ABOUT CLICKED

The modern news consumer ignores Weblogs and online citizen journalism at his own peril. But not everyone has the time to keep track of what's going on the Web. With this blog we hope to track the highlights of what's being discussed online so when news breaks from the Web, we're ready.

Will Femia is a Weblog enthusiast who, through good fortune and dumb luck, was introduced to the form as his position as chat producer for MSNBC.com careered into obsolescence. On any given day, Will can be found having already spent an unhealthy amount of time squinting at a computer screen.

Send a message to Will at spotter@msnbc.com



If it wasn't for bad luck...

Posted: Monday, September 24, 2007 1:29 PM by Will Femia
Filed Under:

BoingBoing has all the deets and links on that MIT student who was arrested at the airport in Boston. I don't think mine is the majority opinion, but "She's lucky to be in a cell as opposed to the morgue" is one of the most galling remarks I've ever heard. In fact it's the over-reacting security team who's lucky - lucky their embarrassing string of knee-jerk panic and jumping at shadows hasn't been crowned with the loss of a promising young American life. I know the counter-argument is that I'm the one who should feel lucky that this security force is so zealous about my safety and protection. I might feel luckier if I thought they had the ability to recognize an actual bomb and not just freak out over everything that looks like a red wire/blue wire suspense scene from a Die Hard movie. God forbid another Shoey Shoebomber strolls through while everyone is dazzled by blinking lights.

At least there's Bruce Schneier or I'd think there was something wrong with me.

Speaking of airport security ridiculousness, how clever of this terrorist to try to use a nun's habit as a disguise.

Ten things to keep in mind to avoid getting tased, bro.

"A police officer is on paid leave after dash-cam video shows him using a taser over and over again on a woman even after she's handcuffed."

"Orange County sheriff's deputies on Tuesday defended their decision to use a stun gun on a 15-year-old autistic boy who ran away from his parents and later dashed into traffic." Contains another one of those lines about luck: "If that were your son, would you want him Tased or hit by a car?"

Remember that YouTube video of the guy pulled over by a cop who ends up threatening to make up charges against him? They fired the cop.

This is a comparison of two similar ad campaigns. I'm less interested in the competition than I am impressed with the rendering. The second set has kind of a Kuato quality.

Here's an interesting little story that may have a lesson for us all.  Chewywong took this picture of his friend. Someone else noticed that Virgin Mobile was using a Flickr photo in an ad with an insulting context added. Sure enough, it was the same photo. Now the family of the girl in the photo is suing Virgin. It's a pretty tangled Web.

Tecktonik dance craze takes Paris by storm - I love this part: "The leaders of the Tecktonik craze can be found at meeting spots around Paris, including in the centre near the Pompidou modern art gallery, where dance-offs are organised between teams." What's French for "Bring it on?"

Dan Rather's producer Mary Mapes sticks up for her former boss and gives her perspective on the whole "Killian Memos" affair. She's pretty self righteous about it all, arguing that the questions about the documents missed the point about Bush's military service - a gambit that has come to be derided as "fake but accurate." Ironically, a criticism that went largely overlooked at the time was that by sloppily rushing the story to air, Mapes and crew undermined the work of more serious efforts to bring the story of Bush's military record into the public arena. Mapes herself points this out without realizing it.

Yet another twist in the story of the hacking of the anti-piracy company MediaDefender. Apparently the exposed documents reveal that the company was involved in illegal activities against Pirate Bay trackers. "The charges are infrastructural sabotage, denial of service attacks, hacking and spamming, all of these on a commercial level."

Did you see the cast list on this Southland Tales movie? I'm predicting media saturation.

It's funny enough that God replied to a lawsuit against him (Him) but the associated AP photo is hysterical.

Sometimes sarcasm is hard to recognize, particularly if you're not familiar with the person doing the writing. The source he's quoting has a lot of interesting entries on the war experience worth reading.

Speaking of waiting for loved ones to come home from war, I don't mind saying my colleagues did a great job on this piece.

