Foreword
Unlike online Instant Messaging or Chat communities (such as AIM, Yahoo Messenger, MSN Messenger, or ICQ), social networks (or "virtual communities") can be defined as groupings of people with similar intents, if not interests. Their purpose is relatively simple, to use the internet to allow people to interact with people they most likely would have little or no chance of coming into contact with otherwise, whether due to social cliches, geographical boundaries, or other obstacles. Consider it a veritable successor to or perhaps even "evolution" from having a "pen pal".
The approach of each individual website differs, depending on which type of person or "crowd" that website is trying to attract... And as with just about any type of business, there are often just as many if not more of that type of business that will fail, than succeed. Keeping that in mind, this is by no means intended to be a complete or encompassing report or listing as to every last social networking site ever to grace our beloved internet. That said, let us get to it.
Origins
One of the first notable websites to introduce online social networking would be HoTMaiL Personals, created sometime in 1995 (sometimes shortly following the induction of Hotmail, but before it's commercialization with Microsoft) which allowed users to link personals ads to their already existing Hotmail accounts. The popularity of the website lasted until approximately 2000, and since then the website has undergone several make-overs to the point that any sort of social networking is almost hidden within the mass of Hotmail, MSN and other Passport.net live links (and/or link rot).
An even more notable entry into the ring of social networking sites is the still-running Classmates.com, again, created sometime in 1995. While HoTMaiL Personals took an approach derived from the concept of personal ads (such as those in newspapers), Classmates.com focus of operation was to allow members to find, connect (or re-connect) with, and keep in touch with friends met throughout the various stages of their lives, via school - be it anywhere from Elementary to Graduate (extended to include places of employment and the various Armed Forces). This flexible form of exclusivity allowed for Classmates.com to attract a certain, albeit wide-based, type of user - something that would become more and more common in succeeding social networking sites.
Perhaps motivated by the success of the two aforementioned websites, HoTMaiL Personals and Classmates.com were quickly followed up an almost countless number of successors - from imitators (SixDegrees, Yahoo! Personals/Geocities) to abstract takes on the original form (Live/DeadJournal, Xanga) - which took turn to focus on literature, music, movies and their review(s/ing), as well as online journals (or "weblogging"/"blogs"). For the most part, all of the aforementioned sites have carried on in some form or another (with the exception of SixDegrees.com, which was sold to YouthStream Media Networks in 2000 for $120M USD) - but none would become a true social "meme" until the introduction of Friendster in 2002.
Friendster
Friendster targeted itself at the group which made it's precursors most popular - young adults from North America (most particularly the United States), Europe (most particularly England/United Kingdom) and Asia (most particularly Japan) aged about 18 to 29. Establishing a format that many succeeding sites would use as a template, each user created an online profile (or "identity") by filling out a questionnaire profile and uploading a user picture, then defining a gallery of friends - either by interacting with friends already using the site, seeking out people who use the site, or inviting friends to join. The service would then integrate these galleries, using the so-called "small world phenomenon" to allow people to always interact with a friend-of-a-friend(multiplied to whatever exponential value necessary), and not simply a random or unknown person (such as is often associated with spam eMails or Instant Messaging/Chat programs).
Friendster's approach, blending the successful aspects of its precurors and leaving out the less popular features, would set the standard for almost every subsequent social networking site that would be met with any sort of popularity. Friendster's focused targeting (aiming the site not only at the youth market, but targeting single youths) would also be heavily borrowed by following sites, most notably - MySpace.com.
MySpace.com
Currently the most popular website in the United States (accounting for approximately 4.7% of all website visits originating from the US)*, MySpace.com was born of the integration of "blogging" (as preceeded by LiveJournal or Xanga), user profiles (as preceeded by Friendster), grouping (mostly provided by the seperation of websites - i.e., Friendster for dating, SixDegrees.com for "underground" socializing, or even Ryze for business networking), and an internal eMail system (perhaps borrowing from the original concept of Hotmail Personals).
MySpace has gradually gained more popularity than similar sites (such as Friendster, LiveJournal, or Classmates.com) to get the highest hit count of all English-language social networking websites. It has become an increasingly influential part of contemporary pop culture, especially in the Anglosphere. MySpace currently has just over 95 million members (although the number of "unique" members is almost impossible to determine) and gets about 500,000 new members each week.
