Ah, further reading in Dickens' Pickwick Papers has found our amazing little man behind bars. As he has steadfastly refused to pay the monies owed stemming from the lawsuit and the judgement against him, he would rather stay in the airless dungeon (or gaol) rather than give in to the unjust situation in which fate has placed him.
On his entry into jail at Fleet, he undergoes a rather hysterical intake process known as 'Sitting for a portrait.' In this case, Pickwick is surrounded by all the jailors, turn-keys and watchmen and observed as closely as possible, so that they know him from memory, lest he should slip away. Clearly, the debtors prisons of the mid-nineteenth century in London weren't the highest in security.
Just before his long and draining first night in the place, faithful servant Sam Weller relates a fascinating tale to Pickwick about a previous tenant at the jail. A certain character who'd been stuck there for owing as little as 9 British pounds sterling remained at the jail for seventeen years. When he convinces the turn-key to let me look around outside for just a bit (7 years after the beginning of his imprisonment) he comes running back to the jail within two minutes, so flabberghasted by the crazy carriages and horses, and his general fear of being outside the safety of the prison walls.
Eventually the turn-key lets the prisoner become more familiar with the outside world via a new public house that has opened across the road. Soon he's alowed out a few nights a week (clandestinely), but falls in with a bad crowd. He always returns at night, but many times drunk. The turn-key decides that it's high time he had a chat with the prisoner.
'"Now I don't wish to do nothing harsh," he says, "but if you can't confine yourself to steady circles, and find your vay back at reglar hours, as sure as you're a standin' there, I'll shut you out altogether!" The little man was seized with a wiolent fit o' tremblin', and never vent outside the prison walls arterwards!'
Oh the poor fellows who've grown so used to prison walls that they can't conceive of life outside it. What melancholy humor!
It will be a wonder to see how long Pickwick can stand the strange characters of the place, and when his will may be broken. Some resolution is bound to occur, and Snodgrass, Tupman and his other chums will undoubtedly find some way to fetch him out.
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
The Floyd Landis Chronicles at Trust But Verify - A Blog Worth Watching
What's one of the first topics you think of when you consider starting a blog? Would that answer be 'a professional cyclist in trouble'? It might not be - dare I say it's likey that this subject would only cater to a very, very specific niche audience? You can say that and more, but it's meaningless to the writers, thinkers, sportsmen and women, lawyers, judges and enthusiasts at Trust But Verify. What began as a storehouse for all information relevant to the Floyd Landis doping controversy has blossomed into a highly active hub for discussion that varies as much as the doping in sport issues have themselves.
For those who have not followed the cycling news, Floyd Landis is the winner of the 2006 Tour de France, but due to an adverse finding during a doping test, his win was questioned by USADA (US Anti-Doping Agency). Landis defended himself in an arbitration process in 2007, and is appealing the decision of the majority of arbiters in a proceeding scheduled for March of 2008.
At any given time when you stop by TBV, you will find yourself in the midst of discussions about lab testing procedures, schedules for Landis' legal process (including motions and appeals), ethics of anti-doping testing, and athletes' rights. What may surprise some is the sheer volume of reporting that TBV manages to do on a daily basis. Arguably one of the most up-to-date private blogs on the Web, TBV gives readers a unique tri-fold architecture of reporting: 1) daily news updates, 2) daily blog postings, and 3) in-depth articles from pretty much anyone who'd like to contribute thought-provoking copy. It's a brilliant organization of information - a taste of the highlights for those who want a quick-hit of stats, a summary of other blogs, and the studied (many times academic and scholarly) longer reports from either field experts, or writers who've become ad hoc experts due to studying volumes upon volumes of Landis-related legal proceedings. It's produced by 5 primary contributors, and Landis himself has offered an op-ed piece to the site.
TBV is generally a Landis-leaning blog, which attracts many people who feel that WADA (the World Anti-Doping Agency) has overstepped its bounds when pursuing athletes in doping cases. They contend that there are too many questions as to the accuracy of the science behind sample testing, and therefore there must be stricter measures to ensure that athletes have protection. When you read through the many, many posts (well over a thousand since the blog's inception,) it's difficult not to be convinced that the science of understanding athlete doping is tricky business. As with many other sciences, it's an area still full of interpretation, non-conclusive results, and an aggressive environment in which labs are policed by the same organization that gives them accreditation, (yes, WADA.)
In terms of content, it's a big challenge for a blog to offer what it hopes to be balanced information, and raise issues of fairness, but to do so without falling deeply into one or the other camps. Many people in the public who follow the Landis legal battle are often required (by its very nature) to make a decision about his case. As Landis awaits an appeal process with CAS (Tribunal Arrbitral du Sport) that begins in March in New York City, TBV has often reported on many other doping violation cases that help to bring context and comparison to what Landis is currently experiencing. These topics are discussed at length in its user comments section, which is active. The result of this 'community' is that Landis' case has been analyzed alongside other alleged sport dopers, and the reader is left to decide for him or herself what the real answer seems to be. TBV goes out of its way to remain fair, despite some personal conviction that Landis did not dope.