Dial DIR-ECT-IONS worked when I tried. It didn't give the same directions I would have given, but it gave me free directions across New York City. You have to be patient with the computer lady's questions but the directions arrived at my phone before I even hung up.

Speaking of getting local advice online, Rotten Neighbor says it's about finding out about bad neighbors before you move next to them. I reckon it's more about complaining about the neighbors you already live next to. I imagine if this catches on it'll be the source of some significant fighting.

This explanation of photographic lighting led me to "Lighting Essentials for photographers." There are a lot of ads here but it's not hard to find the free, easy to understand lighting set-ups used for different effects. If you're like me and your interest in photography stems from the fact that you own a camera and that's about it, the idea of using umbrellas and soft boxes is pretty foreign so this is handy. Frankly, the sample shots on the site look a little cheesy to me, but I was recently reading acclaim for this photographer (NOTE: Some artful nudes. Stray, unshrouded boobage possible.) and his skills with lighting were particularly celebrated. At least now I have some sense of what that means.

Speaking the basics, The AudioFile: basics of uncompressed digital audio - (In case you hesitate to get into something with a "next page" button at the bottom, it's only three pages.

"Welcome to the wonderful world of umbrage, the new language of American politics."

lolsecretz - Mixes lolcats grammar with Post Secrets confessionals.

Extreme rich/poor divides - They're photos of ghettos next to wealthy neighborhoods. Pretty amazing.

Speaking of rich/poor, "the politics and economics of inequality" is the theme of Paul Krugman's new (and now free) blog. ADDING: I remember the NYTimes Op-Ed writers being more relevant to the national discussion. Friedman, Krugman, even Dowd were important opinions to consider. I wonder if they'll regain some of that with the subscription wall down.

Speaking of the Times being all free now, "Now that the NY Times has discontinued their Times Select subscription program and made much more of their 150+ years of content available for anyone to read and link to, let's take a look at some of the more notable items that the non-subscriber has been missing."

Most Voters Say Election 2008 is Annoying and a Waste of Time - It's funny because it's true - but it's not an Onion headline (again, because it's true).

Ralph's Recommendations:

Urban Stickman Sniper 2: Vengeance
Get revenge on the stickman mob boss for making you kill your own father.

This one's pretty violent and very challenging. I still haven't beaten the first level. The key is to wait for the right shot. (Oh, and if you wait for the fuel truck in level one, you can shoot the driver and blow up the truck to kill some of the bad guys.)
 
Hope you enjoy it!
-Ralph

Will remarks: As with the first one, I'm amazed at how cerebral this game is in spite of its meager rendering.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

No, Will.  Trust me on this.  The fact that someone agrees with you re: the Logan incident only indicates that you have company in being staggeringly wrong.

Mr. Rational, College Station, TX (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 2:15 PM)

I'm really surprised you missed all the articles and discussion about a general strike that have been going around.

Most started from this Harper's article, http://harpers.org/archive/2007/10/0081720 but there is plenty more, too.

Brad, Colorado Springs (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 3:44 PM)

Brad, there's often a lag before I see something because it has to generate some popularity first. Of course right now everything is about Ahmadinejad so maybe it's just being bumped from the headlines.

Will Femia (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 3:53 PM)

Will, there's nothing wrong with you.  The instant the word "Boston" was mentioned in connection with the "fake bomb" incident, you can bet millions of pairs of eyes rolled.  That the "bomb" was a simple electronics breadboard with LEDs and a battery attached only proves the point.  How many times can the Boston Police display their utter incompetence before heads start to roll?

NW, Bellevue, WA (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 4:15 PM)

I dont believe it was an overreaction at all. You walk into any airport in the US with a flashing circuit board and play-doh and see where that gets you. "I was proud of my art and wanted to show it off"??? Are you kidding me? Who doesn't see this as a shameless attempt to get in the news and then play dumb about the whole thing? This is as stupid as the "don't tase me, bro" idiot.

