|
January 25, 2006
anatomy of an inhibition
The stuff people say is priceless to behold sometimes. During a Washington Post panel discussion with Glenn Reynolds, Jeff Jarvis, Jane Hamsher (NOTE: Because there's some controversy over the proper location of Jane Hamsher's blog, I deferred to her celebrity URL), and Jay Rosen, an anonymous New York commenter leveled the following charge at Glenn Reynolds: New York, N.Y.: Why does Professor Reynolds dislike comments on his site, when by linking to the Transit Workers Union Site, they got nearly a 1000 comments of truly vulgar and racially hostile nature, to the point where the union had to close down comments.Not only do I agree with Glenn Reynolds, but I've been guilty of similar (albeit on a much smaller scale) conduct -- inhibiting people by linking to their blogs. While until today I didn't realize that I had actually been a victim, the fact is that for better or for worse, I have been one of those bloggers Glenn saw fit to "inhibit" on a number of occasions. (I was absolutely thrilled and delighted each time, but little did I know.....) Anyway, because it's happened to me, I think I'm qualified to describe what happens to those blogs that Glenn Reynolds inhibits by linking to them. First, you might notice that if you allow comments like me but don't get that many, you'll suddenly have a flurry of them all on one post. Strange comments from the type people you've never seen before and who you can tell are not regular readers. Then, if you check the counter, you'll first see that there are more people on the blog than the counter can display at once. Next, you'll see that you get something like 20,000 hits when you'd normally have a few hundred. In technical language, this whole process of inhibiting your free speech is called an InstaLanche, and it can be expected to last for days. Here's a colored graph showing the damage an InstaLanche can do as it runs roughshod over a blog's free speech: As you can see, eventually the symptoms die down, and your blog goes back to its previous state of being "uninhibited." Some of the new visitors, however, might like your blog, and if you're especially unlucky they'll keep stubbornly coming back to inhibit you all by themselves even after all other traces of Glenn's "inhibition" wear off. It's very inhibitating -- to all except the uninhibitible. MORE: Via Mister Snitch, a blog called Hullabaloo elaborates on Glenn Reynolds' censorship technique: Glenn Reynolds knew exactly what he was doing when he linked to that blog and sent his massive readership over there to flame them. That's within the rules of engagement. But it's chickenshit when you don't have comments yourself. And it's dishonest in the extreme to pretend that you don't engage that way when you do.He "sent his massive readership over there to flame them"? I read through Glenn's post, but I couldn't find anything like that anywhere. No flaming instructions. Nothing. (Obviously, Glenn was too slick to leave any trail.) But as Mister Snitch points out, Digby's readers consider this a flame war, and the commenters advocate a massive retaliatory email attack against Glenn Reynolds. That's because he's guilty of something worse than inhibiting free speech by linking to blog posts, and that's a thing called "eliminationist rhetoric": We are living in a political world formed by rightwing commentators who have made a fetish of harsh eliminationist rhetoric hammered over and over again into the ether until it sounds like normal discourse.This is not a new topic for me. And yes, I'm afraid it's true. I commented about this extensively in an earlier post. In that post, not only did I graphically demonstrate the linkage between Reynolds and eliminationist rhetoric, but I unearthed this very damning statement: I'm not interested in being anything more than a tool for the right and an echo of their propaganda.Glenn would probably deny saying that, but there it is! As I said then, "the inner workings of his eliminationist strategy!" What more proof could anyone want? Obviously, links from Glenn are goose steps towards eliminationism.
Once again, Ein volk, Ayn Rand, Ein Fuhrer!Is there any way to make the connection plainer? posted by Eric on 01.25.06 at 02:27 PM
Comments
Yeah, but you live on the uninhibited island of Kauai! Eric Scheie · January 25, 2006 11:26 PM I got an Instalanche for my review of the Serenity movie, from a link I shamefully submitted. That inhibition was over three orders of magnitude greater than my normal reads. I guess that post was really inhibited. B. Durbin · January 26, 2006 01:15 AM hmmm...guess I got "inhibited" by G.R. The increase was amazing. Nothing like an Instalanche. Didn't stop me from not turning off comments--didn't stop me from blogging either. The thing is, though, that blogging is supposed to give the people the ability to respond to the pundits. It's supposed to open up communication between the proletariat and the haute bourgeoisie. But it doesn't quite work that way. Esp. when the majority of people who comment on blogs aren't necessarily bloggers (as I now know) and when the pundits are most interested in constructing echo chambers. Meet the new media boss, same as the old media boss. Tish G · January 26, 2006 11:11 AM Thank you all for having the courage to share these riveting stories of survival in the face of the Reynolds link attack machine! (Maybe it's time that we victims thought about forming an InstaLanche Survivors Support Group....) Anyway, keep coming back! This has been very enabling and empowering! Eric Scheie · January 26, 2006 03:11 PM Maybe it's time that we victims thought about forming an InstaLanche Survivors Support Group good one! I wonder how many of us are out there....hmmmm..... Tish G · January 26, 2006 06:18 PM The biggest spike I got was a Stop the ACLU post and it was nothing like that! Do you think he meant that when Reynolds links to a previously uninHABited blog it becomes inHABited? Maybe he just mispelled? beth · January 27, 2006 10:54 PM You mean, like InHibitat for InHumanity? Eric Scheie · January 28, 2006 08:41 AM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Holy crap... Biggest spike I ever got was from Oakland Raider articles submitted to Raidernews.com, but those spikes were like 2-3k tops...
25k!!!