"The Sun and The Moon": How a New York City newspaper found life on the moon in 1835.

As John's post below indicates, there are a lot of changes taking place in the newspaper business. New technologies and innovations are resulting in rapid change. In some ways, history is repeating itself. Back in the 1830s, the newspaper business also went through a rapid transformation. I know this because I just finished reading "The Sun and the Moon: The Remarkable True Account of Hoaxers, Showmen, Dueling Journalists, and Lunar Man-Bats in Nineteenth Century New York." It is a remarkable story, not only because it's true, but because how much of it relates to some of the same things we deal with today.

The author, Matthew Goodman, is an avid reader of AMERICAblog. The Economist ranked "The Sun and the Moon" as one of the best books of 2008 and it got a very good review in the Los Angeles Times.

The centerpiece of the story is an in-depth history of a hoax pulled off by one of New York City's first one-penny newspapers, The Sun. Before then, papers cost six cents and catered to the well-off.

For a period in the summer of 1835, New Yorkers were led to believe that there was life on the moon. And, many of them believed every word. In what became known as "The Moon" series, the editor wrote a multi-part report on the discovery of life on the moon complete with detailed descriptions of the creatures living in harmony on the lunar surface. New Yorkers clamored for the latest updates.

But, the backdrop of the book is the transforming newspaper business. The Sun and its fellow one-penny papers democratized the news and made it available to everyone, not just the well-to-do merchant types. They also provided more titillating news then had usually been reported -- including sordid court cases and wild rumors. These were the original tabloids. And, the competition among the media types was fierce -- they were brutal to each other in print.

Throughout the book, there are similarities between now and then. "The Moon" series highlighted the ongoing struggle between science and religion. Back then, much of the country was heavily influenced by religion. Colleges were basically religious institutions. Science was no different. You'd like to think times have changed, but eight years of the Bush administration showed us that struggle still exists.

The story also provides insight into the growing abolition movement. I was surprised to learn that in the 1830s, New York City had a pro-slavery bent, because of all the business it did with Southern states. Newspapers were defined by their views on slavery -- and many of the New York papers had no problem with it.

Some big names from the 1800s, like Edgar Allan Poe and P.T. Barnum, also make appearances.

Congrats to Matthew Goodman who did an amazing job with his book. I hadn't done much reading for fun in the past year, but "The Sun and The Moon" was fun and engaging. Anyone who has an interest in the media or the history of New York City or the struggle between religion and science would enjoy the read. Read the rest of this post...

Palin and conspiracy theories

Don't want conspiracy theories to abound about the birth of your child? Then don't give a speech and bop around the country for half a day after your water breaks during a high-risk pregnancy. It looks either fishy as hell, or irresponsible as hell - especially for someone who's an anti-abortion nut. (It also doesn't help that the religiously right Palin never explained how her first child was born 8 months after she got married eloped. Parthenogenesis?) She has quite the odd track record when it comes to childbirth.

Now go away.

Read the rest of this post...

Seattle Post-Intelligencer may have to close down in 60 days

Signs of the times.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer has been published for 146 years. But it seems likely it will cease publication in 60 days. Hearst owns the paper and announced to the newsroom late Friday evening that it is putting the paper up for sale. If a buyer is not found in 60 days the PI will either become a web only publication or cease publication entirely.

It's an extremely poor climate to sell any newspaper. And as the PI's article on its own apparent demise notes, the paper has lost money every year since 2000 and lost $14 million in 2008.

Read the rest of this post...

Obama: We will close Gitmo, just not in the first 100 days

I think that's fair. Obama raises a good point - we need to develop a real system of law in which we can try these people, we can't just shut down Gitmo and then say "oops, what we do with the guys being housed there?"

"I think it's going to take some time and our legal teams are working in consultation with our national security apparatus as we speak to help design exactly what we need to do," Obama said in an exclusive "This Week" interview with George Stephanopoulos, his first since arriving in Washington.

"It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize," the president-elect explained. "Part of the challenge that you have is that you have a bunch of folks that have been detained, many of whom may be very dangerous who have not been put on trial or have not gone through some adjudication. And some of the evidence against them may be tainted even though it's true. And so how to balance creating a process that adheres to rule of law, habeas corpus, basic principles of Anglo-American legal system, by doing it in a way that doesn't result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up."

But Obama said unequivocally that it will close. "I don't want to be ambiguous about this. We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution. That is not only the right thing to do but it actually has to be part of our broader national security strategy because we will send a message to the world that we are serious about our values."

The real measure will be what progress we've made towards establishing this new legal framework in, say, a year from now. Read the rest of this post...

Another bad effect of the tanking economy: Increase in hate groups

Today's Washington Post spotlights yet another ugly result of the economic woes. It provides an opportunity for hate groups:

Veteran investigators say they have advocated for increased attention to the problem since late September, when the nation's economic troubles widened, giving white supremacists a potent new source of discontent to exploit among potential recruits.

The number of U.S. hate groups has increased by 48 percent, to 888, since 2000, according to experts at the Southern Poverty Law Center, an independent organization that monitors racist movements.

Although questions persist about the ability of such groups to carry out violent plans, several recent national developments have combined to worry analysts, said Mark Potok, chief of the law center's Intelligence Project. In addition to the economic downturn, he cited rising immigration, demographic changes that predict whites will not be a majority within a few decades, and what some might see as "the final insult -- a black man in the White House."

The challenge for law enforcement officials is to figure out which of the haters are capable of violence. The article concludes with this paragraph:

The trick for investigators, the ATF's Cavanaugh said, is separating hateful words from impending violence. "They all hate, they all go to rallies, but for the most part, most of them will not go out and plant a bomb or shoot," he said. "Maybe four or five out of 100 will go out and do that. The hard part for us is to sort out the free speech and find the person who's really going to make a bomb or shoot someone."

Four or five out of 100 seems like a pretty high number to me, especially when the Southern Poverty Law Center estimates "The number of U.S. hate groups has increased by 48 percent, to 888, since 2000." Read the rest of this post...

Okay, now the Repubs. are really, really worried about deficits

The economic debate highlights yet another reason why Republicans have no credibility. And, also demonstrates why Obama has to be very, very careful when dealing with them. The Republicans have no scruples:

Out of power, Republicans appear to be retreating to familiar old ground. They're becoming deficit hawks again.

GOP lawmakers didn't seem to mind enjoying the fruits of government largesse for the past eight years while one of their own was in the White House. Now they're struggling to regain footing at a time of economic rout, a record $1.2 trillion budget deficit and an incoming Democratic president claiming a mandate for change.

It might not be the best time for running against more government spending. But that hasn't stopped Republicans from casting themselves as protectors of the public purse, striving for relevancy as Congress tackles President-elect Barack Obama's stimulus legislation.

"Congress cannot keep writing checks and simply pass IOUs to our children and grandchildren," says Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. Asks House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio: "How much debt are we going to pile on future generations?"

For the record, as this AP article notes, when George Bush took over with a GOP Senate and GOP House, our country was on track to have surpluses. Now, we've got a $1.2 trillion deficit adding to the enormous debt. So, the GOP's new-found fiscal discipline rings hollow -- and is cravenly political. That's a problem for the GOP:

"It's hard to oppose fixing the economy right now," said Stanley Collender, a former congressional budget analyst now with Qorvis Communications, a Washington consulting firm. Collender said the depth of the crisis makes it difficult for fiscal conservatives in either party "to say that deficits are something that should be addressed right now."

"If you say that, you kind of lose credibility," Collender said.

If you've got no credibility, you've got nothing to lose.

Once the final stimulus package is presented to Congress, opposition to it has to mean opposition to fixing the economy. Are the Republicans who created the mess willing to push the country off the cliff into a depression? That's the question. Read the rest of this post...

Sunday Talk Shows Open Thread

Some big names on the shows today, but Stephanopoulos has the biggest. He's got Obama. The transcript is up already.

At the far other end of the spectrum, FOX is dedicating its news show to the Bush family and Cheney is on CNN. Haven't we seen enough of them already? It's OVER -- and there is no way to repair the legacy of destruction.

