, along with your prescription lists, all your emails, your Excel files, and the draft of that novel you've been meaning to finish. Oh, and you'll need to buy a new computer, because this one is toast.

    But here's the really great part of this story. It turns out that Senator Hatch is using pirated software on his own website! Yes, that's right -- under his own rules, it's time to destroy his computer and take down his website. According to Wired, an unemployed programmer began clicking around Senator Hatch's website, after reading and becoming incensed by the Senator's comments. What he found was software piracy, pure and simple. The webmaster apparently has been running an unlicensed JavaScript menu system developed by Milonic Solutions. What's even worse is that someone removed Milonic's copyright notice from the source code.

    So, Senator Hatch, before you shoot off your mouth again on an important legal issue, perhaps you should take the time to actually research the issue first. Just a thought....

    Posted on June 20, 2003
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    The Rise and Fall of Steve Case

    Eighteen years ago, Stephen M. Case founded a little company called America Online. At the time, no one really knew what the future of computers would be, and no one anticipated the incredible speed at which the World Wide Web would become an accepted part of everyday life. Even Bill Gates didn't see the potential of the Internet in the beginning. In one of the most amazing corporate turnarounds in history, Gates refocused his entire company towards the Internet right about the time of the infamous browser wars. (You remember a little browser called Netscape, don't you? Oh wait, that's owned by AOL now). Overnight, entire divisions of Microsoft were reorganized and personnel were reallocated to different, more net-friendly projects.

    As Case's company grew and began to aggressively sign up customers, it became clear to some that hey, this Internet thing was here to stay. And at the height of the tech boom, Case made another bold move, by engineering the merger of Time Warner with AOL; the merger was eventually approved by the FCC in 2000. Along the way he also found time to have an notorious office affair with the then-married Jean Villanueva, VP for corporate communications at AOL, whom he later married after divorcing his wife of 11 years who is the mother of his three children (Source: The Washington Post).

    But the bubble was about to burst. Greenspan started raising interest rates (he was worried about inflation, remember?) in 1999. Then investors got nervous and began pulling out of tech stocks, which were wildly overvalued. ("Earnings? We don't need no stinking earnings!" was the mantra of the growth stock cheerleaders.) Then 9/11 hit and the economic boom was officially as dead as videocassettes. The numerous accounting scandals didn't help either. AOL is currently under investigation by the SEC for accounting fraud...something about booking free ad swaps as revenue to boost the stock price or something. (Of course, one has to wonder what the IRS would have thought about failing to report that barter income, but that's another column).

    So, here's Case: he's achieved his goal. He is now the head of the largest media conglomerate in the world, which includes such goodies as CNN, Warner Books, Time magazine, People magazine, and Warner Bros and New Line Cinema. The AOL people started pushing around the Time Warner people. The management at CNN went completely nuts and hired soft core porn star Andrea Thompson to anchor Headline News, while firing talented, experienced journalists in a drive to compete with Fox. Even Ted Turner acknowledged in an interview that he made a mistake in giving up control over hiring decisions. (Perhaps he was distracted with his messy divorce proceedings?) Meanwhile, the stock price was falling faster than the waistband of Christina Aguilera's hip-hugger jeans.

    At the shareholder meeting in May, it was clear that Case was going to get his walking papers, so he resigned, making it clear in interviews that he really didn't want to go. Richard Parsons has now taken over as both CEO and Chairman of the Board of AOL Time Warner. (Case is still on the board of directors, but who knows how long that will last.) Critics of Case say that he was like a bull in a china shop; that he didn't know anything about running a traditional media company and that the AOL corporate culture clashed with the more traditional Time Warner style. Case himself says he is being blamed for the falling stock price, which is a result of the ailing economy.

