Category: Weblogging

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

“Is it a scary ride, Mommy? Will it go loop-de-loop and make me throw up?” “Let’s hope not, dear. If you get sick, we’ll just have to go home.”

Hugh MacLeod (comment315):

Actually Shelley, the more I read you, the less I think of you a champion of people whose voices don’t get heard enough [women, “D-Listers”, whoever], and more as somebody complicit in making sure they stay that way.

Yes, I’m sure somebody like Seth takes comfort in your words [the writing of which, you obviously have a talent for], but I don’t think you’re doing him any real long-term favors, either. Pity.

Shelley Powers (comment316):

Hugh, I have a headache and I don’t speak ‘cryptic’. Explain your comment, please.

Jeneane Sessum (comment317

sounds like he’s saying it’s your fault more people don’t link to non-a-listers AND that you’re at least partially responsible for non-a-listers staying non-a-listers.

wow. hugh thinks you are Very. Powerful.

I wonder who started the “Shelley is this” and “Shelley is that” club?

hrmmm. It’s all so puzzling. I mean, I just can’t think of … OH! Oh yah. okay. I recall it’s early origins… okay.

So it’s good to broad brush stroke folks who have been blogging both shits AND giggles since 00 as ‘this way’ or ‘that way,’ is that it? Is that how cultosphere will keep on without having to look back at any valid points from those who make them uncomfortable? Or piss them off? Or who, as Scoble might say of a blogger who disagrees, “play the ad hominem card”?

Good job, Hugh. How Cluetrainian of you.

Trackback from Chris’ quips (oops, that’s Chip’s Quips) (comment318:

[…] The Bb Gun » Blog Archive » Eat the Red Couch Shelley Powers proves that juvenile obnoxiousness is not the sole province of male bloggers. (tags: linklove blogging blogosphere alist) […]

Shelley Powers (comment320:

I had thought about doing another post, but I really am not feeling great tonight.

Jeneane, have you noticed that those who have benefited the most from this environment seem to be those who want to restrict it the most?

What did Mena Trott say that one time? I think that was shut up, too, wasn’t it?

“Sit down, shut up”

“You have to go to the conference before you can be critical of it”

Scoble’s assertion in comments about writing THE book on weblogging, and he can damn well define it as he wants, and no one else need bother

“You’re helping no one” — this one I’m assuming to be a variation of sit down and shut up.

The people who wrote the original posts and comments that touched all this off–Newsome, Seth, and Nick Carr–they weren’t saying that anyone had to change. They weren’t even writing angrily. They were just saying, that to write glowingly of this environment, that to say that every little boy and girl can grow up to be BoingBoing if they just write good enough, is a fallacy. One that could lead to disappointment.

What I’m trying to communicate is that maybe we should stop assuming that all little boys and girls that aren’t BoingBoing don’t have something to offer, or to say. Yes, I place some emphasis on the girls, but a quick glance at tech.meme shows very clearly that something is wrong when so few women are listed.

(AOL CTO not withstanding, and frankly she has my sympathy.)

Who cares if they, we, anyone says these things? We’re not stopping anyone from disagreeing. We’re not even stopping people from going out dropping dewey eyed pronouncements (all the while, oddly enough, they ignore most everybody but the little circle they surround themeselves with).

Doc asked: what do you want us to do differently?

Nothing. No one is asking anyone to do anything differently. Least of all, sit down, and shut up.

Well, maybe one thing differently: listen.

Jeneane Sessum (comment322):

Shelley, I wish I had answers. I don’t.

These recent ‘declarations’ by some top bloggers seem to be a way of getting comments and links–i think we used to call it link baiting, but now it’s smart networking. Make it a conference track and call it a day.

IMHO, Doc = accidental a-list. he’s be doing what he does (and would be and will) long before any lists and tries harder than — i’ll say any a-list male and most a-list females — to do the right thing. Like, if frank paynter graduates to a-list, he’d be a doc.

I will name names as far as who i think is listening and thinking about this stuff, same as i will name names of those who I think don’t give a shit. Doc does give a shit.

What could they do differently? Maybe Holy RSS has the answer — maybe to deliver a cross section of posts from blogosphere, balanced by male and female bloggers and tagged with other b-z list characteristics, like ethnic diversity, global/local location of blogger, etc., to the inbox of the a-list each day. Maybe even with highlighted sections of posts that may be of interest, pre-filled hyperlinks, and even suggested response posts–pro and con.

Hey, let’s just automate the WHOLE THING and go on a long vacation!

