Also during this segment, Scarborough attacked liberal bloggers for correcting McCain’s error, saying they were probably “just sitting there, eating their Cheetos” and saying, “Let me google Anbar Awakening!” He added, “Dust flying — Cheeto dust flying all over. They’re wiping it on their bare chest while their underwear — you know, their Hanes.
Being a paid employee comes with many expectations and responsibilities. Let's run some of them down, shall we? First of all, there's this expectation that on a daily basis, you will show up and do work. In an office and everything! There you are subject to things like deadlines -- you actually have to produce writing on a regular basis. You receive assignments, from editors, that you are expected to fulfill in a timely fashion. You participate in editorial meetings. You coordinate your efforts with your colleagues. You try to break news. You try to cultivate sources. You go, whenever you are able, to where news is occurring.
Stop for a moment, class, everyone is not paying attention
Is the State of the Union tonight? You'll be working during that time. Is there a debate? Got a night of election returns coming? Plan on staying late. Did some madman just put several people in Tucson, Arizona in the hospital on a Saturday? Cancel your plans, because you've got to call in and get to work. You are, theoretically, on call, 24-7, to get the work done.
Those are the sorts of responsibilities, that, when they are fulfilled, entitle one to a "salary." And that's the life of the people who get paid to do original reporting and content for the site. And the content they produce is the most important content on the site. It's the stuff that is most widely read. It's the primary driver of everything else.
Does everybody follow that, class?
Big people do big, important jobs every day, and it's important to understand that, because when you grow up, you'll have to do big important jobs everyday, so you can get a paycheck.
Or not;
Here is where he channels Scarborough;
Now, people often wonder: why would anyone blog for free, at a place that pays other contributors? Please note, that part of what "free" entitles you to is a freedom from "having to work." No daily hours, no deadlines, no late nights, no weekends. You just do what you like when the spirit moves you.
[snip]
Of course, there remain hundreds of contributors to The Huffington Post who do so for no other reason than that they want exposure. Now, the value of "exposure," in and of itself, is a subject for debate. And it should be! But nevertheless, we have hundreds of people who want to take something they've written and put it in front of potentially millions of people, instead of their Facebook friends or their Twitter followers.
And here, Linkins bends down, to fill our bowls with some more Cheetos, and tell us to be quiet and, someday, we can eat grown-up food;
I suspect that there are a lot of blogger-contributors who are of a similar mind to me. Still others probably like having a big megaphone for their hobby. Naturally, there will probably be people who want to graduate from unpaid contributor to employee -- and where they can make a case on merit, and assume all of the responsibilities of employees, such "promotions" will be considered. But it's a dramatic change in your life to go from somebody who's writing whenever they feel up to it, to someone who has to come in and make high quality contributions on a regular basis -- even when that sporadic writing is brilliant writing. And that's the sort of thing that has to be considered before that jump is made.
Arianna Huffington is planning to use AOL's infrastructure to launch a major expansion of citizen journalism in advance of the 2012 presidential campaign, she tells me in an interview, sharing new details about her vision of expanded political coverage in the wake of the merger with AOL.
Huffington described her plan as "Jeffersonian," and she says she plans to use AOL's Web site Patch.com, a network of sites that cover local news at the granular level, as a vehicle for expansion modeled on HuffingtonPost's 2008 "Off the Bus" coverage. "Off the Bus" made a splash when candidate Barack Obama was caught on tape suggesting that economically distressed voters are "bitter" and "cling to guns or religion," and if Huffington has her way, she will oversee a massive increase in such coverage next year.
"We are going to dramatically accelerate this in 2012," said Huffington, who discussed the idea on a conference call yesterday with Patch.com employees. "We will have thousands and thousands of people covering the election. Covering the Repulicans. Covering the Democrats. Just being transparent about it."
Huffington -- who said high-level editorial staffing decisions were still being worked out -- also provided the first clear glimpse of her plan to graft the HuffPo vision on to the AOL infrastructure. "Patch already has professional editors," she said, adding that freelancers across the country would work with those editors "the way that the Huffington Post pairs young reporters with established editors. It's something we can also do at the local level."
[snip]
The expansion of citizen journalism seems likely to expand the current model by which a massive amount of content is generated by unpaid freelancers who are looking to get their voices heard. If she gets her way, the site's current identity won't change, preserving the site's community feel but expanding it in new directions.
"The first thing I said about Huffington Post is that I don't want to talk to the choir," she said. "I wanted to use this platform to inform millions of people. Now that can be dramatically accelerated."
The third President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, acquired and sold hundreds of slaves throughout his lifetime.[1] Jefferson first acquired slaves through his father's inheritance and by his marriage to Martha Wayles Skelton. According to one historian, Jefferson remained silent and did nothing to challenge slavery after the Revolutionary War era, America's most urgent and pressing social problem.[2] Jefferson's lavish spending left him in debt, and all but one of Jefferson's slaves that remained were sold after his death to pay his debts.[3][4][5] Jefferson today remains a complicated American icon and his writings and behavior on slavery are full of contradictions.[6] Jefferson, master of Monticello, relied heavily on slavery to support himself and his family's luxurious lifestyle.
From this large sample, a whopping 81 percent (405) opposed the acquisition in terms that ranged from confused to pessimistic to, most frequently, downright livid. Only 19 percent (95) were optimistic, though many of those were far closer to neutral.
“We made HuffPost and we are being abandoned,” one aggrieved reader wrote. “They will aim for the center. That’s where the big money is.” Another added: “Corporate greed and intelligent analysis don’t merge.” Others couldn’t even bear to read the news: “I have no interest reading about yet another monopoly creation and the slow erosion of diversity in terms of news sources.”
Within hours after the merger was announced, Huffington Post readers had even made a game of one-upping each other with metaphors that conveyed the depth of their despair about the sale. “This feels like walking into my credit union only to find out it was bought by Bank of America,” one said. “[It’s] like Carol Channing taking over for Fergie in the Black Eyed Peas. Legendary, but past the expiration date by about 10 years,” another lamented. A user with the tech analogy might have been the closest to the broader sentiment: “It’s like Friendster buying Facebook.”
Last, but not least, we'll have to extend the "My Sister/My Daughter" thing to Arianna as well.
Dana Milbank, today,pulls back the curtain on the revolving door of Ariana's idealogy;
"It's time for all of us in journalism to move beyond left and right," Huffington said Monday on PBS's "NewsHour." "Truly, it is an obsolete way of looking at the problems America is facing."
That is almost exactly what Huffington said in 2000, when she was making her last ideological transformation, from a conservative Republican into a liberal icon. "The old distinctions of right and left, Democrat, Republican, are pretty obsolete," she told Fox News then.
It's a stock line for Huffington, but if she and Armstrong are taken at their word, they are planning a radical reshaping of what had become an important voice for liberalism and a gleeful participant in the left-right game. "It can no longer be denied: the right-wing lunatics are running the Republican asylum and have infected the entire country and poisoned the world beyond," Huffington wrote in her 2008 book, "Right is Wrong ."
[snip]
I say this with admiration. Huffington deserves every one of those millions she'll be paid by AOL for creating this online sensation. She was once derided as "the most upwardly mobile Greek since Icarus" because of her many well-connected friends, but Huffington has earned her place as one of the extraordinary personalities of our time: an entrepreneur and writer who is always chasing the next big idea, wherever it is on the ideological spectrum.
Yet this is also why Huffington and her Web site are unlikely to remain as they were. Anybody who expects her to continue as a reliable voice of the left is a poor student of Huffington history.
[snip]
But in the late 1990s, Huffington began to reinvent herself. She covered the '96 political conventions for Comedy Central with Al Franken. She broke with Gingrich. She disparaged Bob Dole. She promoted Warren Beatty for president. She published a book favoring campaign finance reform. In 2000, she hosted a "shadow convention" protesting both parties.
She later explained the "transformation" of her political views by saying the right had "seduced, fooled, blinded, bamboozled" her.
That's crazy talk. Nobody bamboozles Arianna Stassinopoulos Huffington. If anybody was fooled, it was those who believed she would be a more enduring progressive than she was a conservative.
Phew!
That be a whirlwind of changes.
But, as has been noted before,and what we offered up above, one change that won't occur is Arianna paying her writers.
Can't wait for all those "Citizen Journalist" posts, in 2012, about all the funny signs and costumes at the Conventions, and Tweets about "Where's the best place to eat?" and "I missed the Press Bus, can anyone give me a ride"
High Tech companies, Internet companies, and such have been booming, falling from the sky, like, say Google and Facebook, and many others, out there doing big, fast things, and there was AOL, looking out the garage door, polishing the reins, and longing to ditch the horse and get out there in the growing World Wide Web.
Around the same time, I got an email from Tim Armstrong (AOL Chairman and CEO), saying he had something he wanted to discuss with me, and asking when we could meet. We arranged to have lunch at my home in LA later that week. The day before the lunch, Tim emailed and asked if it would be okay if he brought Artie Minson, AOL's CFO, with him. I told him of course and asked if there was anything they didn't eat. "I'll eat anything but mushrooms," he said.
For the saving grace of not serving mushrooms, Hufffington gets to do this millennium's first updated Charles Foster Kane thing, albiet, not in print, but on the World Wide Web, with her new Xanadu being good, ole AOL.
Somewhere, right now, Tina Brown is trying to sell The Daily Beast to Compuserve.
[snip]
Swisher writes that Huffington and Armstrong's "motto" is "One plus one equals 11." Which, ha, Huffington better hope that's true if her writers are going to make AOL's insane pageview targets. To that effect, AOL content will be "integrated deeply" into the HuffPo site—alongside terrific HuffPo content like "What Time Does the Superbowl Start?" and "How to Date an Indian (Advice for the Non-Indian)." The new media landscape is going to rule.
Now, by contrast, the constraints on Huffington are much fewer. Lyons frets that “all those bright young things with the glamorous job of writing for the Huffington Post are being sent down into the belly of the AOL galleyship and assigned to an oar” — but the fact is that Armstrong bought HuffPo, and TechCrunch before it, precisely because his galleyship model of managing writers was a signal failure. Arianna gets much more bang for her buck — and has happier and more loyal employees.
[snip]
Best of all, from Arianna’s point of view, is that all the extra investment she wants to make in editorial, starting with HuffPost Brazil, is going to be paid for not by rapacious venture capitalists looking for monster returns on their investment, but rather by befuddled and elderly AOL subscribers with broadband connections who don’t understand that they can cancel their $20-a-month subscriptions and still keep their AOL email address. That stream of cash won’t last forever, but it’s never going to interfere with Arianna’s editorial decision-making
I wonder who will quit first: the unpaid Post writers who aren’t making a dime from this deal, Arianna’s Hollywood buddies, or Arianna herself.
All you writers over on Engadget, TechCrunch, Moviefone, MapQuest, Black Voices, PopEater, AOL Music, AOL Latino, AutoBlog, Patch, StyleList, and others, prepare to lose your checks, and practice genuflecting, maybe even having to kiss Ariana's ring, mumbling gratefulness and gratitude for being able to write for such a great icon, for nothing.
PaidContent.org reports that Huffington Post has hired Focus Media to go after the rebounding Detroit automakers for potential advertising deals.
In a statement, Huffington Post chief revenue officer Greg Coleman said: "Given the size and importance of the big three domestic carmakers, hiring a designated rep to work with them is a milestone for HuffPost in our continued national sales expansion," according to PaidContent.
Hmmm ....
If we wanted to stay with the universe of The Garlic, we could say, after revolutionizing the Auto Industry, HuffPo now wants to go collect the spoils.
Today, Roger Ailes, the mothernest egg chamber of the vile insects that inhabit the airwaves at Faux News, sitting in on the roundtable, of ABC News' 'This Week'.
I mean, the program also had Barbara Walters sitting in as host/moderator!
I have no idea why Jabba the Ailes decided to appear on “This Week” — but after this beatdown by Krugman, I doubt he’ll be back.
Notice Jabba doesn’t refute Krugman’s charge. He just ignores it, belches up a total non sequitur, then starts spewing Republican talking points. The result? The master propagandist was made to look like an ass on live teevee.
HUFFINGTON: Well, Roger, it's not a question of picking a fight. And aren't you concerned about the language that Glenn Beck is using, which is, after all, inciting the American people? There is a lot of suffering out there, as you know, and when he talks about people being slaughtered, about who is going to be the next in the killing spree...
(CROSSTALK)
AILES: Well, he was talking about Hitler and Stalin slaughtering people. So I think he was probably accurate. Also, I'm a little....
HUFFINGTON: No, no, he was talking about this administration.
AILES: I don't -- I think he speaks English. I don't know, but I mean, I don't misinterpret any of his words. He did say one unfortunate thing, which he apologized for, but that happens in live television. So I don't think it's -- I think if we start going around as the word police in this business, it will be...
HUFFINGTON: It's not about the word police. It's about something deeper. It's about the fact that there is a tradition as the historian Richard Hofstetter said, in American politics, of the paranoid style. And the paranoid style is dangerous when there is real pain out there. I mean, with...
AILES: I agree with you. I read something on your blog that said I looked like J. Edgar Hoover, I had a face like a fist, and I was essentially a malignant tumor...
HUFFINGTON: Well, that's...
AILES: And I thought -- and then it got nasty after that...
HUFFINGTON: ... that was never by anybody that we had...
I suppose, to be fair, we should apologize to malignant tumors, the slanderous analogy to looking like Roger Ailes.
It would be closer to say, he looks more, proverbially speaking, like Joseph Goebbels.
And Krugman's call of Faux News hawking PartyofNoican talking points is on-the-money, as, earlier this month, Newsweek cited ""Roger Ailes is the real head of the GOP";
Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum—which is why God created Roger Ailes. The president of Fox News is, by default, the closest thing there is to a kingmaker in Anti-Obama America. And that, in turn, makes him the de facto leader of the GOP. In a relentless (and spectacularly successful) hunt for cable ratings, Ailes has given invaluable publicity to the tea partiers, furnished tryout platforms to GOP candidates, and trained a fire hose of populist anger at the president and his allies in Congress. While Beltway Republicans wring their hands or write their tracts, Ailes has worked the countryside, using his feel for Main Street resentment to attract and give voice to this year's angriest—and most powerful—voter-viewers: those who hate the Feds, the Fed, and the Ivy League. It was Ailes who put the "party" in the tea parties by giving them a round-the-clock national stage. Next month Fox will have priority access to the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville.
That prompted John Amato, over on Crooks and Liars, to highlight;
Ailes already has been leading the charge to tear down President Obama and has been very successful at that so far. In a year they have changed the political narrative when conservatism and the GOP were in shambles and the country was in meltdown. They were aided by a horrendous economy created by Bush and his conservative cronies of course that Obama inherited. The president has also left his base in the dark too, but FOX News is a real threat to the democratic process in America. PERIOD. I'm not just talking about having a conservative point of view. They created an entire political movement called the tea party movement and not a word from the media about this. Even on TV today, pundits and pols call them a wild card in politics, but that's silly, They make Newt Gingrich look like a moderate republican. When has a media outlet ever turned into an activist organization for one political party and recruited members by sending their hosts on location to do so?
I haven't heard the media complain either that FOX is the only network that has access to the teabagger convention. Once again the Aile's machine chugs along and our country suffers for it as the MSM remains mute.
It's happening, and we have history on this, that we shouldn't ignore.
Thus we still live in an era in which you have to have been wrong to be respectable. You’re not considered serious about national security unless you were for invading Iraq; you’re not considered a serious political analyst unless you spent the last 3 years of the Bush administration predicting a Republican comeback; you’re not considered a serious economic analyst unless you dismissed the idea that the Bush Boom, such as it was, rested on a housing bubble.
That’s why the firing of Dan Froomkin now makes a perverse sort of sense. As long as the right was in power, he was in effect the Post’s designated moonbat, someone who attracted readers but didn’t threaten the self-esteem of the self-perceived serious people at the paper. But now he looks like someone who was right when the serious people were wrong — and that means he has to go.
So, the clock was started, the wait was on, to see who would pick up, or, where Dan Froomkin would land.
Today, the buzzer went off - Huffington Post gets the wreath of roses.
Both Emptywheel, and Glen Greenwald broke with the news this morning.
Emptywheel, gleefully, with charts, noted that "So the WaPo wanted to silence Dan Froomkin. And instead, their stupid decision has led to Dan Froomkin getting hired by an outlet with greater online circulation than them."
