Comments on: Associated Press: Dinosaurs of the Internet

By: JamesJoyce

JamesJoyce — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 21:26:25 +0000

Seems like the AP and corporate oil have the same challenge to their existence!

Evolution, progress, innovation, technology, reason and logic!

By: Bustednuckles

Bustednuckles — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 21:10:37 +0000

Maybe because I am a GEEEEEEEnius compared to the average subscriber?
I dunno.

By: mack

mack — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:51:42 +0000

Not unlike the publishing charges levied at Internet Radio broadcasters.
Similarly, this move may come from standard AP subscribers saying,
“Hey, how come we have to pay for this stuff, and you let the DFH bloggers have it for free?”

By: bigbrother

bigbrother — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:49:04 +0000

Where is the first amendment in this? Once published it is out, with credits given at the linked site, seems ludicrous to charge for news that has been charged for once and is history. Does ASSociated Press get a sydicated fee? To follow that logic no more utubes or articles on MSM?

By: jayt

jayt — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:35:26 +0000

Speaking of the AP, just saw at the SF Chron site they mentioned that Henry Waxman has subpoenaed the transcripts of Bush and Cheney on the Plame matter.

Do I “yeee-haaa!! now or in about 2010, when this finally is settled by the courts?

By: RetirinInFive

RetirinInFive — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:34:35 +0000

Say, Debster !

By: RevDeb

RevDeb — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:33:37 +0000

Hey Retirin’ long long time . . . welcome back?

By: TheOtherWA

TheOtherWA — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:31:04 +0000

Not only is AP being stupid about this, they’re ignoring the McClatchy reports on our treatment of detainees. Many newspapers have articles about the McClatchy series today, but the AP is silent on it. If it’s not on “the wires” it likely won’t be on your teebee tonight either.

By: cbl2

cbl2 — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:29:00 +0000

thanks !

By: Hugh

Hugh — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 20:22:48 +0000

Going out on a branch here but quoting Froomkin not quoting AP but Skynews: Bush in an interview:

Boulton: “I mean, you’ve talked a lot about freedom. I’ve heard you talk about freedom — I think every time I’ve seen you.”

Bush: “Yes.”

Boulton: “And yet there are those who would say, look, let’s take Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib and rendition and all those things, and to them that is the, you know, the complete opposite of freedom.”

Bush: “Of course if you want to slander America, you can look at it one way. But you go down — what you need to do — I think I suggested you do this at a press conference — if you go down to Guantanamo and take a look at how these prisoners are treated — and they’re working it through our court systems. We are a land of law. ”

Boulton: “But the Supreme Court have just said that — you know, ruled against what you’ve been doing down there.”

Bush: “But the district court didn’t. And the appellate court didn’t.”

Boulton: “The Supreme Court is supreme, isn’t it?”

Bush: “It is, and I accept their verdict. I don’t agree with their verdict. And it’s not what I was doing down there. This was a law passed by our United States Congress that I worked with the Congress to get passed and sign into law.”

Boulton: “But it looked like an attempt to bypass the Constitution, to a certain extent.”

Bush: “This was a law passed, Adam. We passed a law. Bypassing the Constitution means that we did something outside the bounds of the Constitution. We went to the Congress and got a piece of legislation passed.”

Boulton: “Which is now being struck down, I think.”

What an idiot. Bush not Boulton.