Sean, OH (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 4:32 PM)

"Mr. Rational", it is you who is "staggeringly" wrong. A flashy nametag does not equal an airport threat. Get a clue.

Kate, Calgary, AB (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 5:08 PM)

I guess you guys are too young to remember the prevelence of PCP back in the 80s.  Many a stoned, armed, and completely out of control person was shot - by cops and with bullets - multiple times to no avail.  It took quite some time for them to realize that they had been shot and die.  It was also impossible to reason with them.  I myself was attacked by a homeless woman in the middle of a psychotic episode.  She was violent and could not be reasoned with.  It took me quite some time and significant effort to defend myself and eventually subdue her.  Fortunately for her, I had no gun (or taser); it would have been a righteous justified shoot.  BTW this was in broad daylight on a crowded city corner and the incident was over by the time someone was able to get the police.  So yeah, taser is better than dead.  Literally, long live the taser. (and long live many of us BECAUSE of the taser)

tunatofu (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 5:11 PM)

Given that the 9/11 hijackers started from Logan Airport, I agree that she is lucky to be in jail than in the morgue.  She is also criminally stupid and deserves as much punishment as the law can give her.  I can only hope FEDERAL charges are pending as well.  Massachusetts state may go easy on her but the Fed WONT.

tunatofu (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 5:14 PM)

So why can't police identify a fake bomb? Maybe because they don't have systems in place to identify REAL bombs - instead everyone is running around looking for stuff like 6 oz. liquid containers. We have bomb sniffing dogs and sensors that apparently aren't being used. Great news for the terrorists - and by the way, it's this kind of craziness that makes terrorists believe they are winning .

Bob, Bloomfield, NJ (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 6:26 PM)

MIT musta lowered their standards (a lot).

Pywackett TheCat (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 6:35 PM)

That remark made by the Feds is an indication of the overall mentality that has kept me from flying for some time now. Ever since 9/11 the Feds have had a panic attack kind of mentality towards secuity. It all started with the stupidity of banning finger nail clippers and now its devolved into public threats. Anyone who actually thinks they are safer with people like this in a position of authority are probably the same people who happily voted for Bush both times and still think the Iraqi war is a good thing.

Depite what I just said that art student is just plain old dumb. She will pay a price for what she did and she will be treated worse than she deserves.

Joe (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 7:10 PM)

only an idiot would wear something like that to an airport and then be surprised when the security forces over-react.  Come on!  No one said you can't wear it, just pull your head out of your a$$ (helps oxygen get to your brain) and don't wear it to the airport!!!

No sympathy for morons (Sent Monday, September 24, 2007 9:45 PM)

Sorry, Will: you're way off base here, re: the Boston bomb idiot.  Had it been real? Had it gone off? Had truly innocent lives been lost? Would you be reporting something to the effect of: gosh, I wish those security guards had been a bit more diligent, eh?
Why not place the blame where it belongs? Why not identify this young woman as an irresponsible, self-centered "art" student as the dolt she is? Not smart Will; and not smart or informed of you to defend her or such actions.

Denny, Chugiak, Alaska (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 2:28 AM)

Walking into an airport wearing an unidentifiable homemade electronic device and holding "putty" is staggeringly stupid, and it would have gotten a serious reaction even before 9/11. I flew to Europe in the 80's and Walkman's and radio's were treated as potential bombs so don't act like this is some bizarre new phenomenon.
And for those who mock the Security people or Police about this, which one is the designated sacrificial lamb used to approach the person wearing a circuit board so as to avoid being mocked by bloggers?
Will, I agree with you about 90% of the time but on this no way. What an irresponsible, stupid, arrogant and dangerous stunt this girl pulled.

