MSM vs. Blog ethics -- sponsored by Weinermobile

What's the difference between an independent blogger and a reporter or bloviator for the mainstream media? It isn't education or training or writing ability. It's where your paycheck comes from.
People in mainstream media know their paychecks come from the publication or website. And so do their readers. Even though those publishers may be compromised by ad dollars or sponsorship fees, the writers are separated from such concerns at all but the tiniest outfits. The MSM model calls for maximizing readership by having the reporters write for the reader, without thinking about where the publication's revenues come from.
Bloggers' paychecks are seldom transparent. Even though most bloggers don't make a living at what they do, there is a temptation to search for perks. The Isthmus, an interesting alt weekly in Madison, Wisc., has a fascinating article on this subject related to blogging housewives. http://www.thedailypage.com/daily/article.php?article=27981 .
The article points out that many corporations showed up to hand out gifts at the "BlogHer" convention in Chicago last summer -- something they wouldn't do if they didn't think it would pay off. Indeed, the Oscar Myer Weinermoblie -- a top attraction -- later made a special trip to Georgia to visit "Domestic Diva" a well-known blogger Mom who couldn't make the convention.
Now I don't believe that anyone can be bought off by a ride in the Weinermobile. But it's easy to see why Oscar Myer would want blogging moms to associate its products with campy Americana kitsch. That would seem to be so much better than thinking of Oscar Myer's processed salt, fat and meat byproducts as potentially lethal concoctions that could inflate the bellies, clog the arteries and raise the blood pressure of America.
Editors at mainstream media make sure that a bit of skepticism appears in most articles puffing products. There's no such constraint on Domestic Diva who called her family's ride in the Weinermobile "the best day of my life." Reader beware.

Hacking Google

China's apparent threat to Google is alarming me. Now that I'm a freelance writer without an in-house IT staff I'm counting on Google.
All my work is being done on Google. Gmail is my lifeline. It's the email I use on my iPhone. I'm not using Word or Excel or Powerpoint. I'm using Google Documents and its other apps. Even when I'm on a 3G connection with my netbook rather than on my home wifi, they work plenty fast. And I like the idea of Google handling backup for me and fighting viruses.
But its accusations against China are worrisome. While Google hasn't said so, it seems to me that if China can successfully hack specific e-mail accounts, it could possibly disrupt or even block other service. I can't operate if Google isn't functioning. I'd like Google to be more forthcoming about how secure it is against well-funded government hackers.
Gordon Crovitz's Information Age column in the Wall Street Journal today, compares the threat to Google and other IT-based companies to that posed by the Barbary Pirates to American seafarers in 1805. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704562504575022251970284896.html
I think that's a valid analogy. And, as he says, that means our government has to pay attention. It has to take steps to keep American businesses safe from government-sponsored cyber-criminals. I don't think the Obama administration has started to grapple with this, although I hope I'm wrong.
It's definitely something government should be moving on quickly. Shutting down or fooling operations like Google or Citigroup or Union Pacific or Apple's app store or even the L.A. traffic light system, could put a big dent in the world's economic system.

Congressional travel

Interesting front- page article in today's Wall Street Journal about congressional travel increasing 70% from 2005 to 2008. online.wsj.com/article/SB126092430041092995.html

But the total expense cited was chump change -- only $13 million. It's tough to get too concerned about that when Congress is running trillion dollar deficits. And while there's great detail on their $118 daily food allowances and the cost of hotel rooms in London ($340 a night) and Edinburgh ($1500 for a shared suite), none of it seemed outrageous.

Having Senators and representatives travel abroad -- even to nice places -- seems like a good way to broaden their perspectives and make them more aware how fast the world is globalizing.

What's more disturbing was the revelation that these folks were travelling on Air Force planes, commandeered for their use. And they apparently had Air Force-supplied aides carrying their suitcases and embassy workers driving their vans. Those costs aren't disclosed, and judging by NetJets' norms, a trans-Atlantic private jet flight costs $40-80,000 depending on the size of the plane. I say, let them fly commercial. Even last minute business class flights would save the taxpayers a lot of money. And it would keep the lawmakers in touch with the experiences of their constituents.