Were you up for… well, we’ll see 

Tonight being on London time is a definite disadvantage. The presidential debate starts at 2am London time, which will certainly leave me bleary-eyed tomorrow. But such a lot hangs on this 90 minutes that I’ll stay up with the other political obsessives on this side of the ocean (Democrats Abroad is having a debate party tomorrow night, where supporters can watch a recording, but what’s the point of that?).

The Wall Street Journal has unfortunately hidden Christopher Buckley’s pre-debate piece behind its subscriber firewall. An excerpt:

Op-ed for the yin, weblog for the yang 

Here’s a very nice interaction between weblog and conventional media. Daniel Drezner has an intelligent op-ed piece in today’s New York Times uncovering the misconceptions around outsourcing and offshoring. He uses his weblog to provide the source footnotes that the Times style won’t allow. He also uses his weblog slightly mischieviously to blow his own trumpet about getting some op-ed real estate.

Why thinking analytically is important 

Brad DeLong waxes indignant and lyrical about the kneejerk response of Slate writer Seth Stevenson to the making of inexpensive coir matting in a village in Kerala, south India. Stevenson reckons we should stop buying India-made coir mats because villagers are being exploited. DeLong explains why this is woefully wrong:

What Kerry should say 

There is such a tremendous volume of weblogging on the US presidential contest that I usually steer clear of the topic, unless I have something new to add. But two posts today particularly caught my attention.

First, Scott Rosenberg urges Kerry to go on the attack at Thursday’s debate. He’s done a good job of writing the speech:

Sadly, everything I’ve seen about the Kerry campaign so far suggests he’ll be reasoned and cautious, and not go for a knock-out blow. That might be the right percentage call, but I’m doubtful it’s the winning strategy.

At the same time, Brad DeLong points to a Washington Post article by Dan Froomkin:

Answers heard we none.

The only stores in town 

About a year ago, Frank Leahy started a weblog about his move from Sausalito in Marin county to Cornwall. He’s recently moved from Cornwall, in the far southwest of England, to Leatherhead, in the nowhere of Surrey, south of London.

But he’s also taken time to reflect on some aspects of the US, particularly after a summer holiday on Cape Cod. I’m not as gloomy as Frank about the future of political discourse in the US, but his essay, The 7-11-ification of Politics in America, merits close attention.

“The same two chains – Republicans and Democrats – are the only two stores in town. There’s no longer a place to have a conversation about what matters in America. All the real conversations have been relegated to the far back corner, if you can even find them at all.”

I’ll trade you three Barros for two Krugmans 

A lot of economics weblogs are pointing to the market in Nobel prize winners in economics for this year, where Robert Barro and Paul Krugman are riding high. In fact, the site offers markets in all the Nobel prizes.

Marginal Revolution provides a well-informed analysis of the runners and riders.

My favourite, currently doing pretty well in the physics market, is Anton Zeilinger. Zeilinger gave a talk in Davos on quantum teleportation that is one of my more memorable Davos sessions.

Gilder stripped bare 

PZ Myers thoroughly defenestrates an ignorant piece by George Gilder on so-called intelligent design in the current issue of Wired. A wonderful, heart-warming read.

No state, no county 

The eight million of us that live in London may be in an unusual situation. Almost every e-commerce site I know has a required field for state, county, region or province. But London is London. It isn’t in a county (although many sports organisations, like the Lawn Tennis Association, persist in dividing it into Surrey and Middlesex (which, to complicate things further, isn’t even a county anymore)).

So I leave that field blank. All too many sites give me an error message, requiring me to fill in a state or county. So there are lots of databases where my address reads something like London, London. It’s very annoying.

Are we doomed?  

David Weinberger went to a World Economic Forum media industry discussion and reports at length. Essential reading:

His own view on the importance of an open Internet isn’t novel, but it’s very well stated:

The Big Picture, seen narrowly 

I enjoy reading Barry Ritholtz’s market commentary on The Big Picture, but pace its title, the focus is sometimes very narrow.

Here’s his read on the election: “Your taxes are going higher, regardless of who wins on Nov. 2. Oil will be expensive. GDP will be modest. While different sectors may do better or worse under each candidate, Greenspan will still be Fed Chief. That matters a whole lot more than who is sitting in the Oval Office…”

Vital reading on Putin 

The Financial Times’s subscription policy has rarely seemed more foolish to me than today. Martin Wolf’s column on Vladimir Putin and the fight against terrorism is essential reading, but it’s restricted to the handful of FT.com subscribers as well as the newspaper readers. At least the FT should have a Wall Street Journal-like policy of putting a few daily highlights on a publicly available site.

Here’s Wolf’s important peroration: “To pity innocent Russian children is right. To embrace the butcher of the Chechens as an ally in the struggle against barbarism is to risk losing our souls, not just the struggle against the Islamists.”

Poll averse 

I have to stop following polls day to day. I think it might be injurious to good health (unlike reading Homer, see below). But today’s news is far, far cheerier than in some time.

Homeric breathing  

Marginal Revolution reports that reading Homer is good for your health (as if I didn’t already know that): “Reciting the Iliad could have epic effects on your health. German physiologists have recently shown that such poetry can get your heart beating in time with your breaths. This synchronization may improve gas exchange in the lungs as well as the body’s sensitivity and responsiveness to blood pressure changes.”

