New WebWarriors Newsletter

Sign up for our WebWarriors 2.0 News here! You can either click HERE to add our WebWarriors posts to your feed reader, or sign up below to have them delivered to you by e-mail. As information, this feature is replacing the weekly newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

October 1st Podcast

Here’s a link to my interview with Aleks, of Taking Back America.

 

MajorityConnections: Turn Casual Supporters into Engaged Activists

Jessica, of MajorityConnections, writes:

…One of the most frequent comments I hear from activists is that they don’t understand why they need Facebook, Twitter, Ning, or any other social networking site and yet they can’t seem to get their groups off the ground. A similar lament is that while finding supporters isn’t a problem, getting them to stick around and become part of the organization is. When the success of your group depends on member engagement, fundraising, and spreading a certain message, it’s important that your internet presence give members and potential activists as many avenues for acting as possible.

If you find that your organization has plenty of support, but you’re having trouble transforming your support into action, there’s a good chance your group hasn’t fully embraced Web 2.0. Embracing Web 2.0 means not just creating dynamic websites where information is readily available, but creating campaigns where your activist base can easily interact with the provided information.

You should approach your new media strategy with two overall goals in mind:

• Goal 1: Provide good and timely information
• Goal 2: Create easy methods for engagement

To reach your broad goals of providing good information and making it easy to share that information, your web strategy has to begin with your website and branch out from there….Read the entire report on MajorityConnections >>

 

Thanks for following FHK’s Web 2.0 Reader! We’d love to follow you back…

The response to our new FHK Google Web 2.0 Reader has been overwhelming, and we welcome our new followers. Thank you!

While you’re obviously under no obligation to allow us to follow you back, we suspect many of you would like to also share your favorite items with us, and perhaps even have us share your “Web 2.0″ posts on our reader. So far, only a handful of folks have set up their own readers to allow us to do that. Basically, you can see our items, but we can’t see yours.

If you are following FHK in your Google Reader, and would like for us to follow us back, please make sure you’ve done both of the following:

1. Add forthardknox@gmail.com to your one of your contacts groups (the default is “Friends”) in Gmail.
2. Make sure that you are “sharing” with the group that you have added us to.

Google has a very helpful set of instructions, with illustrations HERE. Check it out, and happy reading!

Oh, and if you don’t have a G-Mail account, and would just like to follow the public feed – you can still do that, by clicking on the Web 2.0 Reader tab at the top right of our blog.

 

Technorati thinks we still care. (How cute.)

A couple of years ago, Technorati was vital to bloggers. It was the only good search engine really good at indexing blogs. Maintaining authoritiy and rank on Technorati.com was a great way to build a readership, and drive traffic to our blogs. Technorati was also a good way to keep track of who was linking to our blogs.

Well, a lot has changed in two years. Google has become so invasive that it crawls nearly virtual “inch” of the blogosphere now. Bloggers can easily see who is linking to them by going typing in link:domainname.com (e.g. link:forthardknox.com) into a Google search, and receive a list of websites that have linked to the blog, sorted any way they like (click on “options” at the top left of the browser).

Google Page Rank and the Alexa rating are a much better way to track relevance and traffic of a blog right now.

And yet, this morning, I received this from Technorati, as part of a newsletter update:

Why Your Technorati Authority May Have Changed, and What You Can Do About It

Changes in Technorati Authority numbers – there are several reasons these numbers have decreased recently:

As our intent is to measure the influence and attention received on an ongoing basis, we stopped counting static blogroll links, and these links have now aged out of the authority calculations.

Due to the vast number of blogging platforms and custom installations out there (and some bloggers who felt we were using too much of their data), we now rely more heavily on RSS and Atom feeds than in the past. Bloggers can control how much of their content they wish to syndicate via feeds. Many blogs only provide partial feeds, we are not always able to get link data from them. Thus, links from these blogs may no longer contribute to your authority.

Finally, to make sure we always know about your updates, please make sure you are pinging us. You can ping us manually from our Ping Page, or learn about configuring your system to ping us automatically on our Help Page. Many blogging services and platforms have a preconfigured option for pinging Technorati and other services.

If you find links to your blog that don’t appear on Technorati, you may want to check that the other blog:

• is claimed on Technorati
• has a full-content feed
• is pinging us with updates.

So, let’s get this straight. In light of its increasing irrelevance, Technorati is increasing the effort that bloggers must make (and the effort they must convince their blogging friends to make) in order to achieve “authority?” They’re making it harder to do something that happens automatically on other search engines?

