Category Archives: Social media

Would Mr. Sulu lie to us about space exploration? No way!

Kurt Rebello, who graduated from Radford High School with Burl Burlingame and me, brings my attention via Facebook to the above photo from George Takei, which comes with this caption:

The first image has now been received from Curiosity on Mars.

You may think this is some sort of gag, but hey: This is Mr. Sulu. Could he possibly mislead us on anything having to do with space exploration?

That would not be logical, captain.

Does Nikki maintain her Facebook page herself? I suspect so…

Someone speculated earlier that Nikki Haley doesn’t maintain her Facebook page herself. I suspect that she does. Or at least that some of the posts, or status updates, or whatever you want to call them (I’m a Twitter man, and get impatient with Facebook) are written by her personally.

They are so emotional. And they are so carelessly written that I hate to think anyone was paid to produce them — unless the rough edges are part of the service being provided, to add authenticity.

For instance, there’s this:

SC Law Enforcement Dir. Chief Keel responding to The State Newspaper: “I have expressed my concerns, as of yesterday, that publication of info regarding minor children of elected officials creates problems for State Law Enforcement and its efforts to provide security for the children of this governor or any governor. In my 30 yrs plus of experience at SLED, the security or activities of minor children of elected officials is something that the media in general has taken a “hands off” approach to in reporting except as released by the elected official’s office.”

First, one wonders what she’s on about. I didn’t see anything in the paper about her daughter before this appears. That sort of airing of a background battle as though everyone knows what’s going on is so off, so unprofessional, that it really feels like it’s coming from her.

Also, it follows her pattern of embarrassing her appointees by enlisting them in her personal political battles. I feel for Mark Keel.

It’s probably a reference to this thing Will Folks wrote about. I suppose The State was working on the story (the MSM have this quaint habit of confirming things with on-the-record sources, which makes them lag the blogosphere), and that freaked Nikki out in a way that Will’s post did not.

There was an earlier post on the same subject that was more emotional, and blasted The State as a worthless, “biased” entity that was persecuting Nikki’s family, and that one really felt like her. Here it is:

Scrutiny of me comes with the territory of being governor. I expect it. But it’s a sad day for journalism in South Carolina when The State newspaper goes after my 14 year old daughter. Public officials have a right to expect that their minor children are off limits from political opponents and even from biased media outlets like The State. Its disgusting. Shame on them.

If a paid staffer wrote that for her, then I’m embarrassed for that person, too.

Nikki, you just keep right on Facebookin’…

At one point in the midst of his reporting on the Senate’s override of most of the governor’s vetoes, Adam Beam Tweeted this:

Sen. Joel Lourie tells ‪#scgov @NikkiHaley to “stay off Facebook.” He was referring to this post: http://on.fb.me/Q4QnOg

So I followed the link, to where the gov posted,

veto of SC Coalition of Domestic Violence $453,680. Special interests made their way into the DHEC budget. This is not about the merit of their fights but the back door way of getting the money. It’s wrong and another loophole for legislators and special interests to use. Defeated 111-0

Hey, if this is the kind of response she’s going to get, the governor should spend more time on Facebook, not less:

  • Nick Danger Dunn Loopholes for special interests are only okay when they’re being used by people who have donated enough to your campaign, or who share your similar “interests” of furthering your political power and mutual backscratching. Right? Right? Otherwise they are unacceptable and wrong.

    Tuesday at 11:30pm ·  ·  16
  • Kim Ponce Obviously you are clueless as to how sexual violence impacts adults and children in South Carolina. DHEC has a long history of providing much needed funding for these services, many of which insurance companies will not pay for. What if it was your child, your sister, your mother needing a change of clothes at the ER, a child sensitive medical exam or interview, counseling?

    Tuesday at 11:32pm via mobile ·  ·  16
  • Xiomara A. Sosa again, with all due respect, this is not a “special interest” issues. This is a health and human services issue. please doo not muddy the water with such political jargon that is only divisive and pointless. Respectfully, Xiomara A. Sosa

    Tuesday at 11:32pm ·  ·  15
  • Marnie Schwartz-Hanley Does that mean the agencies will get the money to help us so that we are not 8th in the nation for criminal domestic violence?

    Tuesday at 11:35pm ·  ·  8
  • Alyssa Daniel As a 20 year victim of domestic violence, you should be ashamed

    Tuesday at 11:36pm via mobile ·  ·  16
  • Angie Wilson Rogers Maybe now YOU can stop being a distraction to SC voters, One-Term Haley?

    Tuesday at 11:37pm ·  ·  13
  • Grace Ammons The people have won. But I still cannot concieve of how this woman became our Governor!

    Tuesday at 11:40pm ·  ·  13
  • Dawn Ridge We’re 7th in the Nation and climbing, but GOD forbid we have money to support Victim’s Rights!!!!! Just make sure those inmates are watching cable tv and having 3 hot meals a day!!!!! This is complete and utter BS!!!!!!

    Tuesday at 11:43pm ·  ·  9

… and many more…

Of course, the comment thread is liberally sprinkled with the kind of “You go, girl!” responses Nikki expects. But it’s far from the unadulterated stream of fawning adulation that caused her to retreat to Facebook as her favored means of communicating with the world to begin with.

Are some of those responses a little on the emotional side, and lacking in calm discernment? Yep. But so are the kind of responses that Nikki goes to Facebook seeking. You can get calm and detached on an editorial page, but our governor scorns that. This is her medium.

I just hope she reads them all.

Adam Beam’s Tweets about veto votes in House

Young Adam Beam is doing a very conscientious job covering the House as it runs through the governor’s vetoes. Here are some of his key Tweets thus far (sorry that this looks junky; I haven’t had time to clean it up):

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Voting now on Arts Commission. Overwhelming to override ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Vote was 110 to 5 to override Arts Commission veto. Voting “no”: Frye, Chumley, Nanney, Norman, Southard. # sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Arts Commission veto now heads to the state Senate. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 2 is EPSCOR funding — basically research money for universities. Vote is close.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

EPSCOR veto (No. 2) is sustained, 70-45. Score: Haley 1, House 1.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House is leaving open option to reconsider veto No. 2. Could come back to it.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 3 overridden, 110-10. Sea Grant Consortium survives until at least tomorrow ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Four and five overridden. Next up: Certificate of Need program, the process that determines if a hospital can expand or open a new hospital

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Certificate of Need veto overridden. Next up: $10 million in one time money for teacher salaries. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Looks like only “no” vote on teacher pay raises will be Rep. Ralph Norman, R-York ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Yep. Vote was 113-1 for teacher salaries. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto No. 8: Governor’s School for Science and Math. Background:http://bit.ly/OOr4d2 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Gov. School veto overridden 109-3

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Veto 9 is $1 million in deferred maintenance at the Dept of Mental Health. They got a huge increase this year, so House votes to sustain

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House voting now on funding for a committee started in the Senate. Rep. White asks to send it to Senate, let them decide. ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

But the House doesn’t listen to him, votes 58-53 to sustain the veto.‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Next is $783K for Education Oversight Committee. Governor says she likes EOC, but doesn’t like how it is funded.

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House overrides EOC veto, 80-34

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Next: $2.8 million for IT dept at Judicial Dept. Background: http://bit.ly/LHScPR ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

During votes, House members passionately discuss SEC media day — particularly anything Spurrier says ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House overrides judicial veto, 108-6 ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

So far, House has only sustained one veto that has money attached to it: $300,000 for the Committee on Children ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

Wait, I was wrong. They sustained the $1 million in deferred maintenance for the Dept. of Mental Health ‪#sctweets

Adam Beam ‏@adambeam

House has sustained 8 vetoes so far. Overridden 10. ‪#sctweets

Follow his Twitter feed at @adambeam. To find out how your legislator voted on vetoes, Adam says to go here — but that must be for later, because I haven’t seen the info show up there yet.

Silly me, for thinking DeMint cared what I thought

Couldn’t help responding to Jim DeMint today when he Tweeted,

My response was in two parts. First, I answered his question: Yes!

I had read with interest the top story in The Wall Street Journal this morning, which said that the long logjam on national legislation to require online businesses to pay sales taxes just like their bricks-and-mortar competitors may finally have broken:

Republican governors, eager for new revenue to ease budget strains, are dropping their longtime opposition to imposing sales taxes on online purchases, a significant political shift that could soon bring an end to tax-free sales on the Internet.

Conservative governors, joining their Democratic counterparts, have been making deals with online retail giant Amazon.com AMZN -1.09% to collect state sales taxes. The movement picked up an important ally when New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie—widely mentioned as a potential vice-presidential candidate—recently reached an agreement under which Amazon would collect sales taxes on his state’s online purchases in exchange for locating distribution facilities there.

