Saturday, April 11, 2009

Worth reading at Slate

Slate Magazine

Slate is always worth checking, but just in the last few days, there seem to be a remarkable number of stories of particular interest:

* read about what Americans now think of Australian wines (and how aiming for the cheap and cheerful end of the wine spectrum is not always good marketing in the long run)

* Here's a list of professional groups which have the embarrassment of having a subset that have become 9/11 troofers. (As I have suggested before, global warming skeptics who like to cite petitions of generic scientists in their favour should keep this in mind. There is always a subset of any group who will belief fanciful ideas.)

* Meghan O'Rourke's series on the death of her mother continues to be compelling, moving reading.

* For Easter, there's a quick revision on the role of crucifiction, and how peculiar it was to the Romans that a religion should spring up around such an event.

* You can learn that you are not alone if you think Twitter is a ridiculous fad that will pass soon enough. (It reminds me of all the hype over Second Life.) I like this part:
Much of what we do online has obvious analogues in the past: E-mail and IM replace letters and face-to-face chatting. Blogging is personal pamphleteering. Skype is the new landline. ....

Twitter is different. It's not a faster or easier way of doing something you did in the past, unless you were one of those people who wrote short "quips" on bathroom stalls. It's a totally alien form of communication.
* And you can read a lengthy and (to my mind) pretty convincing argument as to why Israel will bomb Iran in the relatively near future. (There are many counter-intuitive propositions involved, but it's a well thought out essay.)

Slate really is the best quality web magazine of its kind, I reckon.

4 comments:

  1. Twitter is no different to sending an SMS to your whole address book. Random, limited thoughts, fully disposable.

    Like having a blog, only shorter and more facile.

    The burden of Twitter, which that commentary omits, is that unlike writing on a bathroom wall, you have an obligation to "follow" other Twits. At least graffiti on walls doesn't entail a social contract to run around readying all the other graffiti.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Haven't read the bomb piece yet, but Steve, do you really believe Israel will act, if so, what timeframe?

    I know this is mooted every now and then, but it's one of those actions that, after a while, sounds plausible, but has a whiff of boy crying wolf.

    I don't have any thoughts on it, other than vague concerns over what the consequences would be, not just in the Middle East, but everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Caz, Israel has pretty good form for taking action pre-emptively, and the only thing holding it back so far is the technical difficulty of the task in Iran. As I mentioned a few posts back, it may be that without US help (which looks very unlikely) it is undertaken with knowledge that it is essentially a suicidal task for a big proportion of those involved, which would be a first time for Israel.

    Still, I expect it will happen. And it will secretly make the Arab nations quite happy, while they huff and puff about how outraged they are. But, as that article suggests, it may also hasten the establishment of a Palestinian State.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Still haven't had a chance to read the piece, have marked it for later.

    Yes, I suppose you're right about Israel being a tad preemptive, which tends to get them in a bit of trouble, not good for the image. I think that's why I've always vaguely concluded that they would never take on a whole country preemptively, and if they did, they'd at least need tacit approval / cooperation from the US.

    Obama is making very different noises about the Middle East than any past president, the picture isn't clear yet, but it seems to me that he would not support Israel taking such an action. That's a hunch as much as anything. Either that or Obama will turn out to be a total hypocrite. (Always possible with leaders.)

    Well, if they do act, it will have to be big, genuinely decisive. Not a piddling exercise like Gaza. I'll have to read the article to find out more!

    ReplyDelete