Whatever…We’d love to want to help you, Technorati, but I’m afraid we’re just a little too busy blogging.

 

Also see: Tracking Incoming Links

 

Tech Tip: Follow Gov’t Officials Online

Hat-Tip to Dr. Bill, of the ARRA News Service for this one.

10,000 Words has a great list of 5 Online tools for following US government officials this week. Check it out!

 

Tech Tip: FHK WebWarriors Google Reader

Be sure to check out our new Google Reader, updated frequently with items from our reading list that are useful for politically-conservative Web 2.0 activists.

If you have a Google Account (G-Mail, etc.), you can subscribe and share Web 2.0 info with us, or click on the WEB 2.0 READER link near the top left of our blog.

Tech Tip: target=”_blank”

To keep readers on your blog longer, be sure to have links open in a new page.   If you’re using a visual editor, the link shortcut will give you this option.  If you are using at HTML editor, include target=”_blank” within the hyperlink.

 

Here’s an example:

 

<a href=”http://forthardknox.com/category/web20/” target=”_blank”>Conservative 2.0!</a>

 

The above code will produce the following link. Click it to see what happens. Notice that your link will open in a new window.

Conservative 2.0!

 

Is the Oministry Seeking to Nationalize Private Cybersecurity?

We received the following from CEI today:

According to a breaking news report by CNET’s Declan McCullagh, a draft bill in the U.S. Senate would grant President Obama “cybersecurity emergency powers” to disconnect and even seize control of private sector computers on the Internet.  Back in May, when Obama proposed a “cybersecurity czar with a broad mandate” and the administration issued a report outlining potential vulnerabilities in the government’s information security policies, CEI Director of Technology Studies Wayne Crews cautioned about “the constant temptation by politicians in both parties to expand government authority over ‘critical’ private networks.”

“From American telecommunications to the power grid, virtually anything networked to some other computer is potentially fair game to Obama to exercise ‘emergency powers,’” Crews said today.  “Policy makers should be suspicious of proposals to collectivize and centralize cybersecurity risk management, especially in frontier industries like information technology.  When government asserts authority over security technologies, it hinders the evolution of more robust information security practices and creates barriers to non-political solutions—both mundane and catastrophic.  The result is that we become less secure, not more secure.”

Instead, Crews had urged the Obama Administration to focus on “securing government networks and keeping government agencies on the cutting edge of communications technology.”  As today’s news illustrates, the dangers created by such a “broad mandate” may come to pass.

Also see:

• Obama’s Cyber Czar Should Obey “Cybersecurity Commandment
• OpenMarket.org for ongoing commentary on tech issues
• Cybersecurity Finger-pointing: Regulation vs. Markets for Software Liability, Information Security, and Insurance
• Cybersecurity and Authentication: The Marketplace Role in Rethinking Anonymity – Before Regulators Intervene
• Giving Chase in Cyberspace Does Vigilantism Against Hackers and File-sharers Make Sense?

 

Hot Air’s Allahpundit: Insert “What if Bush did it?” hypothetical here.

 

Gov’t Transparency Tool, ‘Money Near Votes,’ Zooms in on Banking Industry Contribs given w/in 2 wks of Credit Card Bill Vote

The following is from Pamela Heisey, of MAPLight.org:

MAPLight.org, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research organization that shows the connection between money and politics, released ‘Money Near Votes,’ a new government transparency tool. This public, web-accessible data mashup combines information on campaign finance and congressional votes. Journalists, citizen activists and bloggers can easily track campaign contributions from special-interest groups given within a month, a week, or a day of each vote in Congress.

This new level of transparency hones in on the role special interests play in shaping public policy. “Never before have these ‘well-timed’ campaign donations been highlighted in such an exhaustive, easy-to-locate format,” said Daniel Newman, MAPLight.org’s executive director.

MAPLight.org’s Money Near Votes tool uses campaign contribution data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

For example, if you use the Money Near Votes tool to follow the money for the House vote on H.R. 627, the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009, you’ll see that the banking industry contributed $271,029 in campaign contributions to House legislators within two weeks of the House’s vote on this bill.

The Money Near Votes tool shows each legislator along with their campaign contributions and votes. For example, Rep. Addison Wilson (R-SC) voted ‘No’ on the Credit Card bill on April 30, 2009. He received $2,000 from the American Bankers Association on April 27, three days earlier, and $5,000 from the Credit Union National Association on April 29, the day before the vote. Both groups opposed the Credit Card bill.

Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act of 2009: Money Received Within Two Weeks Before or After the Vote

Click to enlarge, and see full list.

