Jane Kim for San Francisco School Board
September 17th, 2006
Originally uploaded by head.zoo.keeper.
My friend, neighbor, and a fellow Co-Director at Locus Arts, Jane Kim is running for San Francisco School Board! I recently had the chance to read her platform on her site, entitled “Working Together to Fix Our Schools”. I couldn’t help but notice one distinct parallel, among others, between both the use of technology to make media and local politics here in San Francisco; the keyword being democratization. (That is, I found it impressive that Jane’s campaign did outreach to the bloggers and not necessarily mainstream media, with thanks to MJ.) Using grassroots means to deliver huge impact it is not only a reflection of the fact that Jane “gets it” (after all, she is also a blogger herself), but isn’t this what technology lately has been all about?
And speaking of the democratization of media and the web in so many words, it was good to run into independent journalist and recently imprisoned vlogger Josh Wolf again at the event, who’s been fighting for his constitutional rights (and yours and mine for that matter) since I last saw him. He’s a free man and out on bail for now. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Entry Filed under: APA, APA Arts, API, Asian American, Asian Pacific American, Constitutional Rights, Democracy, Local Politics, Media, Politics, San Francisco, Vlogging
1 Comment Add your own
1. Nicholas Paldino | September 18th, 2006 at 8:34 am
I think that it is great when technology is used in this manner to facilitate outreach, it does raise some interesting questions.
You say that Jane “gets it” because she is using technology as a grassroots means to deliver a huge impact. There is also an implication that she has chosen this way over “mainstream media” (which I assume is television and radio spots). The question here is, was this a conscious choice that was made, or was it a choice that was made out of necessity (lack of funds).
If the answer is the former, then one would have to ask if she is hitting the right demographic (does the majority of voters respond to the web message over the mainstream media message). If it is the latter, then it’s more a (sad) statement about campaign finance (in general, not Jane’s) and how money is more a determining factor in elections than the person themselves.
As for Mr. Wolf, my knowledge on this is limited, but I don’t get the impression that this is a constitutional matter. It’s definitely not a free speech issue, as no one is telling him that he can’t broadcast the contents of the tape. The issue of privacy is also not explicitly defined in the constitution.
The only place where it might be a Constitutional matter is with illegal search and seizure. However, if there is a law that says that the federal government has the right to content recorded of federal property, then it’s not an issue here, either, since this would be covered under the “due process” part of the Fourth Amendment.
I’m not saying that Mr. Wolf should be in jail, but you have to pick your fights wisely, and this doesn’t seem to be one of those cases.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed