Google innovates - for Egypt

In a release yesterday on Google's official blog, "Some weekend work that will (hopefully) enable more Egyptians to be heard" Google announced they've already put a workaround in place for the "internet shutdown" stifling the flow of information coming from Tahrir Square and other protest sites in Egypt.

"Like many people we’ve been glued to the news unfolding in Egypt and thinking of what we could do to help people on the ground. Over the weekend we came up with the idea of a speak-to-tweet service—the ability for anyone to tweet using just a voice connection."

The engineers created a service that not only tweets the message using the hashtag #egypt, but allows for dialing in to collect/hear tweets, too, using the same phone number.

This really shines a light on the concept of an "internet kill switch" in the U.S., which Congress is actually considering again. The bill has not been re-introduced, but reportedly it's being "floated" by Maine Senator Susan Collins who was on the right side of efforts to repeal "Don't Ask Don't Tell" and she assures reporters it wouldn't have the same sweeping impact as Mubarak's current information blockade in Egypt. I'm skeptical, Senator, of attempts to control the flow of information.

I applaud Google's rapid response, but what if I wanted more specifics? What if I want to search on a hashtag related to Tahrir Square, for instance, which is trending now on Twitter?

Although you never know what will change if such a bill moves forward, in its current form there's no provision for judicial review if and when the administration shuts down the internet. I'm not worried that Obama would prevent us from learning about Tea-Baggers rallying to whine about taxes, but moving forward it's important that we not create laws that disturb and undermine the balance of power deliberately crafted into our Constitution during this country's formation, (even if judges and courts funded by taxes are arguably a socialist approach to conflict resolution.)

There's a lesson here, about restricting freedom of speech when people want to exercise their right to assemble peaceably, and most of us outside of the U.S. Capitol want to see that freedom restored to 80 million Egyptians and remain protected for 300 millions U.S. citizens as our Constitution mandates.

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, former Democratic Campaign Manager, strategist, journalist, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community. You can follow him as @kabiu on twitter.

The word is Nigger

Michelle Diane has penned a heartfelt, cogent, timely response to the politically-correct, navel-gazing frenzy which Auburn Professor Alan Gribben stirred up with the planned release of a re-written, sanitized version of Mark Twain's work.

”We may applaud Twain’s ability as a prominent American literary realist to record the speech of a particular region during a specific historical era, but abusive racial insults that bear distinct connotations of permanent inferiority nonetheless repulse modern-day readers...”

Professor Alan Gribben, Wall Street Journal Interview

Writing at the new michellediane-naked blog, she bluntly goes beyond what most mainstream media pundits bother to explore, urging her readers to tear down the curtain on a step backwards deceptively cloaked in gentle political correctness. This is not an academic discussion, the effects of which will be confined to ivory towers and American Literature classes.

"...America needs to keep saying it until America stops living it. Hold it up as a mirror on the realities that be. Demand that neither they nor we can hide behind a politically correct “N” until criminals like Haley Barbour can no longer circumvent ethics, even simple human decency, in the name of political gain."

Michelle Diane, in

The "N" Word Deception

I'm not in a position to comment on Gribben's motivation, but if we ascribe the best of intentions to his undertaking one must still be wary of the constant reality of unintended consequences - and Michelle Diane is a voice well-worth heeding on this topic. If she persists, hers will be a blog well-worth following; her forthright perspective is clear, well-articulated, and more importantly thought-provoking.

Read it.

Thomas Hayes is an entrepreneur, former Democratic Campaign Manager, journalist, and photographer who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Tom Hayes: Do we have a right to truth?

The 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which we often describe as the right of the "Freedom of Speech" which also prohibits interference in religion or the media is being abused in pursuit of corporate profits. Remember how the Bill of Rights starts?

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Sounds good, right? We can't know exactly what the founding fathers had in mind with the 1^st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but we do know that misinformation distorts debates and delays progress. I've come across a story that explains a lot of the shameless prevarication we've seen from the Fox network over the past 6 years or so.

In brief, back in February 2003 a Florida Court of Appeals unanimously agreed with an assertion by FOX News that there is no rule against distorting or falsifying the news in the United States.

"The court implied there was no restriction against distorting the truth. Technically, there was no violation of the news distortion because the FCC’s policy of news distortion does not have the weight of the law..."

Never, ever doubt that a commercial media outlet is driven by profit.

In Florida, the Court held that a threat by Jane Akre (part of a Fox “Investigators” team at WTVT in Tampa Bay) to report the station’s actions to the FCC did not deserve protection under Florida’s whistle blower statute, because Florida’s whistle blower law states that an employer must violate an adopted “law, rule, or regulation."

The decision reversed an earlier judgment against Fox.

We can't know what the founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Bill of Rights but it seems unlikely that their intent was to protect the right to profit from untruths. They went so far as to include the oft-overlooked 9th Amendment:

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Of course, that raises the sticky question, "Do we have a right to the truth?" Apparently the Court in Florida feels Murdoch's right to profit from capitalism as he operates the Fox network is more fundamental - the Florida appeals court found in favor of corporate bottom lines even at the expense of accurate information. It might be worth exploring how they feel about "creative accounting." After all, they found that profit trumps truth.

Read more about this dangerous and disgraceful interpretation; if you share my indignation, spread the word.


Thomas Hayes is a political analyst, journalist, and entrepreneur who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics including economics, politics, culture, and community.

Terrorist ATTACK in Dayton Ohio.

A suspected chemical irritant was sprayed into the mosque at 26 Josie St., bringing Dayton police, fire and hazardous material personnel to the building. The 300 or so inside were celebrating the last 10 days of Ramadan with dinner and a prayer session, but the prayer session was suspended to deal w/ those suffering from tearing, coughing and other symptoms.

It is shameful that what are almost certainly U.S. citizens would engage in this terrorism - in direct contravention of the U.S. Constitution, and the principles the country was founded upon - as a way to showcase their religious intolerance. When we sink to the level of our enemies, we have no claim to be morally superior, and accordingly lose all credibility for enforcing our dissent upon them.

Whatever happened to "do unto others" and the rule of law in this country? I can hardly conceive of a more un-American action than attacking the peaceful practice of one's preferred religion. This behavior is abhorrent to me as a citizen of the U.S.A.

The brave souls who drafted our Constitution and the Bill of Rights must be spitting fire. Such actions as these bigoted zealots perpetrated in Dayton must be universally condemned - the criminals must be brought to justice. It is utterly unacceptable that such actions take place on the soil of the United States of America.

read more | digg story