Sean, NY (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 4:07 AM)

"Well I took my AK-47 model, that I made in metals class, down to a local gas station where I had decided to practice my "armed robbery" improv."  "Why did the attendant shoot me?  I was just practicing my art for career day!"   ---- She is a moron. She lives in a bubble where contrived eccentric-like intelligence is tolerated. She is lucky to be alive.    What would some of you knuckleheads like to see.  ----"Sorry sir, you can't take this on the plane."  "Why not?"  "Well sir, wires, batteries, putty like substances, kind of looks like a bomb."  "But I am a college student at a very prestigious university and this is my project"  "Oh, I'm sorry, go right aboard Mr. Kaczynski."  Sometimes the whining has got to stop about how security forces are overreacting,  or is that your knee jerk response?

Joe , Westmont N.J. (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 5:10 AM)

I thought I was the only one who noticed and thought the "God lawsuit" photo was hysterical...At first glance it looks like a religious icon!

A. Meyer, Tampa Bay FL (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 6:51 AM)

Will, I'm in no way defending the Boston cops for overreacting put people jump to conclusions all the time when they see something they don't understand.

Case in point, I'm a member of an International costuming group (the 501st) and we were asked to appear in costume at our local Best Buy to mark the release of a new Star Wars game. One of our members made the mistake of getting in gear in the parking lot and then entering the store. Somebody called the cops and reported "a terrorist in full body armor and a machine gun" had entered Best Buy. Luckily, they sent a couple of officers to check it out first while the SWAT team got in gear. The cops were surprised (and relieved) to find that the terrorist in question was actually just a guy dressed as the character Boba Fett. The cops called off the Swat team and even got their picture taken with him to show the guys back at the station. My friend in the Fett suit, however, did get a warning not to do that again.

The point I'm trying to make is that the episode in the Boston airport is a two-pronged problem. The cops overreacted, yes, but the young lady should have known better as well.

Chris (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:10 AM)

I think this student was clearly looking for attention. You can "show off" your art, but to do it in an airport knowing of the threat of terrorist attack is someone seeking attention. I don't think anyone will ever be able to always and completely recognize every type of bomb as there are so many types made all the time. I don't think many of us regular people have any idea what a real bomb should look like. So, wearing something like that in an airport would only cause mass panic and unnecessary chaos.

I prefer a little so called over-reaction than risking another 9/11.

NGH, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:11 AM)

You have to be a complete idiot to go to any American
airport with a fake bomb strapped to yourself. The security people at Logan would have been well within their right to have shot this nut. Art indeed.

Bob, Douglasville, GA (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:27 AM)

yes she should know what to expect....artsy people... *roll eyes*...

However, this is a plain and simple overreaction to another embarassing incident of being caught overreacting by security people...and when they get caught they backpedal and justify and throw the book at the culprits to make themselves feel justified and to save face. Authority does this kind of thing and there isn't a damn thing anyone can do about it.

But what really, really, worries me is that security and police seem unable too distinguish a bomb from what is basically a toy....she may be a fool, but they are idiots.

Moonites FTW!

I am Jack's frustration (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:13 AM)

I can't believe I'm saying this, but if terrorists REALLY dressed as nuns at airports then they'd probably dress as flying nuns...

Alex, Lenexa, KS (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 9:32 AM)

I propose that we become a mandatory clothes free society. Then we will have no clothes upon which to hang suspect fun jewelry. Nowhere to hide a thing! Might get cold for those naked cops in Boston out chasing around after "fake bombs" (whatever the hell that is). Our emperor already wears no clothes, so why not?



Godiva, Florida (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 10:14 AM)

Everyone knows terrorists use bombs that look like LED nametags that they wear on their hoodies. *rolls eyes*  If that poor girl had been shot or harmed in any way, the officers should be tried for murder.

You terrorphobes (redundancy?) need to wake up! I guess you would all feel safer in a totalitarian society with checkpoints at every crosswalk by Stormtroopers ready to kill anyone acting 'suspicious'. Then you all would be as SAFE as you will ever get. Safe from terrorists, MIT students, and safe from freedom to express yourself (especially from expressing yourself with those dangerous things called lights and wires).

john (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 11:07 AM)

For the sake of clarity, let me say that I agree that someone who tries to board a plane with a fake bomb rightly stands to get in trouble. In fact, fake bombs in generally warrant trouble. But they have to be actual fake bombs. Like those fake suicide belts we see at some Musilm protests or something.

