I’d like to dedicate this post to one of my favorite skeptics out there, Sara from F-Words. Sara, unfortunately, has had a tumor discovered in her head. They won’t know if it’s benign or cancerous until they take it out, but either way, she has to undergo major brain surgery. If you’d like to help her and her husband out during this difficult time, they’ve put up a Pay Pal in the right hand corner of her blog. Insurance will cover a lot of the medical costs, but as you know, these things tend to cost more than just what the hospital bills you, in time lost from work and travel expenses. I’m pulling for a speedy recovery for Sara.
So I was listening to “The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe“, and they mentioned that the blog Quackometer got shut down by its webhost because one of the quacks exposed threatened to sue. Said flim-flam artist didn’t have a leg to stand on, but the webhost somewhat understandably didn’t want to have to deal with it, and dumped Quackometer instead. The site is back up now, and I, for one, intend to start reading it.
The whole thing really got me thinking about how off-base fears about unlimited freedom of speech on the internet are. I understand such fears—there are a lot of people out there who are full of shit, and building a professional-looking website that gives your bullshit an air of authenticity is all too easy to do. Think about how nice the Discovery Institute looks. But this entire incident really reminded me of how bullshit doesn’t need help to get out there. There’s a lot of money in bullshitting people. The guy in this case who threatened to sue seems to have a right business going in peddling bullshit, charging people thousands of pounds for the offer of lifetime treatment for a variety of vague ills. He’s already been barred from actually practicing medicine in the UK.
No, bullshit has plenty of support. It’s the truth that has problems getting out. The truth is so mundane, and it speaks for itself, and therefore it has problems getting the funding it really needs. The internet really does help reality get a foothold against well-funded bullshit.
Just being grateful for a moment. Cyberspace can be a taxing place a lot of the time, especially for political bloggers during a contentious primary season. But it’s also a godsend in an era where billions upon billions of dollars are spent trying to get people to believe harmful horseshit. Think about how the LA Times was peddling bullshit about rape that was happily corrected by people who wouldn’t have the money to get their message out without the internet. Creationism, abstinence-only education, “post-abortion syndrome”, John McCain’s moderate conservatism—these are but a few of the lies being peddled with a big cash infusion in the mainstream media and halls of government that are getting necessary correctives on the internet, correctives that might not reach the audience that they should without it.
This case of Quackometer really shows how the truth keeps its boots on with the internet as a distribution mechanism. The site was down for like half a week before the owner was able to move everything and start over. If he’d been working through a print medium or on TV, the first time he was dumped by a skittish owner would be the last time he ever worked again, since it would be so financially devastating for him. It’s really pretty fucking nifty. I often worry that this brief flash of freedom and independence will disappear soon enough. It seems like it almost has to.
16 Responses to “Reality triumphs and optimism flares”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
The Internet was built to have no central control structure so that in the event of a nuclear war messages would still be routed to their destination, barring the kind of all-out nuclear strike that would pretty much end all life on earth. Back in the goodoldays of USENET the popular expression was “The Internet interprets censorship as damage, and routes around it.”
This is why net neutrality is so goddamn critical. With more and more of the critical infrastructure falling into the hands of just a few corporations who have closely aligned interests the delocalized nature of the Internet is critically threatened. Internet Protocol (the underlying gizmology of sending packets from source to destination) is inherently delocalized, but it necessarily runs on computers and communications infrastructure that is increasingly controlled by just a few large corporations. Letting them choose which packets to pass on and which to dump in the bit bucket all but kills the very thing that made the Web possible.
they mentioned that the blog Quackometer got shut down by its webhost because one of the quacks exposed threatened to sue. Said flim-flam artist didn’t have a leg to stand on, but the webhost somewhat understandably didn’t want to have to deal with it
Man, this wingnut tactic pisses me off. They thug their prime target and harass everyone around that target who might use their recourse and redress (law enforcement, legislation, civil action, etc.)
Fucking thugs. They recently shut down a server I used by going after the building management company. Why? Server operated as a green, non-profit, community based co-op. Funds above operating expenses went to eco-friendly, pro human-rights orgs. OMFG!!!! That should be only for wingnut churches!!!!
