June 17, 2005
What? Sam Adams Has A Blog? Who Knew?!
Deja Vu All Over Again
His office sent out the official announcement (pdf) yesterday afternoon, which quickly prompted a BlueOregon thread and then an article in The Oregonian this morning as well.
Yes, it's true. City Council member Sam Adams is blogging. But, then again, that was clear ten days ago, and the site had obviously been making the rounds because by three days ago reader activity was spotted over there.
Oddly, not only did we have a glimpse at Adams' blog posted here more than a week ago, but in the comments to that item, a BlueOregonian is the one who pointed out that it took him "exactly 90 seconds to guess at the URL for the blog" (or, more accurately, one possible URL for it), in which case why wait until the official announcement?
Anyway, what we really want to mention is that fact that the word "blogopshere" appeared in a headline on the front page of Oregon's major newspaper this morning.
Also, the article contains something that we suggest should be a warning to Adams against the dangers of posting online while drunk. Yes, it's a reference to exactly what you think it's a reference to, and confirms what had been the popular rumor around town at the time of a certain altercation on this site.
Comments (9)
Jim Dixon on 17 Jun 2005
I thought this was revealing:
Clevenger's advice to his clients: Blogs are bad news.
It reflects much of what's wrong with the City's (and PDC's) approach to public involvement. Instead of first asking the 'public' what they want their public agencies to be doing and then being completely transparent about it, the usual approach is making the decision first, then limiting the range of public comment, and finally ignoring it because, surprise, the decision was already made.
Until we (I work for the City, too) change the way we do things, we'll run into the same opposition from those who've been left out.
Dave J. on 17 Jun 2005
I can see the difficulty of being a public official with a blog--blogs were formed almost as an antidote to the dry corporate-speak of the mainstream media, so blog readers demand more immediacy and intimacy with the bloggers. But in this day and age, I think politicians can be hurt by immediacy--I mean, quite literally everything that Sam writes will be looked over by propsective opponents. It's got to be tough to on one hand write in a forthright and open manner, all the while worrying that the next thing you type will be the headline of your opponent's next attack ad. ("Why is Sam Adams, a well-paid member of Portland's elite political establishment, demanding money from senior citizen neighbors to cut their lawns? I think it's time for a change, Portland--time for leadership who will cut waste, not cut grass!")
Kari Chisholm on 17 Jun 2005
Of course, politicians have been talking in public forums, talking to reporters, and writing letters to constituents for time immemorial. Blogs are just another place for them to alternately brilliant, stupid, inspiring, or mind-numbing.
As always, it comes down to what they're saying. If you can't trust your candidate to be their own best advocate on a blog, well, you can't trust your candidate period.
Than on 17 Jun 2005
I just made up that stuff about being drunk to save face, sissy boy. My friends and I are still gonna mess you up. You're gonna feel the Power of 3 upside the head.
The One True b!X on 17 Jun 2005
FYI, yes that's another imposter comment.
Chris Smith on 17 Jun 2005
Am I the only one who finds it disorienting that the comments on Sam's blog are in reverse order?
Jonathan R. on 17 Jun 2005
Clevenger quoted in the Oregonian article:
"You're just going to throw a cat into a dogfight,' " he said this week.
Huh??? Have I missed this colloquialism somewhere along the way?
I know what a catfight is (screaming, clawing, with its alternative slight to women), and I know what a dogfight is (jets, planes, guns, right?), so throwing a cat into a dogfight involves some kind of large animal slingshot, or a skydiving kitty?
Even at the most obvious level, if two dogs are fighting, they are not going to care about some damn cat that gets in the way.
How's this for PR: if you're coming up with new metaphors, at least try to have them make sense.
Steve H. on 17 Jun 2005
Please don't tease . . . I'm new here -- what's the "drunk posting" reference to?
The One True b!X on 17 Jun 2005
You could try actually reading the article that was linked to.