Joho the Blog
|
|
|
March 21, 2006
An interesting front-page story by Jonathan Saltzman in today's Boston Globe talks about the fact that an ailing justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has been listening to oral arguments over the Web. The article spends most of its time discussing whether it's necessary for a judge to hear oral arguments and in only one paragraph wonders if hearing arguments over a webcast might affect the case or the judge's decision. That is, there's no discussion of the medium's effect on the message, yet another sign that the medium is becoming invisible, as all successful media must. A page 2 story thinks it so unusual that Bush took questions from the audience that it merits a subhead: "Takes questions at an Ohio event." Our president actually deigned to speak spontaneously, albeit undoubtedly after hours of rehearsal. The article doesn't mention how many questions he took or how long the Q&A session was. I'm puzzled, though, by one transition in the article, by Tom Raum of the AP:
What's the "However" supposed to tell us? What's the implied contrast? My wife, son and I had an amusing five minute conversation in which we talked past each other because we took the following teaser and text radically differently:
My wife and I couldn't figure out why they would trade a player as a penalty for hitting another player. Our son understood that "slugging outfielder Pena" means Pena is a slugger, not that he was slugged. Ah, language! Ah, sports know-nothings! [Tags: boston+globe media george+ bush web] WRT to the length of the Q&A period, Tim Grieve at Salon has the mot juste:
Posted
by D. Weinberger at March 21, 2006 09:57 AM
|