Mr. Christie called taxation of online sales “an important issue to all the nation’s governors” and endorsed federal legislation giving all states taxing authority.

This should lead to quick resolution, in a rational universe, since Amazon has said they support a national solution. And that’s very good news for states like South Carolina, which have unwisely shifted so much of their tax burdens to sales taxes just as conventional, “analog” store sales have been drying up.

I was particularly interested because the change that had come about was that Republican governors, such as Chris Christie, saw the need to do something about the fact that their states’ coffers had been depleted by the shift of our economy to online shopping.

It caused me to wonder what it would be like to have a real conservative Republican governor, rather than a darling of the Tea Party or the Club for Growth, one who — like any real conservative — believes in responsible governance, one who sees his or her role as a steward of the state’s public sector.

And then I remembered, that I did experience that, for years, when Lamar Alexander was governor in Tennessee. And so it is fitting that Lamar is the senator pushing this legislation:

Seizing on the recent political shift, Sen. Lamar Alexander, a Tennessee Republican, and co-sponsors from both parties are attempting to speed up action on a bill they wrote to give states authority to compel online companies to collect sales taxes.

One of the co-sponsors, Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.,) said, “It gets down to a basic issue…of simple fairness for small businesses that create jobs and opportunities all across America. And with the sales taxes they collect, they provide for local police and firemen, for the sewers and streets.”…

Oh, but wait… as soon as I said, Yes!, I realized that Sen. DeMint’s question was purely rhetorical, meant only to set up his announcement that he’s leaping into the fray to fight against common sense.

You can always rely on Jim DeMint. Unfortunately.

Silly me, for thinking Jim DeMint cared what I thought.

What, Me Worry about what YOU think?/File photo from an editorial board meeting in 2007.

Cindi’s just KILLING me with that ratio of hers

Haunted by his own rep, always having to look over his shoulder...

You’ve seen the Westerns in which the canny, world-weary, legendary gunslinger is hounded constantly by young punk wannabes, and haunted by the knowledge that sooner or later, one of them will come along who’s a little faster, and that’ll be that.

It’s like that in the Twitterverse.

Here I am, one of the Twitterati, with a follower-to-following ratio of better than 3-to-1 (1,807 to 589), but I can’t just relax. I’ve got to stay on deck and attend to duty, and keep firing them out. You’ve got to keep wowing them, as I did this morning with @absolom, a.k.a. “cgi-bin laden,” who was kind enough to write:

But I still have to keep looking over my shoulder.

There’s this kid out there, this Cindi Scoppe. We used to ride together back in the day, stole a lot of horses together, as they say. But now she’s gunnin’ for me. The kid only started on Twitter a couple of months ago. And she only has 187 followers. Yes, let’s all snort in derision!

But here’s the thing — she’s only following 25! Yes, like movie star follow numbers! Numbers that say, “I don’t have to follow anybody to get followers.” That’s a ratio of almost 7-and-a-half to one! It’s like she’s saying, “I can sweep past you any time I want!”

I had thought these MSM types were washed up. After all, my blog gets five times the traffic of the one I had at the paper — something I attribute in large part to my social media prowess.

But still. I’m hearing footsteps…

Is Spotify worth the price? (Hold on a second… THAT’s not Paul Simon!)

Wait a second... THAT'S not Paul Simon...

Recently, I’ve been listening to Spotify instead of Pandora. And at first, it seems an incredibly good deal. Pandora (at least in the free version) won’t let you directly pick a particular track, whereas Spotify not only lets me go to the track I have in mind (if it’s in its database — I’ve hit a couple of misses so far), but plays the whole album for me. Which is awesome.

And the price — having to listen to ads — is inconsequential. I’ve listened to radio ads my whole life — only with this, I can hear songs on demand. For free (so far).

But today, Spotify exacted a terrible price on me.

I was happily listening to Paul Simon’s first solo album — I had sought out “Everything Put Together Falls Apart,” with which Pandora had failed to connect me in the past — and then, suddenly and without warning, right between “Run that Body Down” and “Armistice Day,” I started hearing this awful, trite, saccharine bubble gum voice singing something like, “If I was your boyfriend… never let you go.”

Alarmed, I ALT-TABbed over to the application, and saw that it was… Justin Bieber. Fortunately, the ad — for that’s what it was — was quickly over, and I was back to stuff worth listening to. Stuff with, you know, at least a modicum of wit and creativity.

I suppose I can stand this if it happens again. But I’ve just had another reminder (shudder), as if I needed it, that nothing is really free.

A little something for you Trekkies out there

This was brought to my attention by pourmecoffee, one of the better Twitter feeds:

All five of the Star Trek captains appeared together for the first time this weekend at Wizard World Philadelphia Comic Con. The photo shows William Shatner, Patrick Stewart, Avery Brooks, Kate Mulgrew, and Scott Bakula from left to right. The photo above was taken by Tomlin Campbell for Wizard World.

Of course, there was only one real captain. The fat guy on the left used to be him. This is one subject on which I agree with Hitler.

Hatfields and McCoys got nothing on Tea Party

Thought I’d share this with y’all since it got reTweeted about eight times after I posted it yesterday:

“Hatfields & McCoys”? If I wanted to watch a bunch of cranky white people who can’t be reasoned with, I’d go to a Tea Party meeting…

I wasn’t just trying to be funny. When I had considered whether I wanted to watch that, that really was the first thought that came to me.

This was a human being, who suffered and died

Once when I was the news editor in Wichita, Dave Barry came to visit. Since he was Knight Ridder’s biggest star, an opportunity was set up for him to meet and bat the breeze with some folks from the newsroom.

It was a light, banter-filled session. At one point, newsroom comedian Dennis Boone challenged Dave by asking, with mock indignation, why he and the rest of us, who worked for the same company, had to sweat away at hard work for long hours while Dave got paid to crack jokes. Barry smiled a satisfied smile and answered with one word: “Talent.”

I had a question I wanted to ask, too, but it felt out of place. It’s one I’ve thought of a lot over the years with regard to humor. It would have gone like this: “Do you ever feel guilty about cracking jokes to a mass audience? Do you ever wonder, when you make a real killer joke about, say, cancer, how many people reading it just lost a loved one to cancer, thereby making your bon mot like a knife to the heart?”

But I decided the question was too dark for the venue — downright weird, really — so I didn’t ask it that day. Nor did I when I ran into Dave again in Atlanta in 1988, where he and I were both covering the Democratic National Convention. We were in the makeshift KR work area in the World Trade Center, and he was telling me about some practical joke that he and others were pulling on Mike Royko over in the next press encampment (I forget what form the gag took). Again, not the right time.

I like a joke as much as the next guy, and probably more than most. I’m generally the guy most likely to go off on a facetious digression in a serious meeting, if only to keep myself interested. I’m guilty of a great deal of the kind of gallows humor that people in newsrooms use to distance themselves from the unpleasantness they report on. (I have my limits, though. I’ve never participated, for instance, in a death pool.) And sometimes I’d forget myself and act that way outside the newsroom. Early in my career, when I’d hardly had time to be jaded (the youngest, least-experienced journalists are often the worst, anxious to show how hardened they are), I was playing tennis one evening with another guy while my wife watched us. There was suddenly a loud, horrible screeching sound followed by a tremendous crash on the nearby busy street that was just out of sight. I said with a grin, “Let’s play that point over; that noise distracted me.” My wife was horrified, and when she pointed out that someone may have just been killed, I felt the appropriate regret, or at least I like to think so. But I knew that we said things that cold all the time at work, about all sorts of human tragedies. We might even dignify it by relating it to professional detachment.

Over time, that sort of humor became less and less the special province of journalists, cops and others who dealt routinely with the uglier sides of life. Starting about the time that “Saturday Night Live” started its long run, society as a whole started accepting an ironic approach to terrible things. A landmark might have been Dan Akroyd’s hilarious sketch in which Julia Child is bleeding to death from a wound inflicted while preparing a meal. Over the years we devolved from that down to laughing at “South Park” and “Family Guy.” We got hipper and hipper and more and more ironic.

Now, with the Web, the lines between professional and audience are largely erased, and everyone competes to be the biggest wiseacre on the Twitter feed. But I was struck today by a gag among professionals that I felt crossed the line — to the extent that there still is a line:

Celeste HeadleeCeleste Headlee

Was he on a plane? RT @TheFix: Man who handles poisonous snakes dies from….wait for it…a poisonous snake bite. http://ow.ly/bf0HQ

To interpret for those not familiar with the Twitter syntax, @TheFix (the feed of the blog written by Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post) said “Man who handles poisonous snakes dies from….wait for it…a poisonous snake bite.” He also provided the link to this story, “Serpent-handling pastor profiled earlier in Washington Post dies from rattlesnake bite.” Then, Celeste Headlee, the co-host of The Takeaway, which I regularly enjoy on public radio), added “Was he on a plane?”

Keeping the ball rolling, Steve Skinner — him I don’t know — added “….and was Samuel Jackson on said plane?” (Such overexplication is, of course, a joke-killer, but hey, nobody’s perfect.)

At this point I decided to play wet blanket — the Harry Hairshirt, the Captain Buzzkill, the Church Lady — and replied:

This was a human being who suffered an untimely and painful death, folks.

No one answered, and that was merciful of them. I had committed such a gaffe, slathering on the self-righteousness like that.

But come on, people.

By the way, if you read the story at the link, it’s appropriately and sensitively done. After all, it’s written by someone who actually got to know the victim in the course of profiling him. That’s an interesting thing about journalistic facetiousness — the reporter out in the field who gets to know sources as human beings is almost never as cynical as the desk types who never leave the newsroom. To the reporter, this wasn’t just some redneck yahoo who took his Bible too literally — which these days is a stock character tout le monde is encouraged to laugh at. He’s a human being who believed in something, rightly or wrongly, and died for it.

Died horribly, in case you don’t know anything about snakebite (and if you don’t, the story sets you straight).

Yeah, I know I was acting like a prig, and that’s no way to get followers on Twitter. But there it is.

Bad news, good news about newspapers

I learned yesterday that one of America’s great cities will no longer have a daily newspaper in the unkindest way, courtesy of my favorite celebrity Twitter follower, Adam Baldwin:

Adam Baldwin Adam Baldwin
@adamsbaldwin

Buggy-Whipped?! | RT @carr2n “Times-Picayune facing deep layoffs, may cut back from daily publication.” – http://nyti.ms/Jsib87

He jests at scars that never felt a wound. How would ol’ Jayne Cobb feel if the financial underpinnings of movies and TV suddenly collapsed? (Hey, don’t say it could never happen. Have you heard about Autohop? Remember, newspapers didn’t start dying because people didn’t want news; it was the ads drying up.)

That newspapers are having to cut back isn’t new (especially not to me), although nothing quite like this has happened before in a major city, so it’s a milestone (and the same company is doing the same with its papers in several other cities, including Birmingham). But my sadness is for the city as well. I lived in New Orleans almost as long as anywhere else growing up — I went to school there for two years (7th and 8th grades) instead of the usual one — and news like this makes it feel like the city itself is dying, with a vital spark fading:

The latest to go to three days a week: The storied New Orleans Times-Picayune, one of America’s oldest papers, which announced Thursday that it plans to limit its print schedule — beginning this fall — to Wednesday, Friday and Sunday editions. It will maintain 24/7 online reporting via its site, Nola.com.

This is a tactical trend for New York-based Advance Publications, which owns the Times-Picayune, as it pushes toward a limited print-digital model. Advance said Thursday that in addition to the Times-Picayune, it will also cut back the print frequency of its three papers in Birmingham, Mobile and Huntsville, Ala., to three days….

First Katrina, now this.

But enough bad news. We have some startlingly good news from closer to home: Warren Buffett is investing in newspapers. Including in South Carolina.

You may have seen that news last week. I was sufficiently surprised that I didn’t know what to make of it, and haven’t commented yet. But I have a new news peg: Buffett has written a letter to his editors and publishers, communicating his thinking in making this move. It’s a bracingly confident message:

Until recently, Berkshire has owned only one daily newspaper, The Buffalo News, purchased in 1977. In a month or so, we will own 26 dailies.

I’ve loved newspapers all of my life — and always will. My dad, when attending the University of Nebraska, was editor of The Daily Nebraskan. (I have copies of the papers he edited in 1924.) He met my mother when she applied for a job as a reporter at the paper. Her father owned a small paper in West Point, Nebraska and my mother worked at various jobs at the paper in her teens, even mastering the operation of a linotype machine. From as early as I can remember, my two sisters and I devoured the contents of the World-Herald that my father brought home every night.

In Washington, DC, I delivered about 500,000 papers over a four-year period for the Post, Times-Herald and Evening Star. While in college at Lincoln, I worked fifteen hours a week in country circulation for the Lincoln Journal (earning all of 75? an hour). Today, I read five newspapers daily. Call me an addict.

Berkshire buys for keeps. Our only exception to permanent ownership is when a business faces unending losses, a remote prospect for virtually all of our dailies. So let me express a few thoughts about what lies ahead as we join forces.

Though the economics of the business have drastically changed since our purchase of The Buffalo News, I believe newspapers that intensively cover their communities will have a good future. It’s your job to make your paper indispensable to anyone who cares about what is going on in your city or town.

That will mean both maintaining your news hole — a newspaper that reduces its coverage of the news important to its community is certain to reduce its readership as well and thoroughly covering all aspects of area life, particularly local sports. No one has ever stopped reading when half-way through a story that was about them or their neighbors…

So… if we are to take Mr. Buffett at his word, this isn’t some bid to rack up losses for tax reasons, or any other convoluted strategy. He actually believes this is a good investment. And he’s not known for being wrong about such things.

Back when I was first laid off, the executive editor position at the Florence paper was open. But I didn’t apply for the job — a combination of wanting to stay where my grandchildren are, and a reluctance to jump back into a dying industry, having done more than my share of laying-off and cutting back in the last few years.

But had the opening occurred under these circumstances — with new ownership, and that owner being Warren Buffett, and he bullish on newspapers — I might have looked at it differently.

Some faves from the late, lamented @PhilBaileySC

Just got around to seeing this…

On Sunday in The State, The Buzz (a descendant of a tidbits column I started in the ’80s called “Earsay”), lamented the cruel demise of @PhilBaileySC, and remembered some of his best Tweets:

• “Happy Confederate Memorial Day South Carolina. The rest of the country calls this day ‘Thursday’ ”

• “At what point do I freak out about Sharia Law coming to SC? Right after Bigfoot is proven real?”

• “Haley to send it to Georgia tomorrow. RT @WLTX: 30-foot-tall State Christmas Tree arrives in Columbia”

• “Happy Valentines Day, Ladies. The @scsenategop will be attempting to regulate your womb tomorrow.”

• “Besides the latest Winthrop Poll numbers having @NikkiHaley at 37%, Angies List gives the SC Guv a D-.”

• “ Mitt Romney and Nikki Haley settled on the endorsement in an email. Unfortunately, Haley pressed delete on the email out of habit.”

Not sure those are the exact ones I would have chosen (the fourth certainly doesn’t reflect my views), but they give you the idea. My fave of these is the first one. Very Phil.

GM says ads on Facebook don’t work (Oh, and why is it going public anyway?)

At the worst possible time — on the eve of the social site’s IPO — The Wall Street Journal reports that General Motors plans to quit advertising on Facebook because ads there don’t get the job done:

General Motors Co. plans to stop advertising with Facebook Inc. after deciding that paid ads on the site have little impact on consumers’ car purchases, according to a GM official.

The move by GM, one of the largest advertisers in the U.S., puts a spotlight on an issue that many marketers have been raising: whether ads on Facebook help them sell more products. On Friday, Facebook is expected to sell shares in an initial public offering that could put a market value on the company of as much as $104 billion…

That aside… personally, I have trouble understanding why Facebook wants to go public anyway. Of course, I’m pretty sure Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t want to — hence his childish, obnoxious gesture of showing up for business meetings on Wall Street in a sweatshirt.

But while I blame him for not dressing like a grownup, I find any reluctance he feels to go public totally understandable. I say this as someone who suffered for decades working for publicly-traded newspaper companies — and who would still be a newspaperman if his paper had not been owned by an overleveraged public company. To me, anyone who is making plenty of money from his private company would be totally insane to go public.

No one, but no one, would accuse me of being any sort of financial whiz. But I fail to see the presence of any of the usual reasons for going public. What does Facebook really need an infusion of cash for? It’s not capital-intensive like, say, a steel mill. It’s always been able to rake in the money for relative little investment.

Yes, I’ve gone out there and read explanations of why. But I’m unconvinced. So what if, for instance, going public would be a huge windfall for Facebook employees? Why would I, as an investor (if I were an investor), want to spend my money to give them that windfall? Where’s the competitive advantage in encouraging a company’s founding talent — the people responsible for making the property valuable — to cash out?

The one rational excuse seems to be that in this converging online world, the only way to compete with the other titans out there, such as Google, is to have mountains of cash on hand, so you can beat the others to the punch when it comes time to buy a YouTube or an Instagram.

In other words, it’s a necessary step in the bid to become all things to all people online. Which seems, in and of itself, a debatable goal. But hey, nobody’s asking me.

The duel that wasn’t (so far as we know)

It looked like the sort of facetious thing that people say on Twitter and which are quickly forgotten. Yet Katrina Shealy seems to be pinning her hopes for unseating Jake Knotts on the substance of Tweet sent in 2010.

The Tweet in question is reproduced above.

Perhaps there’s more to it, but one couldn’t find it in either the story in The State this morning, or the post by Will Folks that apparently prompted it. (The story in The State seemed to be of that new variety we’re becoming accustomed to — one that the MSM would never have reported in the past without having nailed down all the facts first, but publishes now so as not to appear out of the loop. Neither Jake nor Ms. Shealy was reached before publishing the story, which speaks of a sense of hurry.)

Here are some of the questions that the story raises in my mind:

  • Did Knotts ever say anything to Haddon?
  • Did he actually challenge him to a duel? (Duels, of course, properly constituted, require that both parties be gentlemen. I don’t know Haddon, but Jake has never seemed the dueling sort to me. He’s more of the pick-you-up-and-throw-you-across-the-room kind of guy. Ask Dick Harpootlian.)
  • Is that Tweet Mr. Haddon’s response to the challenge? If so, it is both unclear, and doesn’t seem to follow the accepted forms. It takes more the form of barroom bluster than a formal reply. Perhaps if he would identify his seconds, we could ask them.
  • Has either Mr. Knotts or Mr. Haddon been “out” before (which in the age of dueling meant something different from what it means today)? Who would have the upper hand?
  • If there’s any substance to this, will Jake be barred in the future from conducting classes for those who wish to carry concealed weapons? He has taught such classes in the past. One hopes those classes have not involved standing back-to-back, or pacing off distances.
  • Does Ms. Shealy in any way have standing to be taking legal action in this matter? She thinks she does, because her aim is to bar Sen. Knotts from office. But how does that give her any more standing than any other constituent? It seems that only parties to the alleged duel would have standing. And of course, the Code would (I assume) bar a challenged gentleman from resorting to the courts in order to avoid the Field of Honor.

I, along with you, await answers to all of the above.

And now, for you youngsters, Maurice Sendak

Yesterday, Kathryn protested that she should not be expected to know how Paul McCartney was dressed on the cover of “Abbey Road” because she was too young. I shot back that her youth was no excuse, that she might as well claim she couldn’t picture Alberto Korda’s photo of Che Guevara because she was not a communist.

Once she followed the link I provided, of course, she responded, “Oh, that one.” The exchange sparked a fun sub-thread on iconic images of the 20th Century.

Well, this morning, I experienced the feeling of being too old for a shared cultural experience. As the news spread that Maurice Sendak, author of Where the Wild Things Are, had died, Twitter was filled with references to how important he was to the childhoods of the writers — such as this one from actor/director Jon Favreau.

I immediately felt a disconnect. I wasn’t familiar with who he was until I was an adult. Actually, he may not have fully registered on me until Richland County Public Library had some sort of special Sendak celebration several years back.

To me, his most famous work was one of those books in the stacks of books from which we read to our children, and then grandchildren. But not one that had made a big impression on me, like my favorites (Socks for Supper by Jack Kent, The King’s Stilts by Dr. Seuss, and especially Bread and Jam for Francis, by Russell and Lillian Hoban). And while I get the impression that he had greater literary cachet than the authors of “The Berenstain Bears,” I was more affected by the passing of Jan Berenstain.

How about you young folks out there? How did Sendak affect you?

How are Newt Gingrich and John Edwards alike?

When The Washington Post posed this question this morning on Twitter:

What do John Edwards and Newt Gingrich have in common?

I thought the answer was obvious, and shared it:

Ummm… Both won SC, but not much else?

Of course, that’s not exactly what the Post had in mind. This is what they were thinking:

Don’t be surprised if you hear the names of John Edwards and Newt Gingrich mentioned on the Senate floor this week.

Senate Democrats plan to consider a measure Tuesday that would extend lower interest rates for some federally subsidized college loans and pay for the extension by ending tax breaks for firms with three or fewer shareholders — commonly referred to as “S-corporations.”

