National Journal article sez net-activism is just political hicks

[jim bell]

At 09:05 PM 5/23/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote:
>At 3:06 AM 5/24/96, jim bell wrote:
>>At 03:31 PM 5/23/96 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>
>>>>Tommorrow, Washington's politically-powerful National Journal reportedly
>>>>will publish a know-nothing piece of "journalism" saying that net-aided
>>>>politics is essentially nothing but a batch of ineffective, know-nothing
>>>>nerds and back-water political hacks.
>>
>>At least we now know that the National Journal hasn't heard of
>>Cyber-Anarchy--- or they didn't understand one word of it.
>
>
>What is this "cyber-anarchy" (or "Cyber-Anarchy") you keep talking about?

(Yeah, yeah.  Okay, I forgot the trademark.  But I still can't find the 
"circle-C" on my keyboard!)

That's exactly the reaction of the typical mainstream media news person 
today.  But that will change, I think, and probably well within a couple of 
years.  

I keep waiting for Time magazine to declare the Internet to be "The Man of 
the Year", like they did the (personal?) computer in one year in the middle 
1980's.  It has certainly been covered far more this year than any year in 
the past.  Now that the traditional media has discovered the Internet, 
they'd damn well start covering its political implications.  

Last year, for instance, the media was apparently unwilling to admit that 
the main reason the Congressional hearings on Waco occurred was because the 
subject was kept alive on the computer networks.  By next year, I don't 
think they'll be able to keep silent on similar situations:  Too many people 
will consider the Internet to be at least their secondary news source, if 
not their primary one.


Jim Bell
jimbell at pacifier.com