... But MySpace was not always the social networking giant it stands as today, nor was it always poised to become such. Before the creation of the current social networking website, the MySpace.com domain name was registered in 1998 to an online storage and file sharing firm. Registration was free and users were able to obtain a small disk quota which would gradually increase if they referred new members to the site. Due to slow service and a lack of revenue, the original site shut down sometime in late 2001.
The current MySpace service was founded in July 2003 by current president Tom Anderson (the popular "first friend" of each profile created), current CEO Chris DeWolfe, and a small team of programmers. It was partially owned by Intermix Media, which was bought in July 2005 for $580 million by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation (the parent company of Fox Broadcasting and other media enterprises).
Borrowing from the now-popular (or even "standard", as will be addressed later) Friendster format, each profile contains several "blurbs" including "About Me" and "Who I'd Like to Meet", as well as sections detailing the users' musical, cinematic, literary, and other tastes. A standard questionnaire is used to determine details such as marital status, physical appearance, and income. Taking the Friendster format a bit further, each profile also allows for the user to post "blog" entries, further allowing MySpace to be a more "all-encompassing" type of social site.
Although MySpace is more oriented toward the youth market, there are many people who are making careers out of promotion on MySpace. From bands, to celebrities, to exotic car dealers, many people have found MySpace to be an invaluable tool for advocating their goods and services. Like Friendster before it, MySpace has now spawned many imitators (and thus, competitors) - such as Facebook and TagWorld, but the most notable product of the popularity of MySpace has to be the Friendster patent approval.
Friendster Patent
On June 27th, 2006 - Friendster received a patent (US Patent no. 7.069.308) that covers online social networks, one the company had applied for long before its decline and recent recapitalization.
The patent is extremely general in its terms, covering the basic steps involved in joining a social network: entering a personal description and relationships to other users, mapping relationships and degrees of separation, and connecting to others through these friends. In such, seemingly covering the activities of many other social networking sites, especially those such as LinkedIn, that allow people to connect within a certain number of "degrees of seperation", which would leave the proverbial door open for MySpace's "Top Friends" to become a talking point of the patent's details.
In its simplest terms, the patent is referred to as a “system, method, and apparatus for connecting users in an online computer system based on their relationships within social networks." And although the Friendster patent could be challenged in either the patent system or the courts, opponents would face an uphill battle. “Once the patent is issued there is a presumption of validity that follows with it,” said attorney Bill Heinze in representation of Friendster.
The patent is more of a moral victory for the now-struggling Friendster, as even though it still counts 9-to-10 million users, the company has been consistently losing momentum in the global networking market, mostly to MySpace.com. Many users and former users cite heavy "lag" or "loading" times, as well as a lack of the diversity offered by MySpace as reasons for their leaving the site.
This sort of situation treads the fine line between property and intellectual property, which warrants a full-length discussion of its own. Another situation provided by the awarding of the Friendster patent, is the possible monopolization of the social networking class of websites - further pushing the ongoing internet properties debate into the political forum.
Failed Sites
As stated before, for each popularized website, there are quite literally tens of thousands that fail just as miserably as those which succeed (only in opposing terms), and while chronicling the popular websites may be a task of its own - finding all the ones that either haven't or haven't yet made it through the glass ceiling is ten times the effort. Here is a short overview of some of those that haven't:
43 Things
Adult FriendFinder
aSmallWorld
BlackPlanet.com
Babbello
The Black Stripe
Bebo
Bolt
Campusbug
Care2
Cyworld
Crostel
Connecct.ee
DowneLink
DoYouDo
Draugien.lv
Ecademy
eCrush
eSpin
Faceparty
Flickr
Frustuckstreff
Gaia Online
GayRomeo
Gayday
GolfBuzz
GreatestJournal
Grono.net
Hey! ASL?!
