MIT launches watch on US government

What is MIT offering that other sites like opensecrets are not?

The vengeful angle. "Big brother peering over your shoulder? Peer over his!" and the user input.

What a crock. (Their position, not yours, Craven.) First, THIS ALREADY EXISTS elsewhere. MIT has done nothing new. This is barely news.

Second, TIA, the thing they claim their site exists to "balance" does not exist. It is (was?) a proposal. If they actually decide to implement it, it will be years before it is operational.

Scrat,

I'm not at all impressed with MIT's project. You asked what the difference is and IMO the difference is the marketing. It's being hyped almost as a payback for the government's watchfullness.

Another key angle is the end user input. I barely had a look but ot looks like tehy intend to let any Joe Blow add content (but they didn't plan on the traffic and they suspended this feature last time I looked).

And what generates a buzz ends up being news whether you think it has merit or not. Such is life. When Jordan said "I'm back" it moved millions of dollars. All I can get is a "so what?"

That's all well and good. I'm just saying that their "product" is nothing new, their reason for creating it is a lie intended to mislead people too ignorant of the news to know what is actually going on, and the hype is just that--pure hype, unadulterated by anything like reality or substance. I find it absurd, and an indictment of the average American that the media are trumpeting this horse$hit simultaneously with legitimate news reports that funding for TIA is about to be killed by pending legislation.



I also find it shocking that while Wired News and many international sources were running news of the pending budget freeze for TIA on July 14, the Washington Times chose to run a story on July 15 that focused on TIA's "threat" to privacy while completely failing to mention the potential death of the program.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20030714-113918-2868r.htm

But of course, I wouldn't dream of suggesting that there is a bias in the media. I'm sure it's just sloppiness; reporters writing about stuff they know nothing about. That's probably it.

MIT can launch almost anything they wish. However, this one is a waste of time and money. c.i.

Scrat,

Why such strong feelings? Universities have launched worse sites than that in the past.

My strong feelings on it stem from the opinion that it is being both offered by MIT and embraced by the media as a stab at the current administration. This Web site has nothing to do with TIA, except as a publicity stunt intended to raise concerns about TIA in people who don't know enough to know that it currently does not exist and now looks doomed not to (at least in the near to middle term). And if these people (at MIT and those reporting the story) really cared about TIA, they'd be asking people to call and ask their representatives to support the bill to kill funding for it. But TIA makes too good a bogeyman, so they'd rather ignore the fact that it is being killed so that they can get some mileage out of it as a rallying issue for people too stupid to keep up with the news. (You know, Democrat voters.)

Scrat,

Sure it's a stab at TIA. That's what I reference as the "vengeful" quality. I still see little reason to get worked up about it. It's going to be a shoddy site at best and will most likely soon be forgotten.

Then by all means, do not get worked up about it.

We all have our hot buttons and our heated days. Allow me mine. :wink: