Joho the Blog
|
|
|
April 04, 2007
I'd like to respond to the CNN piece about cyberbullying, but I have the flu and am unable to think longer than a sentence in advance. You can see the piece here. And here is my worry-wart post about my participation in it. Briefly my take is: It didn't do the flat-out, ominous chords scare-mongering, but it nevertheless was perilously close to self-parody. [Tags: cnn media kathy_sierra chris_locke rageboy cyberbullying blogs ] By the way, I should note that CNN got my attribution wrong. They say I'm a professor at Harvard. In fact, I'm a Fellow at Harvard. To be precise, I'm a Research Fellow at Harvard Law's Berkman Center for Internet & Society. (The ampersand is an official part of the name.) And I was very clear about this attribution when CNN asked. There are major differences between professors and fellows, affecting everything from teaching to pay-scales to voting to having to wear a silly cap and picking up dry-cleaning for professors. (I've written about being a fellow here.) Posted
by D. Weinberger at April 4, 2007 07:45 AM
|
Comments
I thought you came off well. Very "voice of reason".
The whole piece though was silly to me. As someone summed up in the comments: "next up on cnn: 'the dark side of paper' about getting threats in a letter."
More interesting to me is that blogger pile-ons are becoming more and more frequent.
Posted by: Brad | April 4, 2007 09:31 AM
I'm not one to be easily offended, but that laughing, joking little bit at the end of the CNN piece -- "How can you threaten the 'cute kitty' like that?" -- was absolutely disgusting. I understand the need for some banter and some sort of transition between stories, but what goes through an anchor's head when he thinks *that* is a good idea?
Posted by: Mike | April 4, 2007 10:36 AM
was there a cnn companion piece about nationalizing big oil, or was I just dreaming it?
Posted by: Philonious Monk | April 4, 2007 11:09 AM
Agree with Mike: I thought the male anchor showed what a self-absorbed moron he was with that chuckle.
The piece felt like it was produced by people with the emotional and intellectual sophistication of 8-year-olds.
Posted by: Glenn Fleishman | April 4, 2007 02:33 PM
I'm bemused by the shock and dismay some are directing toward the CNN anchor's stupid attempt at banter when they rushed to the side of the perpetrators of the meankids site. Not pointing fingers at you, Glenn and Mike. But your comments reminded me of my bemusement. I don't know what either of you has had to say about "rageboy" and his childish/hateful cohorts.
Posted by: David F. | April 4, 2007 06:23 PM
I actually think you were the only source of "reason" and reality on that segment. The rest was very surreal.
Posted by: flic | April 4, 2007 08:29 PM
"Discovery to focus on the Enviornmental Movement" -- Righto! And what are the "others," then--the Anti-Enviornnmental "Movement"?
Posted by: Philonius Si Muove | April 5, 2007 07:02 AM