But this wasn't a fake bomb, it was just something the cop didn't recognize. And by the way, she wasn't trying to board a plane. If she was the regular security would have ascertained the nature of the gizmo immediately (without killing her or nearly killing her).

And remember, it's not airports that are being defended by all that security, it's planes.

And if we look at the history of bombs on planes, the one that stands out is the shoe bomber.  But we know better than to threaten to shoot anyone who walks into the airport with shoes on.

Will Femia (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 11:35 AM)

Will - Can you tell me what a bomb looks like? Would you be able to distinguish if someone with a circuit board type apparatus was carrying an actual bomb or a harmless toy? Most likely not.

I'm sure even with vast training not all security personnel will be able to 100% identify a real bomb from a fake. I'm sure the box cutters/pocket knives the 9/11 hijackers were carrying seemed harmless at the time. But I can guarantee the security working on 9/11 would have wished they "over reacted".

I'm not saying that it would have been justified to shoot or kill this woman. However, whether she was boarding a plane or not, it was irresponsible of her to wear her "art" to the airport. I do not disagree with the actions taken against her.

NGH, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 12:07 PM)

thanks for the great ny times link.  the end of this one reminds me of your NIN link the other day:

Pop/Jazz; A Band That Deals In Apathy
September 27, 1991

"We're going to demand the socialization of the music industry. Records are going to be free to everybody."

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE6DD143EF934A1575AC0A967958260

ithink_ithink (Sent Tuesday, September 25, 2007 1:38 PM)

We should be scared of idiocy, not fake bombs. The fact is, she's an idiot, and got what she deserved. Blinky, battery-powered thingy notwithstanding, the putty was the icing on the cake. May she be damned to a desk job.

Anna, Minneapolis (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 9:18 AM)

Will, sorry there are so many people that aren't recognizing the total overreaction here.  Its hard for me to tell if the pictures of wires and bomb-like parts are showing components that were hidden underneath the sweatshirt, or plainly visible.  It almost looks like they've turned the shirt inside out to reveal the "suspicious wiring/circuit board".  How could that be seen?  So were they just reacting to the lights?

We are talking about a clothing trend that is increasingly more common.  In a local toy store, I can buy college or pro logo hats with LED lighting that outlines the logo.  It sounds like she had created a custom version of this same concept.  Sounds like it may not have been as professionally created as the LED Hats now available, but am I now to assume that if I, or my children, wear one of these hats (with little difference from the guy next to me wearing his teams hat other than mine has lights) that I should expect to be arrested at gunpoint if I go to an airport?  What about if I wear it on a subway or other public transportation?  What about if I actually wear it to the stadium on game day?  I mean by the logic of these people calling this girl "stupid" and other glorius names, the fact that she wore something that could be "mistaken for"(made up to be?) an "explosive device" to a public location under increased "9/11 scrutiny", then a football stadium would certainly qualify given the increased security measures there.  But the NFL appears to have licensed the creation of these hats, so who is really the "idiot"....someone for wearing what is becoming an increasingly common form of clothing, or everyone else for assuming that she's an idiot for not checking every part of her life for post-9/11 compliance at every step of the way.  

And here are some links to those hats in case people haven't seen them:
http://www.rainbowkits.com/webHats/NFL-Hats.html
http://www.rainbowkits.com/webHats/NCAA-Hats.html

So ease up on the name calling, and take a closer look at the situation.  I fall on the side of complete overreaction and unnecessary escalation.  Stop her....maybe.  Warn her that its not a good idea....probably.  Arrest her, charge her, call her names....come on people have some common sense yourselves before you give away all your rights.

David, Cincinnati, OH (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:05 PM)

Will,
It is your job to read and link items on the web.  You see items you think might be of interest, and link them, when, in your opinion, it could be something other people are interested in.

