New New Media vs. the Mullahs in Iran

Bob Brill on KNX Radio out of Los Angeles called me this morning for my thoughts about the banning of international media in Iran. Here is an expanded version of the gist of what I told him in our interview:

The banned media are traditional, old-time broadcast and print media. They are still an important source of information in our world, and their muzzling by the mullahs in Iran is nothing to cheer about, but this action will do little to stop the flow of news out of Iran.

And this is because we now live in the age of YouTube and Twitter - or, what I call the new new media. Unlike CNN and The New York Times on the Web, these newer media allow anyone and everyone to become a reporter, and are impossible to totally shut down or even effectively control.

New media have always been a thorn in the side of totalitarian governments. The White Rose used photocopying to alert Germans to the lies of the Third Reich, and samizdat video undermined the Soviet Union from the inside out in the 1980s. Word got out on the early Internet about Tiananmen Square in 1989, and though the Chinese government in the end crushed that democratic uprising, the people of Iran today have a lot more new media at their disposal. Hundreds of YouTube videos are coming out of Iran and Twitter has been buzzing with at least that many Tweets per hour about the crackdown on democracy in that country.

But are all of these self-produced reports, sent to the world without editors or vetting, truthful? Of course not. But the same open process that brings this information also makes identification of false reports and unsubstantiated rumors easy.

The Iranian government can do what it can to shut down sites and block Internet access in Iran. But the capacity of most cell phones to record and upload videos, and just about any cell phone to Tweet, makes this a brand new ballgame for democracy.

The point of a gun is still hard to disobey or work around, but the informational means to do so have never been more accessible and powerful.

Obama's Speeches and FDR's Fireside Chats

I was quoted as follows in the Baltimore Sun this morning -

"I think what we have been seeing on TV is very similar to what took place on radio during the Depression, in that both are about reassurance," says Paul Levinson, professor of popular culture and media studies at Fordham University. "Just as hearing Roosevelt's words reassured Americans that things were going to get better, so does seeing Barack Obama's nomination this week offer reassurance to many of us that the best hopes and aspirations of the 1960s have not been lost. What we have been seeing the past weeks reassures us that America has not been hopelessly diminished."

Obama's age, young family, and capacity to inspire clearly hit the same powerful chords in our culture as JFK. But if we're talking about galvanizing the nation with speech through the media, Obama may have even more in common with FDR. Kennedy's wonderful inaugural address was delivered on television at a time when the country was already hopeful. Franklin Delano Roosevelt's fireside chats were delivered on radio with the U.S. in the desperate days of the Great Depression in the 1930s. Which condition more aptly fits the U.S. now?

"We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy," Obama said in his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention last Thursday. Three orators who spoke to our better angels. Two great Presidents and one, if fortune shines of this country, to becoming one.

=====

For more on the impact of FDR's fireside chats, see The Soft Edge: A Natural History and Future of the Information Revolution.

Marshall McLuhan and Barack Obama: Medium is the Message in this Presidential Campaign?

I was just interviewed by Mark Austin Thomas in my regular Sunday spot on KNX 1070 all-news radio out of Southern California - about what happened to Barack Obama in Thursday's Presidential debate.

It is generally agreed by observers, including me, that Obama did not do well in the debate. He certainly had some excellent moments - I thought his lecture to Wolf Blitzer that we shouldn't just accept the current technological options for energy was memorable - but, in general, he seemed not on top of his game, certainly not as much as in command as Hillary Clinton. But only a few days before, Obama gave the speech of his life in Iowa - electrifying his audience and building upon Hillary Clinton's weak performance in the previous debate.

Did Obama just have a bad night?

For better or worse, it's likely something more profound - a refection of something Marshall McLuhan famously pointed out back in the 1960s: the medium is the message.

What McLuhan noticed is that the means of communication can often have decisive impact on the message we receive. Obama clearly wanted to deliver the same message in the Thursday debate as in his Iowa speech. But he clearly is more comfortable giving speeches than standing up on stage with a group of candidates and answering a question every now and then.

Does this mean that Obama would not make a good President, or a weaker President than Hillary Clinton?

Of course not. Historians tell us that Abraham Lincoln had a voice that sounded more Truman Capote than Henry Fonda. Fortunately for America, there was no radio or television back then.

The enormous amount of exposure that our mass media, especially television, give to Presidential contenders is by and large a very good thing. Democracy operates best on a maximum of information. But we need to recognize that the way that information is presented - the forum in which it is offered - can often speak far more loudly than what it is the candidates are saying.

Small Fireworks after my General Petraeus remarks on KNX 1070 Radio this Morning

I enjoy hearing from people who disagree with my blog posts, podcasts, radio and TV appearances. I've always agreed with Socrates that dialog is the best path to knowledge.

Here's an example of a little exchange that occurred this morning, shortly after my weekly radio interview by Bob Brill on KNX 1070 all-news radio, in which I was talking about the MoveOn.org - General Petraeus "Betray Us" controversy.

My position: Most people - just about everyone, I'd say - can understand the difference between a General giving advice to Congress, supporting a President in his harmful foreign policy, that betrays the best interests of our country. This is what the MoveOn.org ad was clearly saying. Not that the General was betraying us on the battlefield, or by working with the enemy - a clearly absurd point to make, and which no one, even the war's most bitter opponents, has ever suggested.

But the Republicans are clearly trying to pretend that the literal traitor point is what the MoveOn.org ad in the New York Times was saying.

Here is the e-mail I received, followed by my reply. (Out of courtesy to the writer of the e-mail, I'm not printing his name - even though as a recipient of an unsolicited e-mail, I'm under no legal or ethical obligation to not publish the name of the writer.)

I heard your comments this AM on the radio concerning the Moveon.org ad in the NY Times. I was stunned by your take on it, but I suppose I shouldn’t be. You were simply reflecting your liberal bias and confirmed exactly what most know about academics in the liberal arts. Your views are so tainted by your liberal leanings, it’s impossible for you to present an evenhanded report on anything.

I guess I live in an ivory tower (slightly to the right of yours,) as I have not heard one utterance which described the ad the way you did. Perhaps in the liberal bastions of Manhattan, that nexus of all learning and civilization, one could believe in one’s heart that the average American took the ad to mean something entirely different than the words as written, but my guess is that if you spent a bit of time out in good old “flyover” country you would find that most Americans knew exactly what the folks at Moveon.org meant. They were simply calling the general a traitor. The doublespeak you used to dance around the meaning was certainly the stuff of legend and on that I must commend.

It’s almost as classic as “we support the troops but don’t support the war” and the like.

Is the job of a journalist to report the facts without bias or comment or is it to advance a personal agenda? The answer you give to that question, the answer you give when you look yourself in the eye brushing your teeth in the morning, will tell us where you stand.

And my reply ...

You're the one who should have trouble looking at yourself in the mirror: you're obviously intelligent, and therefore must know that there's a big difference between saying someone's advice or assessment betrays the best interests of this country (which is what the MoveOn ad is saying about the General), and saying someone is betraying us on the battlefield or in dealings with foreign powers (which is what the Republicans are claiming).

But I'd guess you're probably very familiar with what the Republicans are up to - you write as if you're on their payroll. Are you? Did you actually hear me on the radio, or are you responding to a mass e-mail that some Republican factotum sent out to you?

As for me, I have no agenda, other than what I've been doing in my 30 years of publishing books and articles, and teaching about the media: which is, provide independent scholarly assessments. (And, by the way, I was interviewed as a commentator and a scholar - not a journalist. In other words, I was interviewed by KNX because they were interested in my opinions and assessments.)

If you'd like to learn more about my opinions, I hope you keep listening to KNX - I'm on every Sunday morning at 7:20am. You might also enjoy my book, The Soft Edge: A Natural History and Future of the Information Revolution - where you'll see that I criticize Democrats as well as Republicans when they're dishonest with the American people, or pursuing an unconstitutional and therefore illegal war.

All best wishes,
PL

talking iPhone on KNX1070 Sunday morning

And ... I'll be talking about how I predicted the iPhone back in 1979, and its enormous impact now, on my weekly media interview by Todd Leitz on KNX1070 all-news radio out of Southern California tomorrow (Sunday) morning....

time: 7:20am Pacific time/10:20am Eastern time, you do the math for the rest

streaming live at www.knx1070.com ... hey, you can hear it on your iPhones... ... (you may have to register on the KNX1070 site - free - to get the streaming)...

interview should go about 7-8 mins...

the KNX1070 Sunday morning interviews

We're coming up on the first anniversary of my Sunday morning interviews about media issues on KNX1070 all-news Southern California radio - 7:20am Pacific time/10:20am Eastern time - live-streaming everywhere at www.knx1070.com ... so I thought I'd post all of the interview topics here (yeah, I talk about lots of things) ... and keep this current...   Thanks to Jerry Edling, producer.

Larry Van Nuys interviewing me:
July 9, 2006: humans in space
July 16: social impact of cellphones
July 23: respect the First Amendment (part 1)
July 30: respect the First Amendment (part 2)
August 6: only idiots don't watch tv
August 13: terrorism in a media age
August 20: media coverage of sensational news stories
August 27: the Emmys!
September 3: Fall television season
September 10: media aftermath, 5 years after September 11
September 17: are the media too aggressive?
September 24: outer space tourism
October 1: Clinton vs. Wallace on Fox News Sunday
October 8: Bob Woodward's books on Bush and the war
October 15: the benefits of strong opinions on cable news
October 22: YouTube's impact on politics
October 29: 'tis the season for political ads
November 5: Bluetooth technology: the intelligent earring
November 12: viral marketing
November 19: swarming cellphones
November 26: the new James Bond
December 3: another look at Fall tv
December 10: John Lennon's continuing influence
December 17: Golden Globes!
December 24: Time's Person of the Year is You, the YouTube producer