Shelley Powers (comment323):

Lots of people say Doc’s a nice guy, and he is more than willing to link around to other folks. But Jeneane, have you ever noticed that Doc does not debate women?

I’ve seen him debate Dave Rogers dozens of times. I’ve seen him debate David Weinberger and AKMA and others. I’ve seen him link to women, but he never debates them. The most he’ll do with women who don’t agree with him is link them, with some vague comment of ‘interesting’ and moves on.

What does this show? That for all that Doc would be appalled to be considered sexist, he really doesn’t value women’s contributions to the discussions as much as he values men’s.

It’s not enough to link. Why can’t the stupid A list realize that the issue is less fame and links, and more being acknowledged that people’s opinions have worth EVEN if the people aren’t ranked as highly as they way — or don’t have balls for that matter?

Stowe Boyd discusses the recent stuff and references the Times article on fame and dismisses much of this as based on fame. Yet people who write anonymously are just as frustrated. Why? Because we all want to have an equal chance to be part of the conversation. Isn’t this what we’ve been promised? Isn’t this what Doc and David and Winer and the new horde of controllers have all promised? Stick with us, help us make this into a power, and you will have your say.

Hogwash. What’s happened is that a new breed of purely self-serving marketing dweebs moved in, took over, and are siphoning the power of blogging, like a spider sucks the juice out of a fly.

We have been told so much it’s engraved on our butts how this is an egalitarian environment, where any boy and girl and be heard. We now know this is a lie. Being heard in this environment, is no different than being heard in almost any environment: it has less to do with quality and more to do with marketing ability. And not just marketing ability: there is a strong sense of preserving specific patterns of accessibility.

Hugh will come back and say, well why not? Why shouldn’t those with the marketing skills be heard over those who spend less time on marketing?

Because we were promised this would all be different. But it’s not—it’s the same old crap we’ve always had. Where’s the great and noble universe spoken of glowingly by the Dan Gilmores and the Jay Rosen’s? The Docs and the Davids?

But all things balance and there is justice after all.

We webloggers hyped Snakes on a Plane, and we helped it some at the box office, but no where near as much as we assumed we would with all our hype. We webloggers gave money and hype to Dean and he couldn’t even win one primary. The only reason the Democratic party gives us the time of day, now, is we’re good for donations. But, for all they massage our egos, they don’t really think much of us as influencers.

We’re a niche. Webloggers will always be a niche. And that’s just fine for the vast majority of webloggers and journalists, the ones who have decided that they don’t care if the A list pays attention to them or not. So in a way, the A list is a niche within a niche: given some attention in the back pages of the main stream media, but rarely having any influence beyond an occasional issue or story.

We’re a place for second string professionals like Jeff Jarvis and Michelle Malkin to carve themselves out a kingdom and feel all proud of their top of the heap status. Go down the street, ask any 1000 people if they’ve heard of them and I bet most would just look at you. If you ask the person if they’ve heard of weblogging and they say yes, chances are its because they have a high school or junior high kid who has a weblog or journal. But before we make a leap that this younger generation will fuel a great weblogging uprising, these same kids also have had, in the past, hula hoops and go go boots. It’s unlikely that most youthful efforts into weblogging will last into adulthood.

There are issues that we could influence, but they’re not glamorous enough. We don’t want to influence a state senate race; we want the President or nothing at all. We bitched about Apple and iPod city, and then were completely willing to go, “Cool” when given a PR report from the company that all is well. More, we joked about how ‘good’ the people in China have it. (Now, where’s that new video iPod–gimme!) Our combined weblogging ego leads us to believe we can change the world, and we want nothing less. Where we could do good, we can’t focus our attention long enough to start making an impact. (We have the attention spans of gnats.)

But you know, it’s OK to be part of a niche population who likes to write to a journal online. We do it to share, to communicate, to write, to publish to whatever. And for every Shel Israel who professes to hold this environment dear (while promoting his book, you did buy his book didn’t you), there are a hundred, a thousand people who are quietly, happily writing online without worry about fame and fortune. They’re the winners, because they have something no one can give and no one can take away. People like Arrington, Scoble, Israel, Malik, Kawasaki must be scared to death on a daily basis of losing their weblogging fame, because what would they be without it?

That’s, in a way, the revenge of weblogging: knowing that the A list are nothing than noisy ducks, quaking in a barrel. “Look at me!” they warble, and think they have power. We know we don’t have power; they don’t have a friggen clue.

Mommy, that was fun! Can we go for another ride? Can we? Can we?” “Mommy?” “Mommy?” Don’t you feel good Mommy?

