With all that went on with the
Times puff piece on Rumsfeld's home in MD, I had a very busy weekend in terms of following the story and blogging about it. Before I had even seen Glenn's post later that evening, I had already started to take it head on over at RedState, the location I first saw it up.
When I saw first Glenn's post, I then learned about Malkin's post, and later, as he continued posting updates to his first article, the threats that started to circulate in right-blogistan; everything from hunting and tracking Times employees, to locating their children's daycare centers and alerting sexual predators to them.
But let's back up a minute...
In the wee early hours of July 1st, I put up a diary called
Reflections For This 4th Of July, which was the result of watching the 20/20 show
A Country Divided: Examining the State of Our Union. It was a lengthy piece on both my interpretation of the show, as well as my own personal thoughts on politics in this country today, the polarization of such issues, and lead somewhat into how I feel about being labeled a traitor, treasonous, in bed with the enemy, etc.
Perhaps because it was published so late, or maybe because people disagreed, or maybe even it just was poor writing; it got 16 comments, half of them probably my own, and 2 recommends. I'm not raising any stones about this; it happens. I'm just leading you into this diary tonight, however.
The diary I posted here was also cross-posted on my blog, Phillybits. I do this from time to time, cross-post what I write here, but I don't always do it. I know I'd certainly have more of a chance of having something I write read here, but nevertheless, I was proud of what I wrote.
Then came the weekend and the whole Times controversy. I got linked by Glenn. I was in the thick of it over at RedState. It was essentially my first foray into the evolution of a blogwar. It was intersting, to say the least, but it revealed a darker side. People started commenting on my posts, both in support, and also a few in criticism. One person even alluded to the ability to publish my personal information to which I issued a short "Go ahead."
It never happend. But all the traffic I was getting had me paying attention to both my Sitemeter, and Technorati, to see who was saying what, where. And so today, while checking Technorati, I noticed a new link that hadn't been there yesterday.
The post I put up on July 1st had been linked by Daniel Rubin who manages Blinq at what I guess is the Philadelphia Inquirer online. I would assume it was only apparent online, as well, you can't "link" a website in a newspaper, especially ones with long URL's. The article in general in which I appeared is a rundown of various blogs and what they're posting or saying for the 4th of July.
When I read down the list of other blogs and got to mine, I saw the citation that Mr. Blume re-printed from my blog, I guess as a teaser. Here it is:
It appears, to my anyway, that we have moved away from what we personally believe, to what we as specific groups believe. And what I guess I mean by this is not that we don't have our own personal set of values, or...a belief system that we fall back on as the ultimate justification for our opinions, actions, and decisions but rather, it appears we have given up individuality, that which makes us unique, in favor for the comfort, assurance, and safety of the like-minded group. The echo chamber, if you will.
I was pretty excited to see myself linked at the Philadelphia Inquirer, even if the story itself perhaps had about much to do with politics itself as the
Times story had to do with endangering the lives of Rumsfeld and Cheney.
And then it hit me. I re-read what Daniel Blume had cited of me and I felt I had to go more in-depth with exactly what I meant by the echo-chamber.
And so here it is, almost the same as it is on my blog.
Phillybits Makes Blinq @ Philly Inquirer
Although it's not for any breaking news or expose that I've never really written about, getting the mention is nonetheless pretty cool.
In discussing blogs posts regarding the 4th of July, I get a mention by Daniel Rubin at Blinq for some thoughts I had after watching the 20/20 special the other day, "A Country Divided: Examining The State Of Our Union.".
I'm personally honored at such a mention, but also for the citation he provides:
It appears, to my anyway, that we have moved away from what we personally believe, to what we as specific groups believe. And what I guess I mean by this is not that we don't have our own personal set of values, or...a belief system that we fall back on as the ultimate justification for our opinions, actions, and decisions but rather, it appears we have given up individuality, that which makes us unique, in favor for the comfort, assurance, and safety of the like-minded group. The echo chamber, if you will.
Now, whether or not this was one of the main premises of the 20/20 show to begin with, the show itself inspired me to write the post that I did, and in length; something not seen too often on this site.
I would like to take a minute to elaborate on the very topic of the echo chamber and it's constant presence. Some will very well argue that this site is an echo-chamber, and probably with a reasonable amount of relevance. Look at the sidebars with media links to Think Progress, Reuters, and Media Matters, as well as links to many major, but also lesser-known blogs from the liberal blogosphere. I'm getting direct injections of the same news a lot of us on the liberal side of the blogosphere write about. I visit all the regular larger liberal bloggers, including the Kingpin himself, Kos.
He, in fact, told me to write this post.
I generally re-post what's already out there, and then add some short commentary or snark to it. Yeah, perhaps it's not news, but this isn't your site either. This is my site and I'll say, expectedly, whatever I want.
Yet sometimes the echo chamber itself becomes a very dangerous thing and in fact, this was made quite obvious over the weekend with the right-wing outrage over a Travel section piece in the NYT regarding the location of Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney's retreat homes, I guess, in St. Michael's, MD. The right seized on the article as if it were a threat to the security and safety of Donald Rumsfeld, and furthermore, a deliberate attempt by the NYT to put their lives in jeopardy.
When called out on the fact that the information in the article was publicly available, and indeed had been for some time, some decided that regardless of the facts, the story posed a threat.
Concern for the safety of two of our leaders. Fair enough. But in the face of an otherwise harmless story. Yet what progressed after that was disgusting. Other conservatives sites started threatening, and ultimately did, posting the addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, etc of the photographer of the article, the editor of the Times, as well as other employees of the Times who they feel are traitors to the country.
And so the echo chamber echoed, from one right-wing blog to the next, with anger and intensity increasing ten-fold from one site to the next. How deranged did it get?
See the image at the top left corner that says "This blog is against torture?" Directly below it is a linked quote to Free Republic, one of the most famous echo chambers of the right side of the blogosphere. The quote is an actual quote of someone's suggestion on how to deal with individuals at the NYT who were responsible for the puff piece on the homes in MD.
And so when it became known that the photographer had gotten Rumsfeld's permission, it made no difference. And then when it was later confirmed with Rumsfeld's office permission was given, as well as with the Secret Service that the article posed no threat, it made little difference.
And so a call was put out for right-wing bloggers who pushed this non-story to issue corrections. To date, some have and some haven't.
The point of all this that I write? It was my final thought on the matter but here it is again, since I think it's a very relevant point to make:
Given the fact that it has now been confirmed that the story in the NYT was not, never was, and never will be a threat to the safety of Rumsfeld and/or Cheney, I have to wonder - with all the attention the Right put into pushing this story, riling up the freaks into writing all about this non-story, how many people, notwithstanding Rumsfeld and Cheney, but employees of the Times, the photographer who had permission to take the photograph of Rummy's house, as well as the children who some suggested should be hung as bait for sexual predators, they may have very possibly put at risk themselves.
...
Thus, the potential harmful effects of the echo chamber.
I don't know what else I should say here, as the post from my blog pretty much sums it up. I guess, ultimately, we often do get caught in our own echo-chamber, and that unfortunately, there are times when they can be destructive, and even violent.
I'll add nothing else, but I do hope you found this post to be interesting, informative, and insightful. Feel free to discuss.