by emptywheel
I'm going to be a panelist on a conference in Boston a week from tomorrow (Saturday). The conference is:
A free and independent press is essential for democracy. The press has a responsibility to inform citizens about both the policies and the actions of the government and about credible challenges to those policies and actions, to report on conditions that may require new or different government initiatives, and to raise timely questions itself about debatable policies and the rationales presented for them.
With the recent controversies over the failure of the press to fully live up to its responsibilities in the runup to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the role of the media in the outing of a covert CIA agent, the rise of the blogosphere and so-called citizen journalism, and the impact of increasing financial pressures on newspapers and magazines, public confidence in the mainstream media is at an all-time low. What are the implications of this for our democracy? How might our faith in the press be restored?
The rest of the panelists (aside from Andy Sullivan) are journalists--many of the good ones, people like John Carroll. My panel--Political Reporting--had a conference call today which got me really excited about the conference. It should be worth attending.
There is (free) registration, and I understand the room is filling up. So if you're interested, register now!
Afterwards, phred and Scarecrow and I and hopefully some other folks from these parts will be heading out for drinks, probably to An Tua Nua. I'll post another thread closer to the event, but if you might show, leave a comment.
I don't know if you have already addressed this bad news:
"Feinstein backs legal immunity for telecom firms in wiretap cases"
link:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/11/09/BA13T97BN.DTL
Posted by: eyesonthestreet | November 09, 2007 at 18:43
i'm not far and if i can make it, would love to meet up with you.
Posted by: selise | November 09, 2007 at 19:04
that feindstein is turning into one hell of a representative for the public while being a very good one for corrupt shady dealings.
Posted by: ... | November 09, 2007 at 19:12
opps.. that is fiendstein, not feindstein, lol.
Posted by: ... | November 09, 2007 at 19:15
selise
That would be really great!
Some other folks are probably going to show for the conference, too.
Posted by: emptywheel | November 09, 2007 at 19:17
sounds great. i just registered... so, fingers crossed.
Posted by: selise | November 09, 2007 at 19:29
selise -- I hope you can make it, it would be great to meet you!
And by the way Neil, I did my best to find Beamish, but to no avail... Turns out the Irish pubs of Boston do not carry it. Guess I'll have to drown my sorrows in Guinness and Murphy's ;)
Posted by: phred | November 09, 2007 at 20:39
eyesonthestreet -- thanks for the link, I can't wait to hear her speech about how this is the best we can hope for from this President...
Posted by: phred | November 09, 2007 at 20:42
phred,
here is a BU student place. They said they have Beamish Stout. Try it as long
as there isn't a Red Sox game.
Cornwall's
[ Beer Bar ]
654 Beacon Street
Boston, Massachusetts, 02215
United States
phone: (617) 262-3749
Posted by: Jodi | November 09, 2007 at 21:07
eyesonthestreet -- I wonder if DiFi just needed some more money or something, and that was why she began making noises about changing her mind?
I will be interesting to see if Dodd carries through with his threats to filibuster.
EW, I sure wish you would start having conferences like this in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. I would love to get to meet some of you.
Posted by: sojourner | November 09, 2007 at 21:18
One more comment about Feinstein... According to the San Francisco Chronicle, "...Feinstein said the companies should not be "held hostage to costly litigation in what is essentially a complaint about administration activities.
She endorsed a recent statement by Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W. Va., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, that companies assured by top administration officials that the surveillance program was legal "should not be dragged through the courts for their help with national security.""
If that is the case, why the hell aren't we doing something about the administration? It obviously misrepresented its powers to the telecoms. That part about it being a "complaint about administration activites" -- as far as I know, no one has done anything official to complain. The Democrats and Republicans are just letting Bush and company do as they damned well please.
IMPEACH NOW! Then we can consider the immunity....
Posted by: sojourner | November 09, 2007 at 21:25
There's a small but non-zero chance I'd show. I'll be working all week to increase that chance!
Posted by: Andrew Foland | November 09, 2007 at 21:51
DiFi does not need more money as a fact; but she and/or her husband may be greedy enough to think so.
Posted by: bmaz | November 10, 2007 at 03:00
phred- you would also think she might take into consideration that this occurred in her own home town to HER constiuency.
sojourner- as bmaz sez, DiFi (funny, rhymes with WiFi) is from money and married money more than once. She sees herself as "practical," taking steps to smooth things over. I think the compromising dames in both the house and senate better start getting the message- they are being duped.
Posted by: eyesonthestreet | November 10, 2007 at 09:49
eyesonthestreet -- yep, you would think she would represent her constituents, but then you smack yourself on the head and say, "oh right, we're talking about DiFi" ;)
Jodi -- thanks for the suggestion, I'll pop over and check the place out today. I hope you're right, 'cause after calling 27 places and finally talking to a pub owner who explained the beer distribution system here, it sounded hopeless.
Posted by: phred | November 10, 2007 at 10:09
From the guy who bugs his own office.
Posted by: GREYDOG | November 11, 2007 at 03:33