You emailed me a link the other day to an interview between Nick Gillespie and and Susan Jacoby. Finally got to watching it last night. (Actually, I only watched the first half an hour. I might get to the rest later.) I saw Jacoby on Colbert the other day, and I wasn't too impressed, and again watching this video, the feeling persists. I imagine she's better in her book, but from both appearances, she seems to wander, although both of her hosts have a tendency to do the same. It was kind of sad and frustrating to see Nick and Jacoby get bogged down discussing the details Iraq instead of trying to stay on topic, discussing her book and the theories within.
Also, I was kind of unimpressed with her assertion that blogging and the internet are inferior mediums to books and newspapers. I think I stand with Gillespie when I say they are perhaps supporting roles, if not new, equally valid mediums in their own right. They not only fill a niche that was once unfillable, they also act as both a check and balance on traditional mediums. The fact that blog entries tend to be shorter is not a damnation of the medium, which is what I feel she was implying. Just as book convey information that blogs can't, I feel the inverse is true. The key, as Gillespie was trying to impress, was a matter of balance. Jacoby briefly addressed this, when she brought up the much maligned fact that something like 80% of the country didn't read a single book last year. I think what she was trying to say was that people should read books instead of reading the internet, when I feel they should probably do both, getting as exposed to as many thoughts and ideas as possible.
As for the thoughts expressed around minute 22, I saw exactly what you meant, even mentioning our project to Allison when they brought up the topic of the level of conversation, soon after realizing we were watching minute 22. It just made me even more assured of the veritable success awaiting our project.
No comments:
Post a Comment