Contributions shown include contributions from companies, industry political action committees, and company employees.

“Companies would not invest in politicians’ election campaigns if it didn’t buy them influence or access,” said Newman.

Consumer-First Energy Act

In another example, last year the Senate failed to pass an energy bill that would have revoked $17 billion in tax breaks to oil producers and placed a 25 percent windfall profits tax on companies that did not invest in new energy sources. MAPLight.org’s Money Near Votes tool shows that Mary Landrieu (D-LA) voted ‘No’ on passage of the bill on June 10, 2008. She received $5,000 from Chesapeake Energy three days later, on June 13. Chesapeake Energy was among the firms potentially subject to the proposed windfall profits tax.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Senator Landrieu has received $711,644 from oil and gas interests since 1989.

“Never before has it been so easy to connect the dots between campaign contributions and legislators’ votes,” said Newman. What used to take days of manual research is now available at the click of a mouse.”

MAPLight.org’s research department reveals how contributions correlate with legislation so that citizens have key information needed to draw their own conclusions about how campaign contributions affect policy. Campaign contributions are only one factor affecting legislator behavior. The correlations we highlight between industry and union giving and legislative outcomes do not show that one caused the other, and we do not make this claim. We do make the claim, however, that campaign contributions bias our legislative system. Simply put, candidates who take positions contrary to industry interests are unlikely to receive industry funds and thus have fewer resources for their election campaigns than those whose votes favor industry interests.

MAPLight.org invites you to connect with us on Twitter and Facebook to stay up-to-date on the money and politics issues that affect you. You can also bookmark or subscribe to our blog’s RSS feed

About MAPLight.org:

MAPLight.org is a nonpartisan, nonprofit, 501(c)(3) organization based in Berkeley, California. Our mission is to illuminate the connection between Money and Politics (MAP) using our groundbreaking database of campaign contributions and legislative votes. MAPLight.org combines data from the Federal Election Commission, the Center for Responsive Politics, GovTrack.us, the National Institute on Money in State Politics (NIMSP), the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission and other sources to better inform Americans and local and national media about the role of special-interest money in our political system. Hundreds of newspapers, TV stations, radio shows and online news sites have cited MAPLight.org’s research, including CNN, the public radio show Marketplace, Harper’s magazine, The Washington Post, Reuters, and The Wall Street Journal. MAPLight.org has received numerous awards including a Knight-Batten Award for Innovations in Journalism, a James Madison Freedom of Information Award from the Northern California Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists and a Webby nomination for best Politics website. To learn more, visit MAPLight.org.

 

Wikipedia incorporates peer-review into it’s online editing process.

Wikipedia is perhaps the most well-known wiki, and increasingly popular method of determining what the “common wisdom” is on a topic, person, place, or event. As most of us were taught in school, encyclopedias should never be used a primary reference, but they are a good starting point, for research. Wikipedia is no exception – because it is populated almost totally with user-generated data which can change by the minute, it is generally not a credible reference for validating a point of fact, but it can be useful as a reference in an open discussion about trends or ideas.

Wikipedia has a Google Page Rank of 9/10 (very high), and can be a good way for a celebrity or public figure to establish his/her digital profile (online reputation). In cases, however, where there is controversy surrounding a public figure, movement, or concept, Wikipedia can become the battle ground for a wiki-war (aka “vandalism”), in which users on opposing sides of the controversy continuously battle for the most recent edit and update of a wiki page, trying to make their point of view the most prominent. Blogoscoped has some examples of famous wiki-wars in the early part of this decade, and Wikipedia itself has an updated list of its most vandalized pages. Page for most of the religions of the world have come under attack, as have many world leaders, a large number of celebrities.

Nigel Kendall, Technology Editor for the TimesOnline, explains a new trial Wikipedia is implementing to try to curb some of this “vandalism,” (See Wikipedia to end editing free-for-all). Edits by new members of the Wikipedia community will be held for approval by more experienced editors.

Will it work? We’ll see. Peer-review (i.e. “truth by concensus”) is a volitile concept.

 

WebWarrior: ‘Buffoon’ of D=S (Updated with new URL)

UPDATE: Buffoon’s new blog is at DequalsS.blogspot.com (Something about being tired of Wordpress updates…)

Last year I received the funniest e-mail.

A reader was writing to let me know that the Ft. Hard Knox logo we were using at the time looked all “pixely,” and that he’d taken it upon himself to create a new one for us.

Huh ?!

