"… Edmundson, similar to some conservative or traditionalist humanists, believes in a command model. The public only valued literature because the critics told them to. The public only understood literature because the critics told them what it meant. The public only read literature because the critics lead them through the reading of it. Once the commandment vanished, so did the Western tradition itself, and with extraordinary rapidity."

"In the age of mass media, the press was able to define the sphere of legitimate debate with relative ease because the people on the receiving end were atomized-- connected "up" to Big Media but not across to each other. And now that authority is eroding. I will try to explain why.
It’s easily the most useful diagram I’ve found for understanding the practice of journalism in the United States, and the hidden politics of that practice. You can draw it by hand right now. Take a sheet of paper and make a big circle in the middle. In the center of that circle draw a smaller one to create a doughnut shape. Label the doughnut hole “sphere of consensus.” Call the middle region “sphere of legitimate debate,” and the outer region “sphere of deviance.”"

"If I get enough named supporters so it looks like a real show of force, I’ll include the list in the spot at the bottom. If I don’t get a big response, I’ll probably leave the list of supporters off. Either way, your expression of support will be appreciated.

Note that I am very upset over the proposed rule and the text and tone of my comment reflects this as best I know how without using profanity. And the proposal deserves profanity. If you work for an alphabet organization or otherwise have a relationship with the TSA that requires not angering the TSA, this is not the comment with which you want to be associated. Only the brave and the independent need sign up here."

"A logic question. Which financial professionals would be more likely to be audited: bad ones or good ones? Logically, I would say good ones – if you’re bad, you want to hide it – if you’re good, you want to prove it. Now I’m not saying all audited professionals are good, or all unaudited professionals are bad, but on par I think it’s fair to say that audited professionals are better."

"Unfortunately, some web sites alter the books you are reading on-line in subtle ways that you, the reader may not be aware of: they use blended books."

"This experience, I fear, maps the domain of belief onto the social domains of authority, of command, of law."

Redisintermediating the collective since 2008 or so.

"Today, possibly because of Photoshop and other photography-doctoring software, people have become suspicious of photographs. This is a good thing."

And I did not see this before I wrote my call to war. Something in the air.

Man does not like IA.org

Catching up on old posts of new-discoverd blog: Open-access peer reviewers' comments. Good idea.

Small, swarming doses of scholarship. Are they <i>still</i> scholarly, then? Or something utterly different?