f/k/a archives . . . real opinions & real haiku

I wrote to “Abnu” at WordLab about his less-than-complimentary

reaction to anti-blawg campaigners.  He responded by saying that

my facts are wrong, and that there is indeed a group that has coined

a special word for their category of weblogs.  He cites me to “milblogs,”

which I learned means “military blogs.”  Frankly, I think Abnu has in fact

strengthened my argument. To wit:  

The current and former military service-persons who come 

under the “milblog” classification continue to call what they

do “blogs.”  They have added a prefix that alerts the audience
that there may be a special focus or source (although just

what it might be is surely not clear without further inquiry)

for their weblogs, but there is no doubt that they are “blogs.” 

This avoids the confusing nature of the term “blawg,” and does

not have the trivializing look of that term.

Meanwhile, Prof. Bainbridge (our favorite Cafeteria Conservative)

is like all bent out of shape because Mick Jagger and the Stones

have gone corporate — see When did Jagger jump the shark? (Feb. 6,

2005).  Mick’s sin?  He let the Super Bowl tv executives lower the

volume twice to cover up a couple raunchier lyrics.  As I commented

at Steve’s place: “It is not the least bit ‘corporate’ to take your audience

into account when singing lyrics. It shows a maturity (and self-confidence)

that most 20-somethings do not have, but I would hope that those over 40

do.”

On the other hand, Prof. B is correct that I should not

have suggested he would have called for censorship, if

those very same lyrics had in fact been audible. Although

I have no doubt that his “political, philosophical, and religious

allies would be complaining mightily today, if Mick had in fact

sang the more sexually-explicit lyrics in an audible manner.”

and Steve often does complain about the low morals of the

entertainment industry, he has been consistently against

government censorship.

 

More important, Steve is also right that I should not have

used the terms “blowhard” or “blowhole” to describe his 

venting.  My sincere apologies, Prof. B, if you were insulted. 

 

update (11 PM):  Today, on behalf of the band, spokeswoman Fran

Curtis complained about the NFL’s censorship of their lyrics — with

the lame statement, according to CNN, that “the band may have known

about it, but that doesn’t mean they liked it . . . Jagger sang the full lyrics

during his performance.”  CNN.com, “Stones: NFL censorship ‘ridicu-

lous‘,” Feb. 7, 2006)  Nothing like living according to your principles,

Mick.

Finally, let’s welcome the new group weblog Antitrust Review 

to the law-oriented sector of the internet.  It promises news and

commentary on recent developments in antitrust, along with dis-

cussions of classic cases and economic theory.    David Fisher,

Hanno Kaiser, Manfred Gabriel and Dan Crane are the co-conspirators.

 

smitten lawyer –

can Her Honor

read his mind?

 

 

 

 

underpaid judges –

Prof. B

suggests a tip jar