Hi5
Hyves
IMVU
Insider Pages
IRC-Galleria
iWiW
JDate
Joga Bonito
LinkedIn
LunarStorm
Miaplaza
MiGente.com
Mixi
MOBANGO
MSN Space
Multiply
Music Forte
MyGamma
MyNetSpot.org
myYearbook
Neurona
Nexopia
OkCupid
openBC
orkut
Passado
Piczo
ProfileHeaven
Rediff Connexions
Reunion.com
Ryze
Sconex
Spark Networks
Studybreakers
Sulekha
Tagged
TakingITGlobal
The Student Center
Thingbox
Tickle
Tribe
WAYN
Wireless World Forum
Xuqa
Yahoo! 360/Yahoo! Personals
... And while it can be argued that many of these sites are popular in a specific region or among a particular group of people - the overall popularity does not match that of the previously referenced sites.
Afterword/Commentary
... Glorifying MySpace, TagWorld, FaceBook, FaceParty - or any other "social networking" site for doing the same job as eMailing does, only with fancier interfaces and graphics - is like saying that not paying as much for water purification to the State, and in turn paying that money to say - Coca Cola or Pepsi, to buy water at a supermarket, is "better" or "Worse". Really, it's all the same.
* - Note that the site's traffic volume is based on incredibly intense usage by a more limited number of visitors. At least five English language sites have a higher "reach" measurement; that is, they are visited by more unique people each day.
The correction of any errors, whether in citation, punctuation, spelling or otherwise - as well as the addition of and new information, provided ample source information, is both appreciated and encouraged.
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
27.5.08
Technical Difficulties
I'm not exactly sure if this applies to all of human society, or if it is more restricted to the worlds I have been exposed to - specifically media [including but not limited to those involved television, newspapers, magazines, 'blogging '(for all fairness, this includes myself) and politics]. Really I can only speak about, for, and in concern to what I have come into contact with; I absolutely cannot understand
Organizations such as the Jewish Task Force, have claimed to have uncovered information that "proves" many discrediting thing about the class and/or integrity of Malcolm X - including, quote "The fact that Malcolm X was a convicted drug dealer who sold poison to his own people for profit is a matter of public record. As is the fact that Malcolm X was a pimp and a rapist who violently attacked both black and white women."* Now, I do not proclaim that Malcolm did no wrong within his lifetime - during his affiliation with the Nation of Islam, he was an active and outspoken racist against white people of all nations, merely for their skin colour - just as white were racist unto he, his race and others for the very same reason. Does that justify his beliefs or actions during that time? Of course not, and these are things that he came to realize himself, following a pilgrimage he made to Mecca (the Muslim holy city), and explains within the text of his autobiography;
"You may be shocked by these words coming from me, but on this pilgrimage what I have seen and experienced, has forced me to re-arrange much of my thought-patterns previously held, and to toss aside some of my previous conclusions... During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept on the same bed (or on the same rug) - while praying to the same God - with fellow Muslims whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white... We were truly all the same (brothers) - because their belief in one God had removed the 'white' from their minds, the 'white' from their behavior, and the 'white' from their attitudes."1
... And considering the widespread distribution of Malcolm's autobiography, especially following the 1992 release of Spike Lee's Malcolm X - this isn't something that can completely be ignored. And assuredly it did not slip past the notice of the wizards at the JTF, considering that another claim they make is, "... When Malcolm X returned from Saudi Arabia preaching the true Islamic message that Muslim hatred must be based upon religion and not race, the Bolshevik news media claimed that he was no longer a racist because he now was willing to accept whites if they converted to Islam. (How generous of him.)"*
Before I venture off too much further into this, let's examine a few things. First, yes - Malcolm X was at one time a drug-using (and probably dealing) "numbers runner" in both Boston and New York, who associated himself with white women simply to offend the upper-class white men of that time. Yes, he got caught and spent some four years in prison - during which time he both embraced his "outsider" persona (the other inmates referred to him as "Satan", most particularly for his red hair), and later - converted to Islam, that is - the version of it offered by the Nation of Islam. He doesn't deny that he was taken in by a more-or-less totally fraudulent organization that basically served to promote the greater glory of its leader, Elijah Muhammad. Upon his being kicked out of the NOI, his mind wandered, leading him to study and try to find "true" Islam (highlighted by the aforementioned trip to Mecca). He began to understand that what he had believed in several periods of his life before then, was either not entirely truthful, not worthy of patterning one's life after, or otherwise misleading in its guise. Gilded as the Nation of Islam may have been, even Malcolm could acknowledge that their existence was a very necessary one - even if only in the "necessary evil" sort-of sense... And those of us with the benefit of hindsight, especially here after his death - can make all the accusations and criticisms that we would like about his path towards what many consider to be a social enlightenment - but rest assured, he saw that coming, too;