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

I wrote a post in Just Shelley about my reasons for dropping Burningbird. Chief among them is not having the energy to continue to ‘feed the monster’, as Sheila aptly puts it.

What does feed the monster are posts such as this: over the top, sensationalist, faked outrage, petty bickering. There’s such a desperate need to be linked, I felt one should be given–for pity if no other reason.

I also wanted to commend Dare Obasanjo on his patience and the honesty of his reponses in comments. Dare doesn’t need my support, as he managed extremely well on his own. Dare’s also a popular weblogger and doesn’t need my link. I give both for no other reason than I think he’s one of the most ethical and decent webloggers I know; it’s a joy to be able to link to someone who truly deserves it, rather than a monkey flinging feces around his cage.

(OK, that last wasn’t part of a dignified debate. Luckily, I’m not part of this debate, so I don’t have to worry about being dignified.)

I also liked what Mike Torres wrote:

Me: I really don’t care what people think the word blog means. I just want people to have tools that allow them to communicate with friends, family, and the rest of the world. Not everyone wants to be “famous”, so it’s important that these tools promote privacy, safety, and control to the meet everyone’s unique needs – and that they aren’t limited to text, but incorporate other types of media as well. Call it a blog or don’t. Whatever. As Bruce Lee used to say, “it’s just a name, don’t fuss over it.”

Another link I was happy to give, especially since I couldn’t comment. Note to the LiveSpaces gang: pleeaasseee remove the LiveID requirement to comment on Spaces. It’s ucky poo.

(Ucky poo is a technical term meaning: cumbersome, and requiring more effort on the part of the end user than would be returned as benefit.)

Question: how much money did the tooth fairy bring you for the last tooth you lost? A quarter? A dollar?

What, you say you don’t believe in the tooth fairy? How can you not believe in the tooth fairy? After all, chances are you’ve received evidence of the tooth fairy’s existence. I bet there’s any number of you who found that the tooth you placed under the pillow was exchanged into something else overnight. I used to get a quarter, myself, though I imagine the rates have changed.

Why if you don’t believe in the tooth fairy, you probably don’t believe in the Easter Bunny or Santa Clause, either. Yet you’ve eaten chocolate eggs, unwrapped a present come Christmas morning. Of course, the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause are from a certain culture, but I’m sure there are comparable figures for most cultures. With each, there was tangible proof of the figure’s existence. How can you not believe in these fairy tales when you’ve held a quarter, a gold wrapped chocolate egg, or a pretty present?

That’s why I like weblogging so much. We all have the capacity for unrestricted belief. We all believe in fairy tales.

Fairy tales can come true, they can happen to you…

Take, for instance, the recent report from Apple that reassured us one and all that the labor practices of iPod city are fair and just. Cory Doctorow of BoingBoing, in an example of astute and comprehensive journalism, writes in a post titled Apple does the right thing:

To Apple’s credit, they assembled an independent inspection team that visited the factories and did in-depth, random audits of working conditions.

Of course, the independent inspection team wasn’t independent: it was made up of Apple employees. Apple employees officially reviewing factories making Apple products.

What did they find at the Apple factories?

The team reviewed personnel files and hiring practices and found no evidence whatsoever of the use of child labor or any form of forced labor.

China has a large pool of available adult workers. Factories rarely need to employee children below the legal age limit of 16. Instead, those children that do have to work, work at smaller, unregulated industries and farms, as the adults move on to the better regulated, and perhaps more importantly, scrutinzed factories such as those run by Foxconn.

However, this isn’t Apple’s problem, this is China’s problem. Well, I suppose one could say this is all our problem if we consider this whole thing from a social responsibility viewpoint. But that’s so Web 1.0, as well as being such a downer, and this is a story of fairy tales.

…if you’re young at heart…

Back to the report:

The manufacturing facility supports over 200,000 employees (Apple uses less than 15% of that capacity) and has the services you’d expect in a medium city. The campus includes factories, employee housing, banks, a post office, a hospital, supermarkets, and a variety of recreational facilities including soccer fields, a swimming pool, TV lounges and Internet cafes. Ten cafeterias are also located throughout the campus offering a variety of menu choices such as fresh vegetables, beef, seafood, rice, poultry, and stir-fry noodles. In addition, employees have access to 13 different restaurants on campus. Employees were pleased with the variety and quality of food offerings.

The supplier owns and leases dormitories that are offered at no charge to employees, provided they help in cleaning common areas to maintain the facility. Workers are not required to live in these dormitories, although the majority do. Our team randomly selected and inspected a wide range of dormitories (both supplier-owned on-campus and off-site leased facilities) that collectively house over 32,000 people. Buildings are separated by gender, with female dorms containing a private bathroom/shower for each room and male dorm rooms typically sharing bathroom/shower facilities. The dorms have TV rooms, potable water, private lockers, free laundry service, and public telephones. Many also have ping-pong and snooker tables, and sitting/reading areas. All of the on-campus dorms have air conditioning. Visitors are permitted in the dorms, although a sign-in process is used for security purposes.

Hmmm, I wondered: why no photos? I’m personally curious to see exactly what an acceptable dormitory looks like. For instance, how many people share a room? Are there libraries in addition to TV rooms? What about families–is there any facility set aside for married couples, or a couple with a child?

I watch as the Ford factory here in St. Lou, the one that’s being closed down to move the work overseas, ends its shift. The folks come out, usually laughing, talking with each other about what the kids did last night, or the plans with the Missus or Mister over the weekend. Work is a part of life, but so is family, friends, romance, kids.

According to Lee Siu Hin who visited China, we must not use our standards, though, to judge labor in China. It’s different there:

How can western activists accurately understand the complex labor situation in China?

Unlike in many other countries, in factories in China the employer generally provides free food (lunch) and housing for the workers (the housing and the factory are always next to each other). This is an established part of Chinese labor culture, and one of the ways employers attract workers to come to work for them. It is a plus because as long as migrant workers have jobs, they will not go hungry or homeless, unlike what happens in Tijuana, Mexico, where workers need to travel for miles from slums across the city to go to work.

He mentions one high-tech factory where the dormitories house 8 people to a room. This is, I gather, an acceptable ratio of people to private room in 2001. I wonder what it is in 2006. I also wondered when I read this: are there terra cotta dormitories, then, among the other artifacts found from China’s past, if such is the way of life in China?

In addition, some research showed that if a company does provide dormitory living and food, these have to be provided as a benefit, and not included in the calculations for wages. This is Chinese law. The Gizmodo writer seems to think this is a good deal:

The most interesting finding is that the facilities offer dormitories for employees to live in, rent-free, along with recreation facilities, cafeterias, lounges, Internet cafes, a post office, a hospital, a supermarket and even a freaking swimming pool. Sounds like a pretty good place to work, in China at least.

So, uh, Gawker. You guys going to pay for my rent and hook me up with a sweet swimming pool?

I think it would be a wonderful idea if we convinced Apple and Foxconn to hire this writer to work in the Shenzen factory for, say, a three month period. It could be a vacation of sorts.

(update Nick’s also up for a vacation. I bet I could start up a business for busy SillyValley types: Rest and relax in beautiful Shenzhen province; internet access free; no distractions; plenty of time for ping pong.)

Nyquist Capital writes:

The bottom line is what appears to a sheltered American as exploitation is really a ticket to a life away from subsistence farming with no running water, no indoor plumbing, no stable diet. Read about life in New York City during the late 1800’s and you will find conditions far worse than the ones that exist in China today.

Yes, using New York labor practices in the late 1800’s as a measuring stick with which to judge labor practices in the world today is a novel approach. I wonder that the UN didn’t think of this?

As for the actual working conditions, the Apple report states:

We found no instances of forced overtime and employees confirmed in interviews that they could decline overtime requests without penalty. We did, however, find that employees worked longer hours than permitted by our Code of Conduct, which limits normal workweeks to 60 hours and requires at least one day off each week. We reviewed seven months of records from multiple shifts of different productions lines and found that the weekly limit was exceeded 35% of the time and employees worked more than six consecutive days 25% of the time. Although our Code of Conduct allows overtime limit exceptions in unusual circumstances, we believe in the importance of a healthy work-life balance and found these percentages to be excessive.
…
Employees work in factories that are generally bright, clean and modern with air-conditioned assembly line areas, and are provided with protective gear. There’s an employee grievance process in place, including a telephone hotline, a CEO mailbox for complaints and employee suggestion boxes.

According to what I could find, Chinese labor laws set a 40 hour work week, with 24 hours off on the weekend. Even at 60 hours a week, and one day off, this is in violation of Chinese labor laws. But what’s an hour, or two, among friends?

As for working conditions, the plant is manufacturing electronic equipement. I’ve yet to see an electronic manufacturer that doesn’t provide temperature controls and a clean environment. This doesn’t mean, though, that the environment is setup in such a way to be healthy for the employees.

