October 28, 2004

4:41 PM

A new Slate article is a nice followup to a previous MeTa discussion. It deals so directly with the substance of mine and amberglow's conversation (and others, of course), that it's a little disconcerting. I remain skeptical of the "media lifts story ideas from MeFi", but you have to wonder.
posted by Ethereal Bligh to MetaFilter-related at 4:41 PM (29 comments total)

If the media lifted this story from the site, will the media follow it up with an editorial further explaining the hypothesis made in the story. Or is troutfishing turning evangelical to preach liberal philosophy form the pulpit.
posted by thomcatspike at 5:07 PM on October 28, 2004

I do not find it a stretch that like minded individuals with the same influences will more than likely come up with the same ideas, often times concurrently.
posted by geoff. at 5:12 PM on October 28, 2004

the lib'rul media reads us, live with it.
they've been known to steal story ideas everywhere.
(they also practice withcraft and want to elect Kerry and erase Christianity, but I'm digressing)
posted by matteo at 5:30 PM on October 28, 2004

witchcraft
posted by matteo at 5:31 PM on October 28, 2004

great minds, EB...unless Rev. Chloe's a member? She sounds cool. : >

i like withcraft better, matteo
posted by amberglow at 5:47 PM on October 28, 2004

I realize this is an issue, but I'm not sure what the issue really is. Why do you care? It seems like most ideas are generated out of conversations, reading other articles or essays or some other public source of information. If people are posting on a public website, their ideas are going to be seen by the public. The public, then, will take the ideas and write more essays, which we will post and have another discussion that creates more ideas. Wash. Rinse. Repeat. Pat yourself on the back for being part of the shadowy media underworld.
posted by elwoodwiles at 5:51 PM on October 28, 2004

It's in the air anyway, with all the rampant God/Christian stuff all over the place these past 4 years. I'm happy at least someone's stepping up.
posted by amberglow at 5:57 PM on October 28, 2004

Oh, no, it's not an issue with me. I don't even mostly believe that MeFi is as influential as a lot of people think. It's usually a coincidence, I think.

No, mostly I wanted to post this very interesting article as a followup to the conversation, and to mention how surprised I was to see it so soon after we were talking about the very thing. (And some similar examples: that one paragpraph she wrote about "Evangelicals for Social Actions" very strongly echoed something I had been saying.)
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 6:26 PM on October 28, 2004

Let's hope similar coincidences don't recur too often for other folk, so as to avoid clogging up Meta with like threads, if that's the motive.

Course, the link coulda made a nice coda to the still live original thread: however, we then have the conundrum 'if a link is added to a thread-end and nobody reads it, did it make an impact?'

Is there a consensus on posting follow-ups, whether or not it smacks of self-aggrandisement, or really does increase the sum of knowledge? Has the community arrived at a settled opinion anyway?
posted by dash_slot- at 6:41 PM on October 28, 2004

Chloe Breyer is the daughter of Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. Just sayin'.
posted by Sidhedevil at 7:54 PM on October 28, 2004

That's interesting. I did not know that. Thanks.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 7:55 PM on October 28, 2004

In regards to the pehonemenon of something on MeFi makes it to the papers/news, with quotes and ideas that were originally aired in the (or a) thread at Mefi, I thought I saw this happening everywhere a while back. Every time I bothered to buy a paper or turn the culture news on, I caught myself muttering under my breath "so taken from the blue, that is." It was even nicely timed, two weeks for newspapers, one month for TV. Odd huh?
After the first twinges of wigged-outness and annoyance for 'not mentioning source' wore off, I thought it was very cool indeed that MeFi can have that kind of reach.
Then again, it could all be well-times coincidences, really.
posted by dabitch at 9:01 PM on October 28, 2004

spell check timed out on me. sorry. withcraft it was. yup.
posted by dabitch at 9:02 PM on October 28, 2004

I lost interest in the original MeTa thread before it became, apparently, interesting. There's a passel of lefty Christian types here.
posted by kenko at 10:02 PM on October 28, 2004

God you people are full of yourselves. Grow up.

*Bookmark! Bookmark!: CLASS: Article Idea: KEYWORD: PlunderSchmucks TITLE: "Does Old Media Plagiarise New Media?"*
posted by Opus Dark at 11:17 PM on October 28, 2004

Opus, without rereading the thread (because the huge number of comments [15] is an insurmountable barrier), I don't recall anyone here seriously suggesting that the MeTa discussion inspired this article. Although, you know, it might have. But I doubt it.

Like I said, I posted it because it was a timely and strangely extremely relevant continuation of the earlier MeTa discussion. I'll admit that I shoehorned the "on MeFi first, then the media" thing into it to make it fit better into the grey (because I really feel that it didn't belong as a FPP to the blue).
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:59 AM on October 29, 2004

(No, no, Bligh. The comment was meant to be read as if I were an Old Media writer stalking new material; thus I deride the notion that such is ever done, while immediately doing it myself - by bookmarking the thread as a source for a possible article; it's too opaque and after it went up I realized as much, but hoped its opacity (and my reputation) would earn it the right to be roundly ignored. Then came you.)
posted by Opus Dark at 1:43 AM on October 29, 2004

Opacity is vastly underrated. Bea Arthur would approve.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 1:54 AM on October 29, 2004

Thanks for the follow-up EB, this is quite interesting.
posted by sciurus at 4:45 AM on October 29, 2004

but you have to wonder

I haven't wondered for more than 10 years, when writers for both Melrose Place and Deep Space Nine began creating whole and multiple storylines from posts I made on Prodigy and then AOL.

Why do you think I'm hardly ever serious around here? I'm paranoid because of those incidents, that's why.
posted by WolfDaddy at 5:48 AM on October 29, 2004

I post nothing here without printing it out on hardcopy first and mailing it to myself, registered mail.

it's fun to get mail
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 6:14 AM on October 29, 2004

I don't see a connection. And in any case, on the larger subject, which is more important, to be influential or to be credited?
posted by rushmc at 6:50 AM on October 29, 2004

Credited while alive and influential when dead seems like the best route.
posted by Cyrano at 7:33 AM on October 29, 2004

Why do you think I'm hardly ever serious around here? I'm paranoid because of those incidents, that's why.

just wait until we release the Mime Extravaganza Wolf! based on your facial expressions of the last 10 years.
posted by th3ph17 at 8:57 AM on October 29, 2004

Is it influential or does the collective hive mind of the blue just have their finger on the pulse of.. well nearly everything from politics to obscure architechture. Either way, it's cool. Ons stop-shopping for you latest juicy [insert whatever here]. No wait don't do that. ;)
posted by dabitch at 9:00 AM on October 29, 2004

just wait until we release

We? WE?! You're all Illuminati. I knew it all along.
posted by WolfDaddy at 9:55 AM on October 29, 2004

I'm kind of thinking that the Blue does not influence the "Liberal Media." The Blue is the "Liberal Media."

If other people are getting something other than the party-supplied talking points from here, either directly or because we're amplifying someone else thoughts or information and adding to the discourse level, on any side of the fence, then more to the good for all of us.

The Slate piece lining up wth a discussion here is cool and all, but I'm far from surprised when this stuff happens anymore. It just means we (as Mefites) are plugged in to the world, and whether we're leading or not, we are pushing in the right direction.

(Jeezus. Sorry about the pollyannaism. I mean it, but -- anyone up for a round of Kum Ba Ya?)
posted by chicobangs at 10:25 AM on October 29, 2004

WD, were you responsable for SuperSmart Bashir? Admit it, you were.

That Dominon = shapeshifters thing was pretty rad too. Kudos.
posted by hughbot at 10:53 AM on October 29, 2004

Actually, hughbot, I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that I was responsible for the Dominion itself on DS9, and though a lot of it could be considered just coincidence, I doubt it highly, as I know one of the producers monitored the Star Trek boards on Prodigy, and was trolling for ideas to make DS9 more conflict-y than Next Generation ever thought of being.

The Melrose Place connection was more direct, since I actually had established an online friendship with the producer and one of the writers of the show before they revealed to me who they were. No coincidences there.

If you want more details ... e-mail me. I don't want to go off-topic TOO much.
posted by WolfDaddy at 11:11 AM on October 29, 2004