Time for succinct and lethal responses 

Joe Klein has an interesting column in Time. One powerful jibe: “[White House press secretary] Scott McClellan is beginning to sound like Baghdad Bob, the infamous spokesman for Saddam who announced hallucinatory Iraqi victories as the American troops closed in on Baghdad.”

And a tough judgment on the debates:

The question that dare not speak its name 

Matthew Yglesias ponders whether the Democratic party would be better off with Howard Dean after all. The logic is that a clear anti-war candidate could say, “I will never hesitate to use force — unilaterally when necessary — to defend the United States of America. The Iraq War did not defend America.” But on a Dean candidacy he concludes:

The reason such a question is even being asked was summed up by the BBC’s Washington correspondent Matt Frei on the news last night. “You can find millions of Republicans who are wildly enthusiastic about George Bush,” he said. “But I haven’t found one Democrat who is wildly enthusiastic about John Kerry.”

Still, we have to play with the hand we’ve been dealt. My hopes are beginning to feel rather threadbare at the moment, however.

A journalist who is definitely on the cluetrain 

Charles Arthur, technology editor of The Independent, has a wonderful rant about one-on-one interviews and how useless they are. Worth quoting at length:

100 ways to make money 

Just as I generally disagree with Boris Johnson, I went off Tom Peters as a management thinker some time ago. But I have to admit his weblog makes for good reading. He’s just started a series entitled 100 ways to help you succeed/make money: his promise is that four days a week for 25 weeks he’ll provide one tip.

The Boris Johnson weblog 

I don’t agree with much of his politics, but if he does manage to maintain his blog in the gaps between his several other jobs, the Boris Johnson (MP and editor of The Spectator) weblog should be lots of fun. Here’s his first real entry:

Eleven rules for reading newspapers  

From the excerpts I’ve read in The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian, Andrew Marr’s new book, My Trade: A Short History of British Journalism, will be a very good read. Today, The Guardian provides Marr’s tips for newspaper readers. A very perceptive list by the BBC’s political editor and former editor of The Independent.

Here are his 11 rules, but it’s well worth reading the full analysis behind each of his points:

Amateur security is rather nice  

This may be a slightly crazy and even irresponsible thing to say in our age of terrorism, but I feel oddly reassured by the two security lapses in London this week. It’s not that I’m complacent about risks. But I think there are real benefits to living in a society where the first impulse is casual and non-violent rather than shoot first, ask questions later.

A few years ago, when I first had to go to Downing Street, the security consisted of a policeman checking your name was on a list. If it was, you were ushered through the gates and walked to Number Ten. No one checked your bag, no one checked any ID to see that you were in fact the person you claimed to be.

Inside 10 Downing Street, the only additional security was the requirement to leave your mobile phone on the table in the hallway.

This was in the immediate aftermath of 9-11. Of course, a few months later, metal detectors were added to the security, which I’m sure is sensible. Still no one confirmed a visitor’s identity.

When the ridiculous Batman climbed onto Buckingham Palace this week, he wasn’t shot. The Guardian had a picture of a friendly looking paramedic chatting with the masked intruder. The marines at the White House wouldn’t have been so kind. Similarly the official with a sword — no guns anywhere, note — didn’t draw his weapon in the House of Commons yesterday.

No one wants a security breach that results in real harm. But equally it’s good that we have an environment where the root assumption is that no harm is intended.

John Robb’s difficult question  

John Robb: “Inconsistant (fuzzy) goals continue to plague the US occupation. What do we want in Iraq? You pick:

Campbell in the control room 

Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s former communications chief, has visited al-Jazeera and come away with his thinking changed.

“I thought they would be cocky and brash because they had made themselves into the media story of the last decade. In fact, I found them worried about the way they were perceived, and genuinely perplexed by what they saw as a one-dimensional American view of their output. They see themselves as agents of change, but condemned as part of a dangerous status quo. They report anti-Americanism, but deny anti-Americanism is part of their ethos.

“Whether I was lulled or not, the truth is that the station is now a significant media player. It will become more so when the English language service comes on stream. Western politicians should feel free to attack it if they think it deserves it. But there is a case for a more engaged approach. It is no good just complaining that your policy is constantly misrepresented. You have to engage in the task of putting your case, whatever you think of the medium, and you will probably do the job better if you try to understand where the medium is coming from.”

The Big Lie 

It isn’t just lefties (see below) who recognise the disasters perpetrated by the Bush administration. Francis Fukuyama, a darling of right-wing think tanks, has a devastating piece in today’s Financial Times (subscribers only). His conclusion:

The wastrel administration 

A worthy sequel to yesterday’s recommended post by Josh Marshall is Scott Rosenberg’s analysis of the behaviour pattern of the Bush presidency: “For all the campaign-biography mythos of a misspent youth redeemed by Jesus and a sober adulthood, George W. Bush is using the presidency to play out his own drama of irresponsibility on a nation-size stage. Once a wastrel, always a wastrel.”

Shakespeare quartos 

The British Library has opened a site that makes available their 93 copies of the 21 plays by Shakespeare printed before England’s theatres were closed in 1642.

You can either read a single quarto or compare two different versions of a play side by side. This is the sort of project long advocated by Raj Reddy in his universal digital library. Now anyone in the world with access to the Net can browse these great treasures that were once reserved for only a few scholars.