For instance, if the work is highly repetitive, this could and will lead to repetitive motion injuries that can cripple a person for life if continued long enough. In addition, if employees are not given breaks at regular times, other stress related injuries and health related problems will also occur. There was nothing in the report on this. In fact, looking at the report, there is a wealth of information that is not given. No photos, no mention of breaks, no description of tasks, no description of how anonymous the interview procedure was.

However, webloggers believe in fairy tales, and that dreams come true. Daaa da da daaa…fairy tales can come true

Fairy tales can come true
It can happen to you
If you’re young at heart

For it’s hard you will find
To be narrow of mind
If you’re young at heart

You can go to extremes
With impossible schemes
You can laugh when your dreams
Fall apart at the seams

And life gets more exciting
with each passing day
And love is either in your heart
Or on it’s way

Don’t you know that it’s worth
Every treasure on earth
To be young at heart

For as rich as you are
It’s much better by far
To be young at heart

And if you should survive to 105
Look at all you’ll derive
Out of being alive

And here is the best part
You’ve had a head start
If you are among the very
Young at heart

And if you should survive to 105
Think of all you’ll derive
Out of being alive

And here is the best part
You’ve had a head start
If you are among the very
Young at heart…

Ah that Tony Bennett, what a singer. And what a fairy tale! Thanks to Apple, we now know we can buy, buy, buy iPods with nary a qualm, with visions of happy Chinese workers swimming in pools dancing through our heads.

Of course, it’s not as if we would not buy, buy, buy anyway. I once asked those who persistently complain about the entertainment industry’s restrictive enforcement of copyright law and use of DRM, if they would forgo buying new music or movies in order to force the entertainment industry into backing off. After all, grouped together, we could bring about true change. Couldn’t we?

But imagine my surprise to find I had no takers. No, not one person who complains about these things is willing to stop buying products from the very companies that have earned their disdain. Why one could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that most of the time, we’re loud mouthed opinion givers with absolutely no real commitment to the things we profess to hold dear.

The vision of many social activists that there was, in fact, a market for virtue — and that consumers could be counted on to “vote” their values through their purchasing decisions — was always unrealistic. Consumers primarily choose which products to buy on the basis of price, quality and convenience. They rarely pay attention to the social or environmental practices of the company that produces them. Only a handful of companies have ever been rewarded by consumers for being responsible or punished for acting irresponsibly. While a few “ethical brands,” such as Fair Trade coffee, do exist, their American market shares are extremely modest. In short, consumers cannot be counted on to drive corporate social responsibility.

According to the article in SF Gate, it’s the Chinese government’s fault. It’s up to it to change. It’s not up to Google, or Microsoft, or Apple, or any tech company to enforce human rights and humane working environments (which one would think includes schools, parks, maybe even the sound of a child’s laugh). It’s not up to consumers to buy responsibly. And it’s not up to webloggers to actually do more than write about these things in order to fulfill our social responsibilities.

Fairy tales can come true…

But for every fairy tale that can come true there’s always a scrooge, a naysayer, a dark cloud without a silver lining. The BBC writes:

The plant supports 200,000 employees, less than 15% of which work on making the iPod, and 32,000 staff live on-site at the plant.

Mr Kuczkiewicz said: “We are not impressed either by the report or by the findings of Apple.”

“Apple interviewed just 100 people out of the estimated 30,000 iPod workers.

“We do not know the conditions in which the interviews were held. We have serious reservations about the report.”

The audit team said staff earned “at least the local minimum wage” and that half of the 100 people it interviewed earned above that amount.

Apple did not specify what the minimum wage for the area was but the original report in the Mail on Sunday said staff earned as little as £27 a month.

Apple may not have been very precise in its reporting, but it has brought in Verité. Formed in 1995, this organization will oversee the plant and work with it to ensure that a minimum level of standards are met to protect the worker’s health. Only so many people to a dormitory room. No need to have to worry about messy labor unions. Healthily filtered Internet access. No more than 12 hour days. Five days off a year to visit family, parents, children. That sort of thing.

Good working conditions. A healthy way of life.

As Ars Technica writes:

Apple apparently recognizes that this investigation and corrective measures are merely the first steps in improving working conditions for their own factories overseas. With the promise to complete audits on all iPod and Mac production facilities sometime in 2006, Apple is, at the very least, making the necessary public move to show that it is practicing the social responsibility that we have all come to expect from the company.

Fairy tales can come true, they can happen to you…

So where do failed posts go when they die? Is there like a putz post heaven or something?