Tuesday, January 8: Finally, the Washington Post sets the record straight, although quite late (emphasis added):
“A Dec. 30 Style & Arts column incorrectly said that the recording industry ‘maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.’ In a copyright-infringement lawsuit, the industry’s lawyer argued that the actions of an Arizona man, the defendant, were illegal because the songs were located in a ’shared folder’ on his computer for distribution on a peer-to-peer network.”
Thursday, January 3: This post got a brief mention in this news story.
Wednesday, January 2: Happy New Year, and welcome to LBC! This post has been linked in several discussion forums, and I appreciate the acknowledgement. The Washington Post ought to issue a correction, or at least a clarification, for this story. But it won’t. The story is being cited as the gospel and retold all over the web, but it is intentionally misleading at worst and poorly written/researched at best.
My letter to the editor might be published on January 5. Check back for updates.
Later…The blogger at Coolfer writes (emphasis added):
“When read in context of the entire brief, the Post’s interpretation of that sentence just doesn’t work…This difference in interpretations reflects what William Patry calls a “calculated rhetorical shift” on the part of the press. The Patry Copyright Blog has a post titled “The Establishment Press Takes On The RIAA” on the subject. It’s good reading because it boils the issue down to its basic elements: a (debatable) fight against copyright, journalists acting as activists and the impacts of subtle, semantic twists.”
Update (12:27 p.m.): Speaking of Islamofascism, Pakistan’s Benazir Bhutto, first female PM of a Muslim country, has been assassinated. Read more at Hot Air and Michelle Malkin’s.
Later…On a lighter note, my review of Net, Blogs and Rock ‘n’ Roll has been posted.
————————————————————
Jeff Jarvis, blogger, journalist, and media critic I credit for my appearances on MSNBC a couple years ago, points to an article about an American author sued in an English court for libeling a Saudi.
Rachel Ehrenfeld wrote in Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed – and How to Stop It accused a rich Saudi named Khalid Salim A. Bin Mahfouz of funding Islamofascist groups like al-Qaida.
Ehrenfeld sought protection under New York state law and asked that the judgment against her be rendered unenforceable, but the courts contend Bin Mahfouz is not subject to New York jurisdiction. It’s a procedural matter, but substantive to Ehrenfeld all the same.
Jeff is concerned, perhaps rightly so, that such a judgment chills free speech and postulates that such actions could extend to speech that merely criticizes Islamofascists. It’s not so far-farfetched, once you consider that Islam is incompatible with the West, given its propensity toward free expression, which includes the right to offend. But are we talking about libel, censorship, or both? Ehrenfeld accused the man of funding terrorism. What “free speech” right does she have to do that?
Continue reading Libel, the UK, and the Internet (Updated) - Bhutto Assassinated
Filed under: Bloggers, Technology, War - Islamofascism
A common question Christians often ask one another is, “When did you become saved?” Although I say my “moment of salvation” occurred on December 23, 1999, it was an evolution of sorts, a gradual attraction to “godly” things that led me to Christ. I believe I was in the process of being saved years before that date.
In an article titled “Hour of Decision” in the December issue of Christianity Today, theology professor Erik Thoennes explains what being saved means and what the Bible teaches about the process. An excerpt:
The term saved is popularly used to refer to regeneration and justification. But when the Bible uses the word salvation in a spiritual sense, it describes the broad range of God’s activity in rescuing people from sin and restoring them to a right relationship with himself. Salvation in the Bible thus has past, present, and future tenses. A believer has been saved from the guilt of sin (justification, see Eph. 2:8), is being saved from the power of sin (sanctification, see 1 Cor. 1:18), and will be saved from the judgment and presence of sin (glorification, see Acts 15:11).
While the subjective experience of being saved may look very different from person to person, the objective state of being saved is definite and absolute. From God’s perspective, there is a definitive point in time when those who have trusted in Christ pass from death into life (1 John 3:14).
Indeed, all you have to do is believe Jesus is Lord and Savior, that he died for your sins, and that he rose from the dead. The saved person may give in to doubt from time to time and question his salvation, but he will never lose it. If the blood of Christ has washed away his sins, he is saved for all eternity, even if he backslides.
There’s more to the salvation story, of course, but that’s the gist. The experience is different for each Christian, but the effect is the same. It doesn’t matter whether the story of how you came to Christ was dramatic or subtle; it’s a story worth telling over and over.
Are you doubting your salvation? The Bible admonishes us to become more Christ-like even as we work out our salvation “with fear and trembling.” As Thoennes writes, “[T]he ongoing work of the Holy Spirit in making a person more like Jesus is the clearest indicator that one has been made a new creation in Christ.”
What’s your salvation story? If you’re not a Christian, are you drawn to Christ in some way? I assume you’re a little curious if you’re reading a Christian’s blog. Erroneous assumption, perhaps.
Update: As a point of clarification, the Bible also teaches that we must repent of, or turn away from, our sins. It’s what I believe, but I neglected to say so in the post.
Related posts:
I think I'm overdosing on Sponge Bob and Hannah Montana! But that's what family time is all about, yes? Here's a message for you:
“In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. (This was the first census that took place while Quirinius was governor of Syria.) And everyone went to his own town to register.
“So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.
“And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them ‘Do not be afraid. I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ the Lord.’”
(Luke 2: 1-12)
In some ways, I'm starting over with this blog. After I stopped covering politics, a few loyal fans stuck around. For the most part, however, I’m reinventing myself and the readership is shifting.
Many people started reading my blog because of the way I covered political and “controversial” topics. Since I’m phasing out those topics, it makes sense that some of those readers are phasing out LBC. But it doesn’t feel scary. I’m treading new-to-me territory, and it feels like a fresh start. I feel re freshed.
When I first started blogging, I followed veteran bloggers’ advice: comment on and trackback to other blogs, send post links to established, like-minded bloggers, etc. I did all that. I even visited small blogs - really small blogs - and commented on those sites. This consequently led the bloggers to blogroll me, and things picked up from there.
Should I do the same with digital music blogging? Later, perhaps. LBC, with four years worth of backlinks and indexed pages, has got enough Google juice to show up high in search results under certain digital music terms. That’s good enough for now. I’ve returned to my roots, in a way. Blogging for the pure pleasure of it and being genuinely surprised that people are reading the blog at all. It’s still amazing after all these years. 
In the meantime, I’m taking notes and journaling my somewhat dramatic shift in tone and recording the hits and misses. The plan is to turn the notes into an instructional (and inspirational?) essay for established bloggers longing to do the same.
Many blessings to you!
(Clip art from EternalChristmas.com)
I wanted to point you to what I consider a must-read article written by musician David “Letting the days go by” Byrne, formerly of the 1980s-era Talking Heads.
In a Wired magazine article titled “David Byrne’s Survival Strategies for Emerging Artists — and Megastars,” the veteran offers advice to new artists and other veterans on how to distribute music and make money in the digital age.
Check out his blog, too.
Technology set music loose from its social settings. With no ability to record music, consumers had to go where the music was: concert halls, clubs, opera houses, etc. After recording technology was developed, music became a product, says Byrne. We could take it home with us, and, with today’s portable music players, literally everywhere we go. Although the music “package” may have changed, we still have an urge (instinct?) to listen to it in social settings with other people.
Byrne douses a bucket of cold reality on the old music-making model: Back in the day, artists toured to promote new albums. To survive in the music business these days, artists must change their attitudes about concerts. Performing for fans is an important part of the music, and, as I mentioned in The Long Tail of Independence, sales from concert tickets and merchandise can compensate for low album sales.
Byrne’s offers six “possibilities” to veteran and new artists on how to distribute their music and survive the changes in the music industry. Here are the first three:
- 360 or “multiple rights” deal – Because of declining CD sales, record labels are trying to make money in other ways. Under a so-called 360 deal, labels take a cut of everything, from music to concert to merchandising sales. (Apparently, record companies traditionally did not take a cut of ancillary profits.) Some say such deals take the pressure off artists to produce a hit. With 360s, record labels are reasonably sure they’ll make money, whether or not CDs and digital files sell well. For an example of a 360 deal, see “The New Deal: Band as Brand.”
- Standard Distribution Deal – Traditional deal where labels pay for everything and give artists a cut of the profits. This deal is not ideal for artists, says Byrne. “The label, in this scenario, owns the copyright to the recording. Forever.” However, the Internet has lowered the costs of recording, manufacturing, and distributing music, so the label-does-all idea isn’t as valuable to artists as it once was. Artists can finance some of these tasks themselves. Just say no to SDDs?
Under the standard deal, artists are beholden to labels in more ways than one. “The typical pop star often lives in debt to their record company and a host of other entities, and if they hit a dry spell they can go broke,” Byrne writes. - License Deal – Artists retain copyright of the masters and allow record labels to use the masters for a limited period of time. Sounds like a better deal for artists. Ownership is everything, my friends. Byrne writes: “If the members of the Talking Heads held the master rights to our catalog today, we’d earn twice as much in licensing as we do now — and that’s where artists like me derive much of our income.”
Click over to Wired and read about the other three distribution models. (The comments are good, too.) And read more Byrne blogging here.
Byrne notes that all models are subject to shift and change, and no one model works for every artist. Nothing is absolute. But everyone – recording artist, visual artist, writer, or whatever – should heed this advice:
“I would personally advise artists to hold on to their publishing rights (well, as much of them as they can). Publishing royalties are how you get paid if someone covers, samples, or licenses your song for a movie or commercial. This, for a songwriter, is your pension plan.”
The music industry is in flux (other industries, too), and we, living in the ascendancy of the digital age, have prime seats to watch it unfold.
(Photo by Gilles Larrain Studios)
Update (12/19): The mid-life crisis topic’s a bit too depressing, eh? Sorry! I’m cheery as heck about my “crisis.” I’m working on interview questions for this guy. You may remember him from a little trilogy called “Lord of the Rings.” New movie coming out called “Day Zero.” And he has his own record label.
—————————————————————————–
Oh, the wheels of traditional publishing turn slowly…
For the past few months, I’ve immersed myself in digital music and digital media news. As I brainstorm and pitch what I hope are unique story ideas that will capture the attention of busy editors, I satisfy the writing urge on my blog. I write less on the blog because I’m trying to write more off the blog. But alas, the fruits of those off-blog efforts may not show up for weeks or months, if at all. The life of a writer…
…who’s the blackest of them all?
You can dredge up the horrors of American slavery. You can keep stirring the Jim Crow pot, constantly reminding everyone how horrible it was that a country forcibly segregated its citizens by race and discriminated against blacks because they were black. You can wail and gnash teeth all day long, wallowing in abject bitterness because others have more than you do: looks, money, influence, opportunity, or whatever.
But you cannot, even if you lived 1,000 lifetimes, make a coherent and logically sound argument in favor of racial discrimination in the other direction. Nothing, not even the most heinous act committed against a black person by our government, justifies discriminating against other races in favor of blacks.
Let me put it this way: I have yet to read or hear a coherent and logically sound argument in favor of so-called reverse discrimination. Perhaps one exists. If you’ve read or heard such an argument, do let me know.
This post was inspired by a blogger I met last summer, John Rosenberg, who blogs about racial discrimination. John is just as anti-skin color preferences as I am. He picked apart a pro-skin color preferences editorial in the Muskogee Phoenix, a community newspaper in Oklahoma.
…and others who don’t believe in Christianity:
- According to your belief system (tenets of an organized religion, your own personal philosophy, etc.), how did man come to be?
- What does your belief system teach or reveal to you about the nature of man?
Update (12/15): En route to where most of the loved ones (including all the kids!) live to begin an extended Christmas holiday. Thanks for participating on this thread, and for being civil. I think it’s important to be able to articulate what you believe and why you believe, whatever you believe. I’ve always strived to make LBC a place where people could engage in civil discussions, no matter how controversial or uncomfortable the topic.
See you Monday, and rest easy this weekend.