"You watch, I will be labeled as, at best - an 'irresponsible' black man. I have always felt about this accusation that the black 'leader' who white men consider to be 'responsible', is the black 'leader' who never gets any results. You only get action as a black man if you are regarded by the white man as 'irresponsible'. In fact, this much I had learned when I was just a little boy. And since I have been some kind of 'leader' of black men here in this racist society of America, I have been reassured each time the white man resisted me, or attacked me harder - because each time made me more certain that I was on the right path in the American black man's best interests. The racist white man's opposition automatically made me know that I did offer the black man something worthwhile."2
So what Malcolm was, is most assuredly not as important as what he became... Rest assured, I do not speak of the policies offered by those in the NOI that betrayed him. The policies that state "one hand washes the other" and "the good a man does in his life, far outweighs the bad" - both must be taken in equal consideration in order to accurately depict and understand that man, and the life he lead. But to fully understand the life of Malcolm X, one must do just that - and consider that while he did begin his adult life participating in socially unhealthy practices, and was - for a time, taken in, used and eventually discarded by an organization centered around specific men, instead of men as a whole... These are not the true identity of the man known as e-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz. Just as those who criticize him, Malcolm acted and spoke out based on the teachings and confidence of his faith... And to criticize him for such is not just hypocritical - but outright ludicrous... And what are these criticisms and accusations? Some of the most recent include such as the following;
"Malcolm X was involved in many homosexual relationships in high school. His schoolmate and close friend, Bob Bebee, recalls Malcolm X forcing another male high school student to perform Sodomite sexual acts. In other words, Malcolm X raped one of his fellow black male students. Malcolm X then bragged about the rape.
By the age of 20, Malcolm X was already a homosexual prostitute.
When he lived in Flint, Michigan, his roommate noticed that he would sneak down the hall every night to have sex and spend the night with a black homosexual transvestite named Willie Mae.
Two of Malcolm X's friends from Michigan met him at the YMCA in New York, where he bragged to them that he made his money servicing "queers."
One of Malcolm X's closest friends, Malcolm Jarvis, remembers Malcolm X boasting that he made a lot of money having sex with William Paul Lennon, a wealthy white homosexual from Boston. Lennon hired Malcolm X to be his butler.
... The indisputable and shocking facts about Malcolm X's notorious homosexual past - including homosexual rape - are covered up by the Bolshevik news media just as the truth about Louis Farrakhan's homosexual activities in the 1960s are covered up."*
So, the JTF have a bit of a 'beef' to chew with Malcolm, and more particularly the Nation of Islam, perhaps even more so with its current leader, Louis Farrakhan - who probably had Malcolm murdered... And how do they go about picking their fight? In the time-tested manner that only a peaceful, understanding group such as the Jewish Task Force of America and say, any given sixth grader in America could devise - by all-but-screaming, "OMG-D UR A FAGOT AND U SUK." Who are their cited sources for these allegations? Along with other nameless friends, they cite Bob Bebee, a "schoolmate and close friend" that is (or at least was) so close to Malcolm, that he is completely left out of Malcolm's own autobiography, and whose name reveals absolutely no hits in relation to Malcolm at any point during his or Malcolm's life, when searched upon in that context. They also cite the 1960s media that also did not take particular liking to Malcolm, his actions, or his previous organization, the NOI... And how do they punctuate their message of "truth"?
"In your heart, you know we're right. And in your guts, you know they're nuts.
Every generous check or money order (which can be anonymous) made out to "JTF" (which is political and not tax-deductible) or to "VJA" (which is fully tax-deductible and non-political) makes a huge difference. You can also send cash donations if you wish.
Do not depend on others to do your part! G-d only blesses those who do their own part!"*
By stating that if you don't pay them some money, you're going straight to hell. Damn, I knew there was a catch somewhere.
