Went to the World Press Photo 2004 exhiibition at the State Library yesterday during lunch. The photos there were excellent. A lot of them are even more confronting when blown up to poster-sizes. A lot of them are the product of, more often than not, being in the right place at the right time, when everyone else would be thinking it’s the wrong place at the wrong time. There was one photo which was shot from ground level in an African country, with a dead body in the foreground and a street in violent turmoil the background. I was wondering how someone could have the brazenness to lie down on the ground in the middle of gunfire and take a photos like that when I read the caption and learnt the photographer was only lying on the ground because he’d been shot through the leg and had an artery severed. Unfortunately, the great majority of prizewinning photos in the news categories are depressing, depicting war, pain and suffering. Not unexpected, but it’s hard to find a more upbeat photo there.
I have more invites. Seems like Google is slowly phasing in a full user base. Again, let me know if you want one.
Update: Out of invites again, sorry.
Did you know… that police may demand your name and address only if they have reasonable grounds to believe that you can help them in investigating an offence because you were in the vicinity of the crime? The police also need to tell you why they want your name and address. Otherwise, you don’t have to say anything or answer any questions. That’s the theory. If you decide to try it out, you better make sure you get it right because if you don’t, you’ll be in spot of trouble.
At this rate, it will take 2 to 3 years to fill up my Gmailbox:
(0)
(0)I am swimming in Gmail invites. Let me know if you want one.
Update (22/6 17:00): They went like hotcakes. If I get more, I’ll let you all know. WaD seems to have a Google employee on the take and has a huge stash of invites. He was last seen pimping them out on Fuzzy’s site.
While factual inaccuracies and unfair play may have undermined the full impact of Bowling for Columbine, the New York Times reports that Fahrenheit 9/11 has been properly vetted and verified.
Mr. Moore usually revels in his role as the target of conservative attacks, and his delight in playing the mischievous, little-guy bomb-thrower has brought him fame, wealth and the devotion of fans more interested in rhetorical force than precision. But with “Fahrenheit” he has taken on his biggest and best-defended target yet, and his production staff says that on his orders they have taken no chances in checking and double-checking the film, knowing Bush supporters would pounce on factual mistakes.
Mr. Moore is readying for a conservative counterattack, saying he has created a political-style “war room” to offer an instant response to any assault on the film’s credibility. He has retained Chris Lehane, a Democratic Party strategist known as a master of the black art of “oppo,” or opposition research, used to discredit detractors. He also hired outside fact-checkers, led by a former general counsel of The New Yorker and a veteran member of that magazine’s legendary fact-checking team, to vet the film. And he is threatening to go one step further, saying he has consulted with lawyers who can bring defamation suits against anyone who maligns the film or damages his reputation.
It is, however, still a partisan criticism of Bush’s time in government. However, Moore is an advocate, not a judge. There is nothing wrong with that as long as it is based on solid, truthful evidence.
That said, Mr. Moore’s fact-checkers do not view the film as straight reportage. “This is an Op-Ed piece, it’s not a news report,” said Dev Chatillon, the former general counsel for The New Yorker. “This is not The New York Times, it’s not a network news report. The facts have to be right, yes, but this is an individual’s view of current events. And I’m a very firm believer that it is within everybody’s right to examine the actions of their government.”
Looking very forward to seeing this movie.
| 4 days spent in current location | |
| Previously | San Diego, CA |
| » Currently | San Francisco, CA (2/1/26 12:46am) |
| In 39 days | San Diego, CA |
| In 41 days | San Francisco, CA (End) |
| View full itinerary... | |
12:24pm (GMT +10.00) tomorrow 