    So what does Steve Case do now? He's only 44 years old and has millions in the bank. According to the New York Post, Case owns 41.5% of the publicly held plantation, Maui Land & Pineapple Co., and is its largest shareholder. Reportedly, the company is in a heated dispute with arch-rival Del Monte over an exciting hybrid pineapple. So, he could head back to his home state of Hawaii and be plenty busy. But can he really give up the thrill of being the head of AOL Time Warner? Perhaps he's just waiting in the wings, hoping to regain what he once had. Only time will tell, but one thing's for sure: this guy is never boring. So far, no one has grabbed up the rights to film his life story. It has everything: the struggling entrepreneur who rises to fame and fortune, a lurid sex scandal, backbiting, infighting, trysts in a tropical paradise, and even the possibility of a criminal investigation. I think it would make a great movie of the week. Casting ideas, anyone?

    Posted on January 24, 2003
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati

    The Price of the Information Age

    As I was happily surfing the Net today, I happened to zip over to the Los Angeles Times website to check out the business entertainment news -- and received a nasty shock. All registrations before July, 2001 had been summarily wiped out. In order to access the site, you had to fill out yet another online registration form. Only this time, they wanted to know my income, my date of birth, my phone number, my address, the name of my first real boyfriend, if I'd ever used recreational drugs and various other very personal information (alright I'm exaggerating a bit, but not much). Then I was sent an email telling me to click on a link to activate my account. The email told me in bold red letters to hurry up and activate my account! And we mean now! No, not in a minute...now! By now, I felt my blood pressure rising as I got a cortisol kick, the heady afterburn of stress. It was implied, although not specifically stated, that if I didn't activate my account right away, something terrible might happen. Like, I might not find out which celeb has just headed off to rehab, what exec has just been indicted for insider trading, or whether Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock's wedding was really going to go forward, in light of all those Sheryl Crow rumors.

    So I activated my account, thinking that was the end of it. But wait, there's more! I was asked to create a Product Profile. "This is getting really tedious," I thought to myself. But being a tenacious type, I soldiered on. It turns out that if you don't make your preferences known, you might inadvertently subscribe yourself to yet another three or four email newsletters, and you may have every bit of your personal information sold to merchants. People who generally don't read the instructions on anything in life are going to be bombarded with email newsletters and offers for some very targeted personal products, indeed. Being a compulsive reader, I was handily able to avoid these consequences. So, now I'm registered. It really wasn't that bad, was it? There's only one problem. I don't just read the L.A. Times. I also read The New York Times, Salon, The Wall Street Journal and a host of other online publications, all of which require either registration and/or a subscription.

    What it really boils down to is this: what are you willing to put up with to read information for free? Online publications have to either charge a subscription fee, or use the print magazine model and charge for ads. Declaring that there is no more free lunch on the Web, Salon editor David Talbot has said that customers will either have to pay a subscription fee to see ad-free content, or they are going to have to agree to wade through some ads to see the content for free. Right now, most publications are still free, but they are starting to ask for more demographic information from their users: information which will help them sell ads to keep that content free.

    So there are really three issues here, as I see it: 1) What information are you willing to pay for online? 2) What hassles are you willing to go through and what personal information about yourself are you willing to give to see information online for free? and 3) How in the world do you keep track of the 10,000 user names and passwords you will need to see this information, whether you paid for it or not?

    The debate is just beginning. It will be interesting to see what happens.

    Posted on January 22, 2003
    Permalink | Digg this | Blogs linking to this post: Google | Technorati



    Our Blogs

    Bloggers Blog
    Book Blog
    Crafters Craft
    Drivers Drive
    Fantasy SF Blog
    Gamers Game
    Health News Blog
    HowToWeb.com
    The IWJ Blog
    Lovers Love
    Media Cynic
    Petosphere
    Pleasant Morning Buzz
    Science News Blog
    Shopping Blog
    Singers Sing
    Surfers Surf
    Traders Trade
    Video Nacho
    Watchers Watch
    Workers Work
    The Write News
    Writer's Blog


    Text Ads




    www.mediacynic.com
    Copyright © 2003-2007 by Writers Write, Inc. All Rights Reserved.