... But such allegations as these are not exclusively cast upon Malcolm X, nor are they always motivated by race - although, for the most part, they do seem to only find their way unto those dealing with race relations (particularly in or around the 1960s). Take, for example - Robert Kennedy. Almost always lost in the magnitude of either his brother John's Presidency, or his brother Teddy's amazingalcoholism tenure in the Senate, Robert Kennedy was a necessary tool throughout the duration of John's political career - before his Presidency, and even after his death... And this is where most of the publicity of Robert Kennedy is given light. Why, you may ask? Because of the obvious emotional strain that was put on him during such an ordeal? Because of the heir-apparent nature that it imposed upon him, as the "next Kennedy in line"?
Of course not, the bulk of reporters focused on the fact that Kennedy bonded with JFK's late wife, Jacqueline Kennedy, during their respective mourning... Most particularly on the fact that he vacationed with her and her family, and might have had a relationship that extended beyond mere kinship... But that's only because there's absolutely no evidence, premise, or otherwise to prove it. None of the parties involved seemed too worried about their relationship; Jackie or her eventual husband Aristotle Onassis, nor Bobby or his wife Ethel... And I will add this as a personal note; Robert and his wife Ethel had eleven children. Eleven, and this was in the late-fifties-to-sixties - so it isn't as though contraceptives hadn't been invented - he was probably just too devout in his Catholicism to use them... So, if an affair had occurred between Robert and any of the women he had been linked to, considering these facts - we would probably have at least an abortion scandal to note, if not a now fully-grown child... But, like Malcolm X - he was quick to both acknowledge and dismiss the allegations thrown on him;
"Anti-Catholicism is the Anti-Semitism of the intellectuals."
That takes some courage of its own, when people state that you're sleeping with your brother's widow - to simply cast them aside, dismissing the allegations for what they more than likely are anyway, when it is so much easier (not to mention more appealing) to retaliate, whether through comments or otherwise.
Who is another example? Abraham Lincoln, many people seem to enjoy telling a story that proclaims that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation either did not set any of the American slaves free, or only set free those enslaved in the then-Confederate States of America as a political "power-play". Let's take a look at the document itself:
"Whereas, on the twenty-second day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, a proclamation was issued by the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the following, to wit:
That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom."
Let's see, "all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State; the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free" Wow, that was simple. Every state, part of a state - every person who was or is enslaved within it... Seriously, are there people losing sleep over this or something?
* - Taken verbatim from the JTF.org website.
1 - Taken from Autobiography of Malcolm X; ch. 17, "Mecca", pg. 347.
2 - Taken from Autobiography of Malcolm X: ch. 19, "1965', pg. 389.
Organizations such as the Jewish Task Force, have claimed to have uncovered information that "proves" many discrediting thing about the class and/or integrity of Malcolm X - including, quote "The fact that Malcolm X was a convicted drug dealer who sold poison to his own people for profit is a matter of public record. As is the fact that Malcolm X was a pimp and a rapist who violently attacked both black and white women."* Now, I do not proclaim that Malcolm did no wrong within his lifetime - during his affiliation with the Nation of Islam, he was an active and outspoken racist against white people of all nations, merely for their skin colour - just as white were racist unto he, his race and others for the very same reason. Does that justify his beliefs or actions during that time? Of course not, and these are things that he came to realize himself, following a pilgrimage he made to Mecca (the Muslim holy city), and explains within the text of his autobiography;
"You may be shocked by these words coming from me, but on this pilgrimage what I have seen and experienced, has forced me to re-arrange much of my thought-patterns previously held, and to toss aside some of my previous conclusions... During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept on the same bed (or on the same rug) - while praying to the same God - with fellow Muslims whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white... We were truly all the same (brothers) - because their belief in one God had removed the 'white' from their minds, the 'white' from their behavior, and the 'white' from their attitudes."1