The internet is revolutionary because for the first time in human history, individuals have the capability to both gather and disseminate information on the same scale as governments and corporations. This amounts to a historic reversal; it used to be only those at the top of extensive power structures could afford the information necessary to know what was “really” going on in the world. Now, most americans can afford an internet connection.
On one hand, it’s nice to know you’re not alone. On the other hand, it’s like watching a really devastating car wreck in slow motion.
Yep, Ellie. Anti-choicers have perfected the art. Abortion doctors will have their homes picketed, their kids stalked, their local fucking deli harassed. Operation Rescue or whatever they call themselves these days will harass taxi drivers that take women to clinics, picket hotels where they think women who’ve had abortions stay, and of course, harass contractors who try to build clinics.
Amanda @ 9:47: I was just done reading tonday’s racist & “Dem Rules” calls for Obama to denounce Farrakhan, but no similar calls for Repugs to do so (notably, McCain to denounce Pastor John Hagee.
We need to demand whether every self-described “pro”-lifer candidate and office holder, or ever Amy Sullivanesque “personally against abortion” fence-sitter supports the tactics we both described.
The option of turning their backs on persecution, albeit while tearfully clutching pearls later and saying, “What a world, what a world,” shouldn’t exist.
Great article. While I think net neutrality is a good thing to support I do think that throughout history humans have managed to disseminate information despite governments efforts to stop them. If the internet gets regulated than something else will pop up because humans are pretty inventive. That being said it doesn’t mean the internet is not worth fighting for–just that government regulation is rarely as successful as governments plan.
Holy Hell… speaking of Hagee Bill Donohue called out Hagee on his anti-papism.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/28/mccain_endorsement_angers_cath.html
Time to grab some popcorn and cheer for the injuries.
Bill Donohue called out Hagee on his anti-papism.
Oh pleeeeease Great Cat, let this blow up in teh em ess em. I’ll totally sacrifice a big-ass pile of catnip if this gets traction with the bloviating heads.
Sadly, the realities of the situation suggest that this will vanish in the ether. The upside is that the Fox Rightards dislike McCain enough that they might just be willing to give this some airtime. Fingers crossed.
Holy Hell… speaking of Hagee Bill Donohue called out Hagee on his anti-papism.
I saw that too, and dared to dream. Declaring the United States a “Christian nation” works only as long as each group thinks they’re going to be the ones on top. Once the Baptists and Catholics and Mormons and other politically active sects realize the other one(s) might win and dominate everyone else, there will be blood.
(Metaphorically, since I don’t think we have it in us to become Northern Ireland.)
Think about how the LA Times was peddling bullshit about rape that was happily corrected by people who wouldn’t have the money to get their message out without the internet.
Not only the lack of money, but the lack of a group of people helping to develop the message and share information. That’s been sadly lacking among reality-based people, perhaps because most of us have been complacent for a long time. I know I grew up with the naive belief that some things were just UNDERSTOOD. Like, torture is bad. Science is important. I’ve been shocked out of that complacency over the last several years and a large part of that is due to the internet. Without the internet a lot of us lonely progressives in conservative enclaves wouldn’t have a place to find common-thinking people having intelligent discussions amongst themselves.
My understanding is that in places that already suffer from internet censorship/government control (China, Iran, etc), the big thing to get around it in instant message networks. More gossip nets than news/data posting nets, but it’s young yet.
Speaking of the LA Times, did anyone see this pile of steaming sexist shite from Joel Stein?
What state does Sara live in? Plenty of lawyers out here who might be willing to write a “fuck off with your threats” letter to the quack.
There is an interesting discussion going on here about an alternative news site being sued by a guy for discussing articles that have already been published in a newspaper and across the web. It’s a real concern when freedom of speech on the internet is being threatened.
Thanks for your post highlighting this very important issue.
Amanda Marcotte wrote:
“If he’d been working through a print medium or on TV, the first time he was dumped by a skittish owner would be the last time he ever worked again, since it would be so financially devastating for him.”
That seems to be the tactic of choice: scare the conduit of the the message so anything resembling the message (no matter where it’s coming from) won’t get out.
Thanks for all the links Amanda. BTW tobi, that dude wants an awfully lot of coin (4.5 mil???) He is feeling “damaged” because people were discussing his bad behavior, which was a matter (wait for it) of public record? Way to shut down the open exchange of ideas and information