Arranged Delirium

There’s an interesting essay in Wired that continues the discourse on Apple’s hypothetical tablet (which I think we’ll see in Q1 next year). The article takes an approach of considering what Steve Jobs brings to the process, but i thought it was specifically interesting in two regards:

1) The idea that it’s in Jobs’ agenda to save the media
2) The recognition that Apple may have a way to make money off of this

When I think of this theoretical device - given what we know - I do think that it could serve as a suitable electronic reader (there’s a reason why the Kindle has gotten larger). But I also think that Apple has the distribution model that could work. Folks are already buying music, television, and software “a la carte” in rather large numbers. Would it be surprising to extrapolate that they might also do so with text?

If you are working with Adobe Photoshop CS4, you may be encountering few annoyances - I certainly am. Some of these are simple, and I need to get over it; such as the exclusion of filters and plug-ins that I used to use. (The extract filter was nice, and I’ll miss it, but there are other ways to achieve the same thing.)

One annoyance that I cannot deal with is the enabling of trackpad gestures with no preference option to turn them off.

[/ rant]
Really?! We conduct usability tests for a reason…
[/ rant off]

Anyway, I rarely develop imagery on my laptop, but I frequently make minor corrections with it. Trackpad gestures males that practically impossible for me. Perhaps, I am clumsy, or maybe I’m just uncoordinated; but I’m obviously not the only one with this challenge. Adobe has released a patch (a plug-in) to disable this “feature.”

Our political projects continue in ITL 361. And, I have to give considerable praise to the students this term, who have done a marvelous job in discussing some truly challenging content without getting rude or obstinate. This comes while discussing topics such as: underage drinking, the genocide in Darfur, abortion (both pro-choice and pro-life), digital copyrights, among others. Well done!

Despite my liberal leanings (I’m a Moderate - but my Conservative friends all think I’m a Liberal), I’ve developed a lot of respect for Peggy Noonan and her writing over the years. She has a well developed piece in the Wall Street Journal regarding Obama’s presidency and his perceived disconnect that has led to policy conflict. I’m not sure that I agree with her - I think that the previous administration was so slow to act that many things were put off and have seemed untimely as a result (nonetheless the reflect stages of recovery that we had to go through). But, I do think she’s articulated carefully and quite clearly the approach Conservatives should take int he next batch of elections if they want to win: separate Obama’s personality (overwhelmingly popular) from his policies (unpopular). The independent vote will always swing the election - in 2008 we looked like Democrats, in 2010 we may very well look like Republicans.

I think this comes primarily from economic policies. The President has been patient and collaborative, as a leader should be, but it’s enabled the liberal leadership in Congress to put forth some agenda’s that are more extreme that the independent vote will likely care for. The interesting observation in my opinion will be seeing whether a congressional swing back to the right in 2010 results in an executive shift in 2012. I hope not - I like Obama and I think he’s been a good President thus far. He’s also had a lot to deal with. But as Noonan says- it’s his now. So, he’ll have to own whatever happens from this point on, including the eventual outcomes of the elections of 2010 and 2012. And no matter how important the actual work is, democratic government is the outcome of elected office. You can’t shape policy of you are not in office.

Students in ITL 361 are working on their political poster assignments. For some its a challenge to become engaged in a topic; for others, it’s a challenge to think through the process of communicating visually. For all, its a chance to face discourse that it frequently contentious and try to find a way to talk about the issues without descending into invective and platitudes.

As I consider on the nature of political discourse in this country - and especially the polarizing process of the last decade or so - I often reflect on the role that media has played in shaping that discourse. I’m appalled by folks like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’reilly, and concerned that FoxNews enjoys the viewership that it seems to possess given its extreme bias in programming. But before you label me as a liberal extremist, let me say that I’m also concerned some of the writing in the New York Times.

But at least with the Times, I can get access to David Brooks. He’s an example of a thoughtful conservative. I may find myself frequently drawn to his writing even if I disagree ideologically. At least I can see his point of view. One recent article of his actually relates to my earlier topic above: the power of the mediated voice of Conservatism. The perceived power is a result of the medium; and I need to relax when I get frustrated by idiots like Limbaugh or O’reilly. They don’t have any real power. The great fallacy is to believe that they do. That’s a failure that draw conservatives and liberals together!