... And considering the widespread distribution of Malcolm's autobiography, especially following the 1992 release of Spike Lee's Malcolm X - this isn't something that can completely be ignored. And assuredly it did not slip past the notice of the wizards at the JTF, considering that another claim they make is, "... When Malcolm X returned from Saudi Arabia preaching the true Islamic message that Muslim hatred must be based upon religion and not race, the Bolshevik news media claimed that he was no longer a racist because he now was willing to accept whites if they converted to Islam. (How generous of him.)"*
Before I venture off too much further into this, let's examine a few things. First, yes - Malcolm X was at one time a drug-using (and probably dealing) "numbers runner" in both Boston and New York, who associated himself with white women simply to offend the upper-class white men of that time. Yes, he got caught and spent some four years in prison - during which time he both embraced his "outsider" persona (the other inmates referred to him as "Satan", most particularly for his red hair), and later - converted to Islam, that is - the version of it offered by the Nation of Islam. He doesn't deny that he was taken in by a more-or-less totally fraudulent organization that basically served to promote the greater glory of its leader, Elijah Muhammad. Upon his being kicked out of the NOI, his mind wandered, leading him to study and try to find "true" Islam (highlighted by the aforementioned trip to Mecca). He began to understand that what he had believed in several periods of his life before then, was either not entirely truthful, not worthy of patterning one's life after, or otherwise misleading in its guise. Gilded as the Nation of Islam may have been, even Malcolm could acknowledge that their existence was a very necessary one - even if only in the "necessary evil" sort-of sense... And those of us with the benefit of hindsight, especially here after his death - can make all the accusations and criticisms that we would like about his path towards what many consider to be a social enlightenment - but rest assured, he saw that coming, too;
"You watch, I will be labeled as, at best - an 'irresponsible' black man. I have always felt about this accusation that the black 'leader' who white men consider to be 'responsible', is the black 'leader' who never gets any results. You only get action as a black man if you are regarded by the white man as 'irresponsible'. In fact, this much I had learned when I was just a little boy. And since I have been some kind of 'leader' of black men here in this racist society of America, I have been reassured each time the white man resisted me, or attacked me harder - because each time made me more certain that I was on the right path in the American black man's best interests. The racist white man's opposition automatically made me know that I did offer the black man something worthwhile."2
So what Malcolm was, is most assuredly not as important as what he became... Rest assured, I do not speak of the policies offered by those in the NOI that betrayed him. The policies that state "one hand washes the other" and "the good a man does in his life, far outweighs the bad" - both must be taken in equal consideration in order to accurately depict and understand that man, and the life he lead. But to fully understand the life of Malcolm X, one must do just that - and consider that while he did begin his adult life participating in socially unhealthy practices, and was - for a time, taken in, used and eventually discarded by an organization centered around specific men, instead of men as a whole... These are not the true identity of the man known as e-Hajj Malik el-Shabazz. Just as those who criticize him, Malcolm acted and spoke out based on the teachings and confidence of his faith... And to criticize him for such is not just hypocritical - but outright ludicrous... And what are these criticisms and accusations? Some of the most recent include such as the following;
"Malcolm X was involved in many homosexual relationships in high school. His schoolmate and close friend, Bob Bebee, recalls Malcolm X forcing another male high school student to perform Sodomite sexual acts. In other words, Malcolm X raped one of his fellow black male students. Malcolm X then bragged about the rape.
By the age of 20, Malcolm X was already a homosexual prostitute.
When he lived in Flint, Michigan, his roommate noticed that he would sneak down the hall every night to have sex and spend the night with a black homosexual transvestite named Willie Mae.
Two of Malcolm X's friends from Michigan met him at the YMCA in New York, where he bragged to them that he made his money servicing "queers."
One of Malcolm X's closest friends, Malcolm Jarvis, remembers Malcolm X boasting that he made a lot of money having sex with William Paul Lennon, a wealthy white homosexual from Boston. Lennon hired Malcolm X to be his butler.
... The indisputable and shocking facts about Malcolm X's notorious homosexual past - including homosexual rape - are covered up by the Bolshevik news media just as the truth about Louis Farrakhan's homosexual activities in the 1960s are covered up."*
So, the JTF have a bit of a 'beef' to chew with Malcolm, and more particularly the Nation of Islam, perhaps even more so with its current leader, Louis Farrakhan - who probably had Malcolm murdered... And how do they go about picking their fight? In the time-tested manner that only a peaceful, understanding group such as the Jewish Task Force of America and say, any given sixth grader in America could devise - by all-but-screaming, "OMG-D UR A FAGOT AND U SUK." Who are their cited sources for these allegations? Along with other nameless friends, they cite Bob Bebee, a "schoolmate and close friend" that is (or at least was) so close to Malcolm, that he is completely left out of Malcolm's own autobiography, and whose name reveals absolutely no hits in relation to Malcolm at any point during his or Malcolm's life, when searched upon in that context. They also cite the 1960s media that also did not take particular liking to Malcolm, his actions, or his previous organization, the NOI... And how do they punctuate their message of "truth"?
"In your heart, you know we're right. And in your guts, you know they're nuts.
Every generous check or money order (which can be anonymous) made out to "JTF" (which is political and not tax-deductible) or to "VJA" (which is fully tax-deductible and non-political) makes a huge difference. You can also send cash donations if you wish.
Do not depend on others to do your part! G-d only blesses those who do their own part!"*
By stating that if you don't pay them some money, you're going straight to hell. Damn, I knew there was a catch somewhere.
... But such allegations as these are not exclusively cast upon Malcolm X, nor are they always motivated by race - although, for the most part, they do seem to only find their way unto those dealing with race relations (particularly in or around the 1960s). Take, for example - Robert Kennedy. Almost always lost in the magnitude of either his brother John's Presidency, or his brother Teddy's amazing
Of course not, the bulk of reporters focused on the fact that Kennedy bonded with JFK's late wife, Jacqueline Kennedy, during their respective mourning... Most particularly on the fact that he vacationed with her and her family, and might have had a relationship that extended beyond mere kinship... But that's only because there's absolutely no evidence, premise, or otherwise to prove it. None of the parties involved seemed too worried about their relationship; Jackie or her eventual husband Aristotle Onassis, nor Bobby or his wife Ethel... And I will add this as a personal note; Robert and his wife Ethel had eleven children. Eleven, and this was in the late-fifties-to-sixties - so it isn't as though contraceptives hadn't been invented - he was probably just too devout in his Catholicism to use them... So, if an affair had occurred between Robert and any of the women he had been linked to, considering these facts - we would probably have at least an abortion scandal to note, if not a now fully-grown child... But, like Malcolm X - he was quick to both acknowledge and dismiss the allegations thrown on him;
"Anti-Catholicism is the Anti-Semitism of the intellectuals."
That takes some courage of its own, when people state that you're sleeping with your brother's widow - to simply cast them aside, dismissing the allegations for what they more than likely are anyway, when it is so much easier (not to mention more appealing) to retaliate, whether through comments or otherwise.
Who is another example? Abraham Lincoln, many people seem to enjoy telling a story that proclaims that Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation either did not set any of the American slaves free, or only set free those enslaved in the then-Confederate States of America as a political "power-play". Let's take a look at the document itself:
"Whereas, on the twenty-second day of September, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-two, a proclamation was issued by the President of the United States, containing, among other things, the following, to wit:
That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the Executive Government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom."
Let's see, "all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State; the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free" Wow, that was simple. Every state, part of a state - every person who was or is enslaved within it... Seriously, are there people losing sleep over this or something?
* - Taken verbatim from the JTF.org website.
1 - Taken from Autobiography of Malcolm X; ch. 17, "Mecca", pg. 347.
2 - Taken from Autobiography of Malcolm X: ch. 19, "1965', pg. 389.
5.1.08
Keeping History Alive
Tradition is important. To a degree tradition is what keeps us human, as most of our lives are dictated by patterns - and tradition is not just a big part of that, it is its very definition:
"A continuing pattern of culture beliefs or practices."
Whether they be noble or wicked - conspicuous or inconsequential, traditions are what help define our lives, our societies and our world. That said, some traditions are not meant to last - and one could argue that others even deserve to be snuffed out as quickly as possible. But regardless of one's opinions towards specific traditions or the idea of tradition itself, we all have our own traditions - for which many of us would fight to protect and preserve for future generations.
And it is within this mindset that we can begin to understand the divide between 'traditional' journalists and bloggers.
Once, there was a question posed of CNN and its then-radical format, "Is a 24-hour news cycle really necessary?" And we can see the answer to that in the development of channels like MSNBC/CNBC, the SportsCenter formatting of all the various ESPN channels, C-SPAN or even the hundreds of specialty channels ranging from programmes about history to surgery coverage.
And it is in those 'Breaking News' updates to which we grew so accustomed, along with the sudden and massive popularity of the World Wide Web that both the demand for and the ability to deliver instant news came about.
So what is the problem with this version of presenting news? Perhaps those who work for newspaper and television outlets are intimidated by the fact that the Internet serves as a level playing ground, on which they are forced to compete against the common man. Or that those who oppose blogs see them as a poor substitution from a tradition that they believe needed no fixing.
The common argument is that blogs are a cesspit of ignorance, ridicule and poor grammar. And that those who contribute to them, whether through columns or comments - are of the lowest quality of person, whether in opinion or personality. Some even still view blogs as nothing more than personal diary entries made public. And while it is true that a blog is a journal - it is not necessarily a diary.
The same comparison can be used towards newspapers - that they are nothing more than a daily record of occurrences, experiences, or observations. Besides, many prominent and respected journalists have blogs that they use to provide extra insight on the news stories they cover. Does that detract from their professionalism or integrity, or does it simply provide a more thorough and personal look into the lives of those whom the public trust to present them their news?
... And what 'traditional' standards are we fighting so hard to preserve? The ones that drive journalists to this?
There is a tradition much more valuable than any of that, the tradition of innovation - without which, we would never even be able to have this discussion, due to our lack of Internet and/or computers.
Much like the parallel rise of reality television and programmes that depict true-life situations, there is only so long that one can present realism without then being pestered to provide reality. And while we here at Bafflegate don't support the position, we do understand it. Because as so many generations and technological advances have proven - news is a tradition, its format is not.
"A continuing pattern of culture beliefs or practices."
Whether they be noble or wicked - conspicuous or inconsequential, traditions are what help define our lives, our societies and our world. That said, some traditions are not meant to last - and one could argue that others even deserve to be snuffed out as quickly as possible. But regardless of one's opinions towards specific traditions or the idea of tradition itself, we all have our own traditions - for which many of us would fight to protect and preserve for future generations.
And it is within this mindset that we can begin to understand the divide between 'traditional' journalists and bloggers.
Once, there was a question posed of CNN and its then-radical format, "Is a 24-hour news cycle really necessary?" And we can see the answer to that in the development of channels like MSNBC/CNBC, the SportsCenter formatting of all the various ESPN channels, C-SPAN or even the hundreds of specialty channels ranging from programmes about history to surgery coverage.
And it is in those 'Breaking News' updates to which we grew so accustomed, along with the sudden and massive popularity of the World Wide Web that both the demand for and the ability to deliver instant news came about.
So what is the problem with this version of presenting news? Perhaps those who work for newspaper and television outlets are intimidated by the fact that the Internet serves as a level playing ground, on which they are forced to compete against the common man. Or that those who oppose blogs see them as a poor substitution from a tradition that they believe needed no fixing.
The common argument is that blogs are a cesspit of ignorance, ridicule and poor grammar. And that those who contribute to them, whether through columns or comments - are of the lowest quality of person, whether in opinion or personality. Some even still view blogs as nothing more than personal diary entries made public. And while it is true that a blog is a journal - it is not necessarily a diary.
The same comparison can be used towards newspapers - that they are nothing more than a daily record of occurrences, experiences, or observations. Besides, many prominent and respected journalists have blogs that they use to provide extra insight on the news stories they cover. Does that detract from their professionalism or integrity, or does it simply provide a more thorough and personal look into the lives of those whom the public trust to present them their news?
... And what 'traditional' standards are we fighting so hard to preserve? The ones that drive journalists to this?
There is a tradition much more valuable than any of that, the tradition of innovation - without which, we would never even be able to have this discussion, due to our lack of Internet and/or computers.
Much like the parallel rise of reality television and programmes that depict true-life situations, there is only so long that one can present realism without then being pestered to provide reality. And while we here at Bafflegate don't support the position, we do understand it. Because as so many generations and technological advances have proven - news is a tradition, its format is not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)