Security, it is their job to wake up every day, get training on new methods of possible ways to harm people, and figure out a way to prevent it.  When they get to their job, they are told it is to look at everyone, make sure nothing suspicious is occurring, and, at the slightest hint of something dangerous being smuggled, intercept it.  That's their job, that's what they're trained to do.  They're not trained to kind of think of what maybe people might say if oh gee really it was nothing and how could they have thought that way.  The only thought they have is, what if I didn't do something, and it was real.  And, if you were being the most objective about it, you wouldn't want them to think any other way.  

Art students, it is their job to draw attention to themselves by doing things that shock, or mystify, or make people think.  Salvador Dali used to walk around New York City with a bell, so he could ring it to make sure people were looking at him and recognized him.  This is just a different take on an old stunt, ala placing black boxes looking cryptic in the subway station at Union Square, after 9/11.  The cops were a necessary force for her demonstration, in fact, if she wasn't arrested, don't you think she would have thought the whole experiment was a failure?  

You may not agree with that but, for what appears to be a large majority, that's the way they see each person's role and level of culpability in what happened.

Ramon, Bronx New York (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:46 PM)

David, I was going to mention that at New Year's I wore a pair of giant plastic glasses shaped like 2007 and set with LEDs (and options for variable light patterns).  

But what seems to be the crux of opinion on this issue is the application of the term "fake bomb." Fake bomb doesn't have an objective definition, it is defined as anything police react to as a bomb that turns out not to be one.  As such, by definition the police always react appropriately. If they think your left ear is a bomb, they can treat you accordingly. When it turns out to actually be your left ear (and you're lucky enough to still be alive) it changes from suspected bomb to fake bomb. If you disagree, it'll be your fault when a real bomb gets through because you oppose thorough screening. Because a bomb can be in anything from shoes to breast milk, there's no line between legitimacy and absurdity.

Will Femia (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:03 PM)

Well assessed, Ramon.

And for the record, feedback from both sides on this matter has again left me proud and impressed with the Clicked readership. I was able to approve almost every comment that came in on the matter.

Will Femia (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 1:09 PM)

WOW, ALL THIS ABOUT SECURITY IN AIRPORTS. I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT TO JOE, WHO SAID THAT ALL WHO FEEL THEY ARE SAFER WITH THIS KIND OF SECURITY... MUST HAVE VOTED FOR BUSH...
OK. I DO FEEL THAT THIS GOT BLOWN OUT OF PERPOTION, AND YES THAT SHE WAS NOT VERY SMART TO DO THIS TO BEGIN WITH. BUT, I ALSO VOTED FOR BUSH, AND UNDERSTAND THAT THE WAR IS LONG, BUT WE ARE THERE FOR A REASON. YOU CAN BE ON BOTH SIDES.  YES, THERE ARE IDIOTS ON BOTH SIDES. I BELIEVE IN COMMON SENSE.

J, TRICITIES, WASHINGTON (Sent Wednesday, September 26, 2007 5:56 PM)

I'm sorry, but you walk into an airport with a circuit board and wires sticking out, you are asking for trouble. We live in an age where people DO try to blow up planes. Was a flight attendant overreacting when she tried to get people to help her stop Richard Reid from lighting a fuse sticking out of his shoe? How did she KNOW it was a bomb?

These are scary times, and while we should not have to surrender any personal liberties, I don't think it's too much to ask for people to be a bit more responsible.

Jim R., Northampton, MA (Sent Thursday, September 27, 2007 5:23 PM)

If nothing else the ding dong distracted the security workers from their job and that could have allowed a real bomber to get through!

Fred (Sent Sunday, September 30, 2007 8:57 PM)

I tried to go to the rottenneighbor.com and the web sight just wouldn't work.

Courtney Cunningham, Jackson Georgia (Sent Tuesday, January 22, 2008 8:19 AM)



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://clicked.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=377018