Here's the lineup:

ABC's "This Week" — President-elect Barack Obama

___

CBS' "Face the Nation" — Former Illinois Attorney General (and Senate appointee) Roland Burris, Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.

___

NBC's "Meet the Press" — Comedian and author Bill Cosby, author Alvin Poussaint, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty and former Mich. Rep. David Bonior.

___

CNN's "Late Edition" — Vice President Dick Cheney and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

"Fox News Sunday" _ President Bush and former President George H.W. Bush.

Read the rest of this post...

France bans adverts for mobiles to children - cites radiation problems

The radiation issue with mobile phones used to be immediately dismissed - mostly by the mobile industry - but increasingly this is an issue that needs close review. I carry a mobile when I travel but otherwise it tends to sit on my desk and I generally try to avoid using it. When the warnings first emerged the argument was that test results were unclear, which was only normal because the technology was new and side effects take years to develop. I hardly think much about the FDA dismissing the radiation issues as they have not been know to say anything against business since the GOP destroyed the organization in the 1990s. In Europe, governments also saw the business that EU-based handset producers were generating and they're not immune to turning a blind eye themselves.

We are now a good 10+ years into widespread mobile use and health agencies are starting to wake up. While it's easy to see the benefits of having kids equipped with mobile phones, the health issues should be a significant concern and more governments should have a serious public debate about the consequences. Governments who have nationalized health care stand to pay a heavy price if they ignore problems which may be why the most noise on this issue is now coming from Europe.

New laws cracking down on children's use of mobile phones are to be introduced in France amid growing fears that they may cause cancer and other diseases.

All advertising of the devices to children under 12 is to be prohibited under the legislation – announced by the Environment Minister, Jean-Louis Borloo, last week – and he will also take powers to ban the sale of any phone designed to be used by those under six.

The French government will also introduce new limits for radiation from the phones and make it compulsory for handsets to be sold with earphones, so that users can avoid irradiating their heads and brains. And one of the country's largest cities last month started an advertising campaign to discourage the use of the phones by children.

The clampdown represents the most comprehensive action yet taken by any government worldwide. It contrasts sharply with the stance of British ministers, who have largely ignored the recommendations of an official report nine years ago that people aged under 16 should be discouraged from using mobiles, and that the industry should be stopped from promoting them to children. Since then their use by the young has almost doubled, so that nine out of 10 of the country's 16-year-olds own a handset.

Swedish research indicates that children and teenagers are five times more likely to get brain cancer if they use the phones, causing some experts to predict an "epidemic" of the disease among today's young people in later life. But consideration of the threat to them has been specifically excluded from Britain's official £3.1m investigation into the risk of cancer from mobiles.

The French ministry warned that "mobile phone use is increasing at a rapid pace among youths", and warns that the young may be "more sensitive because their bodies are still developing". Children's heads are smaller and their skulls thinner.

Read the rest of this post...

British royalty, worthless as ever

And to think many in the US are keen to create American royal families. Even worse, they're both Republicans and Democrats. Are times so difficult that we can find new people to participate in our democracy or is our democracy really that bad? The Guardian:

A secret video showing Prince Harry making racist remarks and mocking his grandmother has been discovered.

The prince, who is third in line to the throne, made the comments in footage shot while training as an officer at the Sandhurst military academy in 2006, a year after being forced to make a public apology for wearing a Nazi swastika at a fancy dress party.

In the film, the 24-year-old prince calls an officer from the Pakistani army, who was on the course with him, "our little Paki friend" and, when he sees another officer cadet wearing a camouflage veil, exclaims: "Fuck me, you look like a raghead." He also mocks the Queen - the commander-in-chief of the British army - during a pretend mobile phone call.

Last night, St James's Palace issued an apology for Harry's behaviour in the film, obtained by the News of the World. A Ministry of Defence spokesman said last night: "This sort of language is not acceptable in a modern army."

The Equality and Human Rights Commission has demanded a formal inquiry into Harry's behaviour, and Muslim groups and leading MPs have warned the comments could increase tensions with Islamic groups in the UK.

Read the rest of this post...