BLOG

I was surprised when I visited SFGate.com (the San Francisco Chronicle's website) yesterday and was suddenly presented with a whole new layout. Damn. It was about time. The old look was from a redesign that according to the Internet Archive, it was deployed some time around November of 2001, but it might as well have been from 1995. It was clunky, not very extensible, and just flat. Of course, on the comments for the article on the new home page you'll see that there were a good number of people who preferred the old design. Read in to these a bit closer and you'll realize that the main thrust of the ire is because people now have to learn where things are again, which is to say that people don't like the new look, because they're lazy. Obviously malaise is never a reason to avoid progress and I'm very thankful that the Chronicle redesigned the site, since I get my local news from there.       For those that really don't get it, there is a graphic to show what things do. I find these things about as amusing as the manuals for cars. It's a tool. It should be intuitive enough for people to figure out, just like a car should be intuitive enough for anyone to hop in and drive who has driven other cars. If this is not the case, then something went horribly awry. I think that this was just put up pander to the lowest common denominator given that they're a news publication. I don't know why they bother as people who don't like this will never really like it no matter what you do, short of going back to the old design.       As far as improvements, I like the flyout ('Index') in the upper right menu that gives you immediate access to all the sections in the site. This new layout of the page also allows them to tuck the ads in, in a much more classy way. I realize that for a commercial site, you have to have ads and I much prefer this manner than how they were just stuck on to the far right edge of the site. Lastly, while some people might complain about how "busy" the new site is, I find that it presents the newspaper's information in a much more organized form that is more compelling for me to spend time on. The way it used to be, I would just see an article, read it and go. This has more of a 'wikipedia feel' wherein I'm invited to click around a bit more.       So, good job folks and I know it couldn't have been easy given the endless meetings, committees, and hands that try and get in the mix when it comes to rebuilding a site of this scope. Maybe now your PageRank can climb back up from a five, because honestly, I've got a four and I do this for free!

The tragedy of this bridge collapse is only made worse by the manner in which the news covers it. I am at something of a rare vantage for an American when it comes to this, in that I am witnessing this from outside the country. This is a perspective I am growing to appreciate more as the news in the US gets more aggressively sensational over time and is less news and more an arm of government and corporate propaganda to keep us all scared so that we keep buying and remain a society comprised of bags of putty. I would never say that there is a huge conspiracy to make all of this happen, because it is so transparent that to call it a conspiracy would be foolish. It is just a natural chain of events for those who are greedy and has been around since man wanted bone that other man had.       So, yesterday morning, I woke up, nine time zones away from home to the news of this bridge collapse in Minneapolis. I saw this watching the British news group, BBC. I then clicked over to to the American news group, CNN to see what they were saying. In essence they both said the same thing and reported the same facts. The only difference is that BBC actually reported it as news and not this attack on American driving that leaves us all wondering if we are safe, which is the manner that CNN used. For BBC, this was one story of many. For CNN, it was the only story. You could see this reflected in both of their websites. Yes, it's true that BBC is a world news agency, but so, in theory, is CNN.       What really sickens me is that for US coverage, I'm seeing it play out exactly the same way as the 9/11 coverage did. They keep repeating the same facts with the same videos and pictures, drilling this in to the mass consciousness that yes, you are not safe. You need more insurance or a bigger car or a hydrodynamic suspension system in the case of bridge collapse while driving. In fact, while I was watching, nothing was known, because it was about 04:30 there, but this didn't stop CNN from pulling out archival footage to show other bridge collapses from the last 10 years. Given that we have over half a million bridges in the US, the law of averages in these situations would predict these kinds of things happening, which is why I bet that CNN has some little nugget of videos and "facts" stashed away for any kind of disaster to hit the US. I always get the feeling that when I see things like this, the American news agencies are more interested in creating the news than reporting the news. Perhaps they all have massive inferiority complexes from being what is supposed to be passive channels reporting on the events that happen for too many years. I am reminded of a bit in The Simpsons where the helicopter reporter took off his shoe to throw it from the helicopter at a fleeing suspect. I have a feeling this sense of emasculation isn't far from the truth of real life.       Whatever that case, I'm thrilled to be here, because in the US, I bet this will dominate the media for the next week or so and then completely disappear, just like New Orleans did. Oh yeah, you didn't know? They still haven't rebuilt the town, but why report on that?

In The Sometimes Office, it's often the case that the elevators are slow. Some days, it's actually faster to walk the nine or ten floors when going down. But, if one was to do that, one would miss out on the little screens in the elevator called, the Captivate Network.       If there is a more aptly named company, I've not heard of it. The fact that you're a prisoner while watching these little screens is something that I've thought about often. Sure, it's another invasion of space by the media in this country, but is it really the case that you'd rather just stand in the elevator while going up or down? Some might say yes, some no. For me, I'm indifferent as this is a sometimes office and I'm not there all that much. I'll readily admit that they do a good job of varying the content and keep it lively. It's just really funny when things don't change up so much and you realize that everyone you work with is reading the silly thing because we're all grumbling about it not changing.       I'm curious how widespread these will be some day. Is there a point where this might be the next format in film? The 30 second elevator ride? It's a thought and something that could actually make these pretty damned cool.