Todd Leitz interviewing me:
December 31: intelligent advertising: you determine the ads
January 7, 2007: Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth"
January 14: how we watch Presidential speeches
January 21: Keith Olbermann and 24
January 28: Foxing Obama
February 4: Super Bowl ads
February 11: Blockbuster, Netflix, Web: Future of Watching Movies
February 18: The FCC - at it again
February 25: Oscars!
March 4: the RIAA and fair use
March 11: Free Josh Wolf: We need a Federal Shield Law
March 18: blogger journalism
March 25: media drop the ball on reporting John Edwards news
April 1: media coverage of British-Iranian hostage story
April 8: the ethics of hostages selling their stories
April 15: don't let Imus off the hook by blaming the culture
April 22: how the media handled the Virginia Tech tragedy
April 29: demonstrating violence in the classroom
May 6: the first Presidential debates and the LA police riot
May 13: mistreatment of online Ron Paul support
*May 20: Fox's spin on after-debate poll reporting
May 27: Star Wars celebration!
June 3: Ward Churchill and sockpuppetry
June 10: The media and Paris Hilton
June 17: The Sopranos finale
June 24: Hillary Soprano and Obama-girl videos

Bob Brill interviewing me
July 1: Elizabeth and John Edwards v. Ann Coulter on Hardball
July 8: I Predicted the iPhone in 1979!
July 15: Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
July 22: YouTube/CNN Presidential debate
July 29: Chinese censorship of the Internet
August 5: Teens are getting their news from Digg not The New York Times
August 12: The lack of media coverage of Ron Paul
August 19: Big Brother satellites in the sky
August 26: In praise of George Lotz, the kid who cracked the iPhone
September 2: NBC and iTunes split
September 9: Celebrity endorsements of political candidates
September 16: The Emmys!
September 23: OJ Media coverage; Moveon.org Gen "Betray us" ad
September 30: Sputnik's 50th anniversary
October 7: FCC Auctions New Bandwidth
October 28: Fake FEMA Press Conference
November 4: Writers Guild of America Strike
November 11: WGA Strike Continues
November 18: Obama: Better at Speeches Than Debating?
November 25: Impact of WGA Strike
December 2: How Important Are Polls in Elections?
December 9: How Important Are Celebrity Endorsements in Politics?


Mark Austin Thomas interviewing me
December 16: Newspaper Endorsements of Clinton and Obama
December 23: FCC Relaxes Concentration Rules: Good!
December 30: Dirty Tricks in Politics

January 6, 2008: Iowa, New Hampshire Primaries and the Media
January 13: The Dangers of a National ID Card

All interviews at 7:20 AM West Coast time... repeated throughout the day and week... live streaming at www.knx1070.com... Jerry Edling producing

My weekly KNX interviews concluded on January 13, 2008. But I've been interviewed on KNX about the following subjects and news events since then:

June 16, 2009:  New New Media vs. the Mullahs in Iran

September 20-21, 2009:  New New Media

November 30, 2009: Tiger Woods and the media

July 11, 2010:  Google vs. China

April 10, 2011: the Arab Spring

October 30, 2011: Occupy Wall Street and direct democracy

November 6, 2011:  Andy Rooney

March 3, 2012:  Rush Limbaugh's calling Sandra Fluke a "slut' and a "prostitute"

June 10,  2012:  Ray Badbury's legacy

July 22, 2012:  the Aurora killings: media and guns

August 26, 2012:  Neil Armstrong

September 9, 2012:  Democratic National Convention

October 7, 2012:  Presidential Debates

October 21, 2012: Second Obama-Romney Debate

Talking Edwards v. Coulter on KNX1070 Radio Sunday monring

A quick note - I'll be on KNX1070 all-news radio out of Southern California tomorrow morning, in my usual 7:20am (Pacific) Sunday spot, interviewed by Todd Leitz about Elizabeth and John Edwards v. Ann Coulter on MSNBC's Hardball.

Links to blog posts with my views are below - I think Coulter got what she deserved...

The interview will be live-streamed everywhere at www.knx1070.com ... 7:20am Pacific, 10:20am Eastern, you can do the math for all the other time zones...

My blog posts on the Edwards v. Coulter:

Real Hardball: Elizabeth Edwards v. Ann Coulter

Hardball II: John Edwards about Ann Coulter

I'll Be Talking Sopranos Ending on KNX1070 Radio this Sunday

Hey - just wanted to let all of you Sopranos devotees know -

I'll be talking about my and everyone's theories about the ending of The Sopranos in my weekly media interview by Todd Leitz on KNX1070 all news radio out of Southern California this coming Sunday morning.

Time: 7:20am Pacific time, 10:20 am Eastern time (you can do the math for the other time zones)

Streaming everywhere in the known and unknown universe live, at www.knx1070.com

Interview will be 5-10 minutes...

Useful links:

The Sopranos and the Closure-Junkies

The Sopranos, or the Tiger?

The Sopranos Ninth of Nine: The Anti-Ending Ending

The Sopranos as a Nuts-and-Bolts Triumph of Non-Network TV my 2002 article

reviews of the first eight episodes this final season: The Sopranos: First of Nine, Second of Nine, Third of Nine, Fourth of Nine, Fifth of Nine, Sixth of Nine, Seventh of Nine, Eighth of Nine

Sopranos Conference May 2008: Preliminary Announcement