Do you feel that's an accurate account of the matter? Many of us are rallying around Sean and Peter, who are friends of ours, who are artists, NOT terrorists, who might have made an unwise choice in letting their digital art be put to work for Turner, but don't deserve five years apiece for it.

On the other hand... I really haven't seen much support for Turner AT ALL... if you have, then we are not reading the same mailing lists, LJs, etc. What I've seen in my circles, and what I've said myself is "Let the boys go, and go after Turner, the real culprit."

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Perhaps they don't deserve 5 years, however they do deserve to be brought up on obstruction of justice charges. They directly instructed others to keep critical information from the police. Even if they did that at the behest of their corporate masters, it's still a jailable offense.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Because it's starting to hit home just how bad 9/11 has gotten. This would've been laughed off some years ago and no one would've called them in as "bombs." It just shows the level of paranoia our culture has reached, and a very dangerous one at that.

I think I'm going to call in the stoplight nearby me as a bomb. I'm seeing some wires hanging out of it. Not good, not good...

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I see, it takes a couple of "cool" white guys marketing a "cool" cartoon in a "cool" city for this to hit home.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

No, I think it takes a couple of commuters to be either delayed or prevented from going to work and having the ENTIRE ROUTE 93 SHUT DOWN for it to happen.

I realize you don't drive and don't typically commute in to work, but if you can imagine a bunch of people having to get up at butt fuck o'clock in the morning to get to work at some ungodly hour, and then have to wait outside in the freezing fucking cold for 45 minutes or longer while your taxdollars are being spent blowing up Litebrites, you might have a different take on the situation. I had to hear from one woman how she got into a car with total strangers so she could make it into work. I'm really glad that they were nice guys, and even happier that she managed to get to work in spite of the chaos. I'm sure some people will think, "Well take the day off." That's assuming that a) you have one to take and b) your day's work not getting done doesn't mean your head on the chopping block. Some places just don't give a shit; you're there or you're gone.

Also, I find your pointing out of "Boston liberals" somewhat ironic given your previous political views on your LJ as being anything but conservative.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Also, I find your pointing out of "Boston liberals" somewhat ironic given your previous political views on your LJ as being anything but conservative.

I've also written on the subject of liberal smugness, and I've seen it demonstrated in high form by many Boston liberals again and again over the last few days.

This didn't happen during the commute. The city was not virtually shut down. While a some people were inconvenienced by the marketing stunt, the vast majority of Bostonians didn't experience any disruption to their day. The media played up the story about a "panic" that simply didn't exist on the ground. This point was well made in kali_ma's post that YOU linked to.

The media played this up. Turner-owned CNN played this up. The BPD did their jobs and did it well. They should be commended.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Based on all the digging I've had to do to find those real abuses in the past, I 100% agree. I think this has much to do with the level or reporting given to the Aqua Teen situation. I was in a bar and thus a captive audience to Fox News, and they wouldn't stop looping the damn thing. Fodder for public outcry, delivered straight to the conservative screen (and I'm sure the rest of the stations as well) ... over, and over, and over. People can't complain as easily about that which they don't know or understand -- that report was wrapped up in a simple, neat package.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I think you may be misunderstanding a lot of folks. I have yet to hear anyone at all say that the corporate advertising part of this thing is good. Not a single person. So I'm not sure where you are getting that impression from. We're all with you on this anti-advertising thing, ok?

I''m pretty sure that there is a law against advertising on public or private property without permission, and if the marketing company/Turner did not have permission, they should be charged with violating that law. Simple as that. But no public official seems to have even considered that obvious option. I have to wonder, Why not?

Also, the fact that these particular pieces of LED art happened to be paid for by a big corporation is beside the point for many of us, because these things could have just as easily been made or put up by some local artist or geek for fun and/or for making a public statement about some issue. And if that were the case, there would probably be an even bigger chance of the individual getting completely screwed by the law, since it wouldn't be seen as "normal business" activity, which, while unconventional, is generally acceptable by most mainstream US Americans. For the msot part, people tend to think that business = good, personal expression = bad (scary, crazy, dangerous).

So those of us who believe in using art and creative technology as means for personal and social expression are rallying behind the idea that:

• Creativity and weirdness and personal expression (corporate or not, public or not) shouldn't be feared because it is healthy and a sign of a thriving and diverse society.

And those of us who are progressive activists are rallying behind the idea that:

• Creating a society full of fear is making our world a worse place, not a better one.

Does that make sense now? Can you see why we feel that these issues are so very important?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

I''m pretty sure that there is a law against advertising on public or private property without permission, and if the marketing company/Turner did not have permission, they should be charged with violating that law. Simple as that. But no public official seems to have even considered that obvious option. I have to wonder, Why not?

The police have stated that there will likely be more charges to come against people within both the marketing company and Turner. Just wait.

So those of us who believe in using art and creative technology as means for personal and social expression are rallying behind the idea that.

Keep your personal electronic expressions off public infrastructure and you have my support.

Creating a society full of fear is making our world a worse place, not a better one.

Creating a society that fears nothing is naive. The world isn't a swell happy smiley place where everyone putting up strange devices on girders has nice wholesome marketing intentions. As much as you may dislike it, we have to take precautions.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)