To someone like I, who does not cycle, it’s amazing to see how interesting a topic like this can be. It only goes to show that a well-designed blog that considers usability, content and timeliness is going to succeed because of its accessibility. Add to that a story that nearly anyone would find fascinating: An athlete pursuing a dream, a questionable test result, a cloak-and-dagger arbitration hearing, an appeal, big international forces, and many colorful characters along the way... (Yes, the case of Landis reads like a Dickens novel.) TBV's writers, who were so dedicated to their blog that they attended Landis' arbitration proceeding in California, know that they've got something very good on their hands. Even though they assumed that the blog would have expired long before 2008, it has proved to be a staying power on the Web. And to what can we attribute this? Using one topic as a springboard for a multitude of related discussions and collaborations. To me, this is a superb recipe for communication in the coming decades, and it can only add to the wealth of information that will become part of the historic case of Floyd Landis.
For those who have not followed the cycling news, Floyd Landis is the winner of the 2006 Tour de France, but due to an adverse finding during a doping test, his win was questioned by USADA (US Anti-Doping Agency). Landis defended himself in an arbitration process in 2007, and is appealing the decision of the majority of arbiters in a proceeding scheduled for March of 2008.
At any given time when you stop by TBV, you will find yourself in the midst of discussions about lab testing procedures, schedules for Landis' legal process (including motions and appeals), ethics of anti-doping testing, and athletes' rights. What may surprise some is the sheer volume of reporting that TBV manages to do on a daily basis. Arguably one of the most up-to-date private blogs on the Web, TBV gives readers a unique tri-fold architecture of reporting: 1) daily news updates, 2) daily blog postings, and 3) in-depth articles from pretty much anyone who'd like to contribute thought-provoking copy. It's a brilliant organization of information - a taste of the highlights for those who want a quick-hit of stats, a summary of other blogs, and the studied (many times academic and scholarly) longer reports from either field experts, or writers who've become ad hoc experts due to studying volumes upon volumes of Landis-related legal proceedings. It's produced by 5 primary contributors, and Landis himself has offered an op-ed piece to the site.
TBV is generally a Landis-leaning blog, which attracts many people who feel that WADA (the World Anti-Doping Agency) has overstepped its bounds when pursuing athletes in doping cases. They contend that there are too many questions as to the accuracy of the science behind sample testing, and therefore there must be stricter measures to ensure that athletes have protection. When you read through the many, many posts (well over a thousand since the blog's inception,) it's difficult not to be convinced that the science of understanding athlete doping is tricky business. As with many other sciences, it's an area still full of interpretation, non-conclusive results, and an aggressive environment in which labs are policed by the same organization that gives them accreditation, (yes, WADA.)
In terms of content, it's a big challenge for a blog to offer what it hopes to be balanced information, and raise issues of fairness, but to do so without falling deeply into one or the other camps. Many people in the public who follow the Landis legal battle are often required (by its very nature) to make a decision about his case. As Landis awaits an appeal process with CAS (Tribunal Arrbitral du Sport) that begins in March in New York City, TBV has often reported on many other doping violation cases that help to bring context and comparison to what Landis is currently experiencing. These topics are discussed at length in its user comments section, which is active. The result of this 'community' is that Landis' case has been analyzed alongside other alleged sport dopers, and the reader is left to decide for him or herself what the real answer seems to be. TBV goes out of its way to remain fair, despite some personal conviction that Landis did not dope.
To someone like I, who does not cycle, it’s amazing to see how interesting a topic like this can be. It only goes to show that a well-designed blog that considers usability, content and timeliness is going to succeed because of its accessibility. Add to that a story that nearly anyone would find fascinating: An athlete pursuing a dream, a questionable test result, a cloak-and-dagger arbitration hearing, an appeal, big international forces, and many colorful characters along the way... (Yes, the case of Landis reads like a Dickens novel.) TBV's writers, who were so dedicated to their blog that they attended Landis' arbitration proceeding in California, know that they've got something very good on their hands. Even though they assumed that the blog would have expired long before 2008, it has proved to be a staying power on the Web. And to what can we attribute this? Using one topic as a springboard for a multitude of related discussions and collaborations. To me, this is a superb recipe for communication in the coming decades, and it can only add to the wealth of information that will become part of the historic case of Floyd Landis.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
The Curiosity of Rudy Giuliani's Website
If you happen to visit Rudi Giuliani's website today, or if you have in the past few days, you might find something surprising: He's still running for president! Now you may think: What? Is it true?
The answer would seem to be that yahoo has it correct when it reported a few days ago: Giuliani has dropped out of the race and has since endorsed John McCain as the republican nominee for the 2008 presidential election. Yet, someone in Rudy's campaign has not even updated the website with this information. My reaction, in short is: Wow. Is that possible in this day and age? Well yes and no. One would think that in an electronic world, the website would be one of the first communication chanels that would be changed to update the most current information. But sometimes it is the webmaster (or his or her suite of fellow associates) that are last to be given the go-ahead to change copy on a webpage.
This can occur for a few reason: First, web copy is a fickle thing. It either relates the immediate, or shows the thread-bare elbows due to a lack of care or over-care. In our collective efforts to see that what we say online is truly representative of what we mean, copy can be written and re-written multiple times before it can be considered 'representative'. For instance, how many times have we visited on-the-scene blogs only to find that these blogs haven't been updated in 2 or more years? The best-laid plans are often ditched because there are only so many hours in a day to achieve accomplishments. Blogs can wait if there's dinner to make.
Second: You can't print the truth until you know it's the truth -online. This isn't the case in print media. In that field, you encounter corrections, clarifications, explanations for text on a previous day or week that were found later to be misleading or untrue. In the web world, those misstatements are expected to be fixed immediately. That's a high standard for truth, and a difficult one to achieve each and every day. The amount of time needed to make sure that copy is accurate could often leave writers in tandem for days, afraid to print and afraid to stay quiet. Haste and accuracy are fighting for better position. Rudy's site is probably stuck in a similar position: Publish the obvious news, or write the 'dropping out of the presidential race' in the best way possible, THEN publish it.
Third: Why publish a lack of news? In this case, Rudy may not know his political future. There have been some internet rumblings that Giuliani may be a favorite as running mate for McCain. If so, why not wait and post THAT information on the Giuliani website? This is a strategic scenario which would be of great benefit to Rudy if his campaign were to shift to that of Vice President. The writers, media buyers and editors on the Giuliani campaign staff could very likely be in this position: wait and see.
In the meantime, however, anyone who wants to see the latest and greatest of Rudy's campaign highlights will have to be happy with the assumption that SOMEONE has 'told the webmaster', and that he or she is waiting by the computer for a signal - a good time to do some surfing on the web to see what's going on in politics.
The answer would seem to be that yahoo has it correct when it reported a few days ago: Giuliani has dropped out of the race and has since endorsed John McCain as the republican nominee for the 2008 presidential election. Yet, someone in Rudy's campaign has not even updated the website with this information. My reaction, in short is: Wow. Is that possible in this day and age? Well yes and no. One would think that in an electronic world, the website would be one of the first communication chanels that would be changed to update the most current information. But sometimes it is the webmaster (or his or her suite of fellow associates) that are last to be given the go-ahead to change copy on a webpage.
This can occur for a few reason: First, web copy is a fickle thing. It either relates the immediate, or shows the thread-bare elbows due to a lack of care or over-care. In our collective efforts to see that what we say online is truly representative of what we mean, copy can be written and re-written multiple times before it can be considered 'representative'. For instance, how many times have we visited on-the-scene blogs only to find that these blogs haven't been updated in 2 or more years? The best-laid plans are often ditched because there are only so many hours in a day to achieve accomplishments. Blogs can wait if there's dinner to make.
Second: You can't print the truth until you know it's the truth -online. This isn't the case in print media. In that field, you encounter corrections, clarifications, explanations for text on a previous day or week that were found later to be misleading or untrue. In the web world, those misstatements are expected to be fixed immediately. That's a high standard for truth, and a difficult one to achieve each and every day. The amount of time needed to make sure that copy is accurate could often leave writers in tandem for days, afraid to print and afraid to stay quiet. Haste and accuracy are fighting for better position. Rudy's site is probably stuck in a similar position: Publish the obvious news, or write the 'dropping out of the presidential race' in the best way possible, THEN publish it.
Third: Why publish a lack of news? In this case, Rudy may not know his political future. There have been some internet rumblings that Giuliani may be a favorite as running mate for McCain. If so, why not wait and post THAT information on the Giuliani website? This is a strategic scenario which would be of great benefit to Rudy if his campaign were to shift to that of Vice President. The writers, media buyers and editors on the Giuliani campaign staff could very likely be in this position: wait and see.
In the meantime, however, anyone who wants to see the latest and greatest of Rudy's campaign highlights will have to be happy with the assumption that SOMEONE has 'told the webmaster', and that he or she is waiting by the computer for a signal - a good time to do some surfing on the web to see what's going on in politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