I didn’t even know what to think about that, but the sample logo he’d created was really good. I wrote back, and explained to him that we were working with a zero budget, and that we were all volunteers…he assured me he didn’t want to be paid. (Apparently, he just couldn’t stand looking at my stock photo modified in Microsoft Paint any longer.) Since then, he has worked back and forth with me many times to modify our various logoas as needed and to create the logo we’re using now, and has continued to help us with graphics that the project has needed as we’ve gone along. He’s kept us “looking good.”

So, who was this audacious reader? He goes by “Buffoon,” and has his own blog, Democrat = Socialist: Unhinged, Unashamed, Unfiltered, Right Wing Punditry (or D=S for short). The blog is not for readers with senstive ears (or eyes); there’s no question, however, about which side he’s on or what he (and his his “agitators“) stand for.

In the short period of time Buffoon’s been blogging, he’s already attained a Google Page Rank of 4/10, and a Technorati rating of 195 (excellent!), through aggressively and effectively using social networking techniques, and by posting original, entertaining blog content that other bloggers enjoy linking to.

We are very thankful for ‘Buffoon’s,’ (an amusing misnomer) help on the Ft. Hard Knox project, and for his contribution to the conservative right blogosphere. He is this week’s WebWarrior.

If you’d like to nominate a “WebWarrior” (a conservative using Web 2.0 effectively) e-mail Jenn.

 

Important: Update Adobe Reader (aka Adobe Acrobat) AND Adobe Flash

(Updated)

We received this from Tom Reynolds and Paul Croteau (”The Loud Talker”) over at RFC Radio:

If you have not updated BOTH Adobe Reader (aka Adobe Acrobat) AND Adobe Flash since July 31st YOUR SYSTEM IS VULNERABLE! It doesn’t matter if you use a PC, a Mac, or Linux. It doesn’t matter which browser you use. It doesn’t matter if you just paid 80 bucks for a fancy security suite. If you play flash games, watch flash videos, chat in flash chat, or read Acrobat documents your system is at risk. If you want to read more about it than most people want to know, you can read more AT NetworkWorld.com.

If your computer (PC or Mac) is compromised you risk the computer of everyone you communicate with, and everyone you share files with. Since you all send files to the station, that means that not practicing good sanitation risks the computers of your friends, family and co-workers. They may have protection on their computers, but nothing that is open to the world is perfect. If you don’t care about your computer think of your friends, your family, or your boss, and how a few days without their computer would affect them.

Below are instructions for each program:

If you use Adobe Reader start the program and go to Help > About. If it reports version 9.1.3 you’re up to date. If it says anything other than 9.1.3 then go to Help > Check for Updates. (If you want to install from scratch, Adobe’s patching system for Acrobat is screwy, so you have to, go to get.adobe.com/reader and install the version there, 9.1. When you run 9.1 it will prompt you to download a patch. The version you need to get to is 9.1.3.)

Flashplayer download site is get.adobe.com/flashplayer. The latest Adobe Flash Player version is 10.0.32.18. Just follow the link and click on the “Install Now” button and follow the prompts. Reinstalling the same version doesn’t hurt, and sometimes makes things work a little smoother for a bit. Checking the version takes almost as long as installing without checking, but if you want to check, right click on something that uses flash (like the RFC chat room) and select “About Adobe Flash Player 10.” (If you have a Mac and a 1 button mouse, Control-Click.)

The Truth Behind the Obama-as-Joker Posters

The L.A. Times today interviews the creator of the now-famous poster of President Obama as the Joker. To the amazement (and probably the disappointment) of many in the mainstream media, the creator is not what they might have expected:

When cryptic posters portraying President Obama as the Joker from “Batman” began popping up around Los Angeles and other cities, the question many asked was, Who is behind the image?

Was it an ultra-conservative grassroots group or a disgruntled street artist going against the grain?

Nope, it turns out, just a 20-year-old college student from Chicago.

Bored during his winter school break, Firas Alkhateeb, a senior history major at the University of Illinois, crafted the picture of Obama with the recognizable clown makeup using Adobe’s Photoshop software.

[...]

[He didn't vote in the last election, but] If he had to choose a politician to support, Alkhateeb said, it would be Ohio Democratic Rep. Dennis Kucinich…Regardless, Alkhateeb does agree…about “socialism” being the wrong caption for the Joker image. ‘It really doesn’t make any sense to me at all,’ he said. ‘To accuse him of being a socialist is really…immature. First of all, who said being a socialist is evil?’ Read the entire article on the L.A. Times >>

Hat-Tip NewsBusters