Democrats call these types of tax breaks the “Newt Gingrich/John Edwards loophole,” because both former politicians took advantage of a federal tax law that allows those with high incomes to avoid paying Medicare payroll taxes on earnings by establishing S-corporations and treating only a portion of their total earnings as taxable wages…

Later, Cindi Scoppe (my mind is blown by the fact that Cindi is now on Twitter) weighed in with another answer, from the NYT’s Frank Bruni:

Gingrich and Edwards belong to different parties but are beholden to similar demons, and they have a whole lot more in common than a bounty of hair — white in the Republican’s case, brown in the Democrat’s. They’re the salt and pepper of outsize egos in presidential politics.

And to look at the two of them together, which their recent convergence in the news and on the map encouraged, is to confront some unsettling truths about a kind of person too frequently drawn to high-level office and about traits that often abet his rise and then seal his fall.

Beware the extreme narcissist. Although he may radiate a seductive confidence, he can justify and forgive himself for just about anything, given his belief in his own exalted purpose. He’ll lose sense of the line between boldness and recklessness. And he’ll quit the stage reluctantly, because he can’t bear not to occupy the very center of it…

So I guess the bottom line is that they have a lot in common.

Maybe I’m just missing the purpose…

Speaking of Twitter, here’s something I sent out yesterday…

It’s a conundrum.

Is the purpose to help the planet, or to save gas? Either way, a hybrid something else would get the job done better. I mean, why buy a Tahoe, and then spend extra to make it a hybrid (I’m assuming, perhaps erroneously, that the hybrids cost more).

Or is it just to send a message to the world: I care about the planet, I really do! I just can’t help myself — I gotta drive a dreadnought through the city streets!

Or is it something else? Such as sheer irony?

Jon Huntsman’s very last Tweet

I was doing a little housecleaning on my Twitter account… as I climb toward 1,800 followers, I thought I’d weed out some of those I follow in a quest to get under 600, so I could brag that I had three times as many followers as I follow, instead of my old standard of twice as many (the ways being one of the Twitterati can mess with your head is truly embarrassing)… and I ran across @JonHuntsman.

So I did what I do with others I’m unsure of — I checked to see what his last Tweet was. And I was startled to see that it was this:

As you can see, that was transmitted at 1:56 p.m. on Jan. 15.

OK, now, remember the sequence of events on that day…

The State‘s endorsement ran that morning.

Around 9 p.m. that night, the news broke that he was dropping out of the primary.

So… it was widely known that he was dropping out only about seven hours after he — or perhaps I should say his campaign — was Tweeting out how pleased he was by The State‘s endorsement.

Yeah, a guy who’s going to drop out can still be appreciative — maybe even especially appreciative — of kind words. But why would he bother Tweeting it? Especially when he’s not much of a Tweeter to start with (his last Tweet before that was five days old).

Of course, I’ve been told there were people in his SC campaign who didn’t know he was dropping out until after media had contacted them. A confusing time.

But I thought this was a mildly interesting footnote.

Oh, and yeah, I’ll be dropping him from my “follow” list.

On the one hand Jupiter, on the other Venus

Rick Stilwell, a.k.a. @RickCaffeinated, shared this last evening:

Explanation: It was visible around the world. The sunset conjunction of Jupiter and Venus was visible last week almost no matter where you lived on Earth. Anyone on the planet with a clear western horizon at sunset could see them. This week the two are still notable, even though Jupiter has sunk below the brighter Venus. And if you look higher in the sky you can see Mars as well. Pictured above, a creative photographer traveled away from the town lights of SzubinPoland to image a near closest approach of the two planets almost a week ago. The bright planets were separated only by three degrees and his daughter striking a humorous pose. A faint red sunset still glowed in the background. Although this conjunction is drawing to a close, another conjunction between Venus and Jupiter will occur next May.

That’s Jupiter on the left, Venus on the right.

Very cool.

The rush begins for Jim Harrison’s seat

Tyler Jones brings our attention to the above placeholder page indicating Joe McCulloch’s jumping into the melee to replace Rep. Jim Harrison.

Boyd Summers, who ran against Jim several years ago (a video clip from his endorsement interview has the distinction of being one of the first two — tied with Harrison’s — I ever put up on a blog), is almost certain to get into it. If I see him at Rotary today, I’ll try to confirm.

According to The State, we might see the following as well: