Jeff Jarvis has been saying it for a while now: old media is exploding. It sure does look that way, doesn’t it? I’m convinced.
And now a Wall Street Journal poll seems to indicate that Jarvis is right as far as the news business is concerned [emphasis mine]:

Readers want more context and background included in news reporting. They want new ways to receive their news, on next-generation handheld devices, for instance, rather than simply on a Web page. They want fewer ads – especially the kind that animate or show up in popup windows.

Slate’s Fred Kaplan is also calling for Bush to answer Ahmadinejad’s letter and mount a serious hearts-and-minds campaign. I don’t agree with everything Kaplan says—for one thing, this is not just a one-shot deal: answer the letter and move on—but I agree with this:

One thing he must do in any case—and that he has failed to do so far—is to persuade the rest of the world that the case against Iran is not part of some global campaign against Islam. Ahmadinejad’s letter paints precisely this picture. It’s time for Bush to paint his own picture. How better to do so than in the guise of a civilized reply to Ahmadinejad? The message would be grounded in a specific context, not appearing out of nowhere as vague propaganda. It would demonstrate that he’s willing to engage with Muslim leaders. And it might have a bonus of advancing a diplomatic way out of Iran’s nuclear standoff.

His secret?: the no-news diet

DIE HARD Hollywood actor BRUCE WILLIS has slammed the media for its poor news coverage, accusing the industry of deliberately ignoring serious news in favour of racy stories. The DIE HARD star, who credits his youthful energy and vigour to a refusal to watch news bulletins, is disgusted with the news reports, claiming they are frivolous and superficial rather than informative. And he says that banning news from his house means he worries far less. Willis insists, “We go for the sensational now in the news. If it’s not sensational or tantalising or making fun of someone, it seldom gets into the news. “I don’t watch the news anyway. I have it turned off, and I feel so much better for it. That’s why I have that youthful glow about me. I don’t look worried.”

The New York Times reports that Bob Kerrey’s decision to invite John McCain to give the commencement speech at New School University (where Kerrey is president) didn’t go over too well with the very liberal faculty and student body:

But instead of welcoming Mr. McCain, an Arizona Republican who is considered a possible presidential candidate, hundreds of students and faculty members are up in arms, calling the invitation a prime example of what they see as the disconnect between Mr. Kerrey, the onetime Democratic senator from Nebraska, and the institution he leads.

They say their school, with its long legacy of progressivism, should not be used to give Mr. McCain, who is lately stressing his conservative pedigree, any New York credibility as a moderate….

“Senator John McCain does not believe in a woman’s right to control her own fertility,” shouted Ann Snitow, a professor of literature and gender studies. “He has been opposed to Roe v. Wade for more than 20 years. He is a man who believes in female sexual slavery.” Ms. Snitow added: “What would he have to do to not be invited? Would he have to say we should drop a nuclear bomb on Iran tomorrow?”

Ya know, not that many people know what “New School University” is, though they have heard of New York. Maybe he shouldn’t be allowed to speak anywhere in New York. Now, there’s an idea!

Bob Kerrey made a different point [emphasis mine]:

Mr. Kerrey said graduating seniors might learn something from Mr. McCain about character.

He recalled the bitter opposition that he and Mr. McCain faced from fellow veterans during their work to normalize American relations with Vietnam. “My guess is Senator McCain is going to talk a lot about character and part of character is willing to stand before protest,” Mr. Kerrey said. “I have been with John when both of us were spat upon for advocating normalizing relations with Vietnam, called him a traitor.”

Bravo.

Austin Bay links to a great piece about the opportunities posed by the letter from Farceur-in-Chief of Iran Ahmadinejad. It’s called “Mr President: RSVP to Ahmadinejad”—invaluable advice for the stupefyingly incompetent, done-teaf, infuriating disaster that is George Bush & Co:

Words and ideas are powerful things. They propel revolutions and legitimize–and sometimes de-legitimize–political systems. In the struggle against nihilistic Islamic extremism, words and ideas ultimately will be more important than smart bombs or boots on the ground….

one might dismiss it as a wacky diatribe from a less-than-rational leader. But, using powerful words of his own, the Iranian leader taps into long-simmering grievances against the United States that are held in the Middle East and other parts of the developing world.

Americans may not agree with his interpretation of history and religion, or his incessant demonization of Israel. But many people across the Muslim world do share his perspective and will find his words compelling. We should not simply dismiss such sentiments as ridiculous. Instead, we should challenge and refute them in active, open discourse.

It was written by Pierre Atlas, who teaches at Marian College. Read the whole thing. And pass it on to BushCo.

Clive Davis may be pleased to note that, yes, I’m pushing for PR. I’m all for it. My blog is called Infotainment Rules. I have turned my back on the authentic and the serious and the important and the transcendent and the valuable and the glorious. (For now.) I speak out in favor of the grotesque. (For now.) Because it gets the message across. And, boy, do we need to send messages.

We are involved in a long-term information war. PR is the foundation upon which our campaigns should be mounted. So bring it on. Just made it good, goddamnit. And effective.