In yet another sign of how online media outlets are strengthening as their older establishment predecessors are struggling to survive, The Huffington Post has hired Dan Froomkin to be its Washington Bureau Chief and regular columnist/blogger. Froomkin will oversee a staff of four five reporters and an Assistant Editor, guide The Huffington Post's Washington reporting, and write at least two posts per week to be featured on its main page and Politics page. I learned last night of the hiring and spoke to both Arianna Huffington and Froomkin this morning.
[snip]
While this pairing is, in some ways, a natural one (even the Post Ombudsman suggested that "Web sites like The Huffington Post or Politico would seem a perfect fit"), there are also potential sources of tension. As a practitioner of what he calls "accountability journalism" -- "explaining how Washington works; pulling no punches" -- Froomkin has been a vehement critic of the Obama administration for the last several months, while The Huffington Post frequently trumpeted (some might say "cheerleading") the Obama campaign and even his presidency (though it has become mildly more critical of Obama in recent months; its screaming, red headline today: "White House May Cave on Public Option"). Will Froomkin's harsh criticisms of Obama alienate an Obama-loving HuffPost readership?
And given the central importance of Arianna Huffington's personal relationships with key media figures and those in power, will Froomkin's unrestrained criticisms of many of those same people undermine a key aspect of The Huffington Post's business and promotional strategies? Both Huffington and Froomkin insist that he will have full editorial freedom, though that commitment is often more easily embraced in theory than in practice.
I had a brief moment today, of feeling like the geeky guy, Riley, in 'National Treasure', that has the answer to a question of which neither of his two, more intelligent colleagues has, for the first (and, only) time in the movie.
The daily Huffington Post Daily Brief dropped in and, I see this headline;
Now, maybe she was real busy, and threw that post together on-the-fly.
But I'd like to think that she, or perhaps an assistant did a Google Search, you know, to see if there were any other John McCain-Is-Bob-Dole posts out there.
No, no references in her post to any.
Gee, how's about a tag, there, princess ... How much of an effort would that have taken?
For, if he did, after the thrashing Rich delivered on Hillary today, and with they way they handled the David Shuster dust-up, the NBC/MSNBC empty suits would probably roll out their entire prime time line-up to apologize to her.
Rich was mercy-less in his column ("Next Up for the Democrats: Civil War"), tearing apart Hillary's live Hallmark Channel, Wolf Blizter-Situation Room-spoof, Town Meeting ("anachronistic studio set that looked like a deliberate throwback to the good old days of 1992").
"Like the scripted “Ask President Bush” sessions during the 2004 campaign, this town hall seemed to unfold in Stepford. The anodyne questions (“What else would you do to help take care of our veterans?”) merely cued up laundry lists of talking points. Some in attendance appeared to trance out ..."
"However boring, this show was a dramatic encapsulation of how a once-invincible candidate ended up in a dead heat, crippled by poll-tested corporate packaging that markets her as a synthetic product leeched of most human qualities. What’s more, it offered a naked preview of how nastily the Clintons will fight, whatever the collateral damage to the Democratic Party, in the endgame to come..."
"Less than two weeks ago she was airlifted into her own, less effective version of “Mission Accomplished.” Instead of declaring faux victory in Iraq, she starred in a made-for-television rally declaring faux victory in a Florida primary that was held in defiance of party rules, involved no campaigning and awarded no delegates. As Andrea Mitchell of NBC News said, it was “the Potemkin village of victory celebrations.”
It could be, since there's been no wailing out in the blogosphere, on how Rich, essentially, called Hillary and her husband lying scumbags, blinded only by their own, self-centered ambitions, the Hillary & Co. didn't notice, or have a chance to exploit/read Rich today.
Rich points out, both with Hillary's Hallmark Moment, and out on the campaign trail, the Clinton's exploitation of "race" ("The campaign’s other most potent form of currency remains its thick deck of race cards."), the opportunity of some classic Clinton ruthlessness that lies ahead ("The question now is how much more racial friction the Clinton campaign will gin up if its Hispanic support starts to erode in Texas, whose March 4 vote it sees as its latest firewall.").
And then there's the delegates.
To borrow from Joe Pesci, it's the delegates, it's always the fucking delegates.
"That’s why you now hear Clinton operatives talk ever more brazenly about trying to reverse party rulings so that they can hijack 366 ghost delegates from Florida and the other rogue primary, Michigan, where Mr. Obama wasn’t even on the ballot. So much for Mrs. Clinton’s assurance on New Hampshire Public Radio last fall that it didn’t matter if she alone kept her name on the Michigan ballot because the vote “is not going to count for anything.”
"That someone needs to say again - and really accentuate - that he is running against THE CLINTONS!
Hunter S. Thompson, in his laser beam, spot-on "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail", about his view of the 1972 Presidential elections described the ego of a man running for president to that of "a moose in heat".
Well, there's two moose out there, ramming their antlers against anybody and anything that looks to be in their way on calling 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue home again."
Wagoner was referring to, just hours before the news conference, his backtracking on the recent strike settlement reached just two-days ago, and his actions of dissolving the United Auto Workers Union contract with GM, in favor of adopting the business model of the popular blog, The Huffington Post.
It was reported earlier this week that The Huffington Post just closed on another round (their second) of $5-Million in funding, upping their total to over $10-Million raised.
In slightly less than three-years, The Huffington Post has built itself up to being the 5th most popular blog on the World Wide Web, primarily by having its' content providers and generators write for free.
Celebrities, politicians, actors, pundits, some famous, others up-and-coming, write daily for Huffington Post, all said not to be receiving any compensation other than "visibility, promotion and distribution with a great company", according to Ken Lerer, the co-founder of The Huffington Post.
Lerer added that they have no plans to begin paying bloggers - ever.
"If you wake up and have something to say, great," says Arianna Huffington, the Editor-in-Chief, author and former political candidate for whom the blog is named after.
Wagoner believes GM will be "enormously successful" with adopting The Huffington Post business model.
"There's thousands-upon-thousands of auto enthusiasts, auto club members, people who write about automobiles ... Even backyard mechanics, that are biting-at-the-bit to get their hands dirty and build a car," added Wagoner. "Now, we'll give them the opportunity."
Wagoner indicated a move has already been made, similar to The Huffington Post, to attract celebrities to the new GM plan, including some who are currently writing for The Huffington Post.
"We already have Alec Baldwin on board," grinned Wagoner. "He was jumping with joy with the chance, we didn't have to sell him on it ... And, he may some of his brothers with him, as well."
Others, Wagoner stated, have either have been contacted, or have signaled they will come on board, include famed theoretical physicist Stephen Hawkings, American Idol Host Ryan Seacrest, newly-elected French President Nicholas Sarkozy, actor and activist Brad Pitt (who, Wagoner offered, wants to work on a line of "green" cars), The Blue Man Group, the musician, Kenny G., and soccer star Zinedine Zidane.
Missing millionaire adventurer Steve Fossett was to both invest, and be part of the new, pay-free GM and Wagoner said, that should he found alive, "the invitation still stands."
"We see quarter-after-quarter of record profits," said Wagoner.
Wagoner would not say if the celebrity-built automobiles will fetch a higher price than cars built by no-names or up-and-comers.
UAW's president, Ron Gettelfinger, was devastated, indicating he need to see the paperwork before commenting on any possible course of action. Gettelfinger urged his membership not to "be exploited" and reject taking part in this new GM business model.
"This will be a economic revolution like we've never seen before," gushed Reich. "My God, if a relatively new, intellectual property-based, on-line entity can raise that kind of money - and via a free labor pool - General Motors will set profit records that will stand for decades to come."
Reich declined to say if he will join the GM production line, but did admit it has caused him to daydream about it.
"Ohhh," cooed Reich, "I could build the car of my dreams."
With having GM change over to the The Huffington Post business model, as predicted by GM Chief Rick Wagoner, thousands are lining up to build cars for free
J. Thomas Duffy created and lauched 'The Garlic in 2005.
Mr. Duffy is an accomplished writer, with experience as a newspaper reporter, radio writer, comedy and stand-up writer, the author of three children's books (unpublished, so far) and, and, through a good number of his writing experience, actually received payment for it.
Mr. Duffy is also a Contributing Editor on the blog, 'The Reaction' and a Contributing Writer to the blog 'The Moderate Voice.
In his spare time, Mr. Duffy likes to promulgate that is actually the dog salivating that caused Pavlov to ring the bell.