AN INTERESTING EMAIL from Condi Rice.

AN OFFICER ON THE U.S.S. ABRAHAM LINCOLN disputes a story about rude and inept U.N. passengers that has been widely circulated in the blogosphere.

TONY MAURO profiles the Institute for Justice, which has two cases before the Supreme Court this term.

SHOULD I DISCLOSE THIS? In the mail today, I got two books from Charles Stross: The Atrocity Archives and The Family Trade. Autographed, no less.

Meanwhile, lefty blogger Newshog wonders why I like Stross, and gets replies from me and from Stross in the comments.

TONGUE TIED is looking for co-bloggers.

“I TOOK FEDERAL MONEY:” Brian Noggle makes full disclosure.

TSUNAMI UPDATE: The U.N. is trying to take credit for the work of others, but is busted by the Diplomad.

MAX BOOT examines Seymour Hersh and finds him wanting in objectivity and suffering from “relaxed reportorial standards.” He concludes: “His record doesn’t inspire confidence.”

THE SPEED OF BLOG: Barb Kaye from the U.T. Journalism Department emails:

I’m introducing my Web journalism students to blogging. Instapundit is on the big screen, and we’re hoping you’ll respond to us so students can see how blogging works.

Anything to oblige a colleague.

UPDATE: I should mention that she has a new textbook out on electronic media, which talks about blogs. In fact, she got me to write a short segment.

IT SEEMS AS IF every other time I go to Amazon, one of these is shown as the “featured product.” Are they advertising that much to everyone, or do they know something that I don’t? . . . Should I be taking this as advice?

UPDATE: Reader Rick Sawyer emails:

Ironically, when I sign on, I see this: Panasonic ES246AC Bikini Shaper and Trimmer
…

To paraphrase from you, do they know something I don’t? And if so, HOW??Ugh.

Heh.

ANOTHER UPDATE: I’m not the only one.

MICKEY KAUS comments on my MSNBC Kurtz piece. I agree that the Gallagher and Kurtz cases aren’t the same — my point in mentioning Kurtz, and Kaus’s critique of him, was simply that lots of people in the pundit class have conflicts, and don’t disclose them every time. And, as I said, I don’t share Kaus’s criticisms of Kurtz.

Still, Kaus makes a good point when he observes that Kurtz’s position is somewhat unique, and there may be something to this point:

The issue with Kurtz isn’t whether he discloses his conflict with CNN (he usually does, though not always). The issue is whether even disclosure of the conflict cures his problem, or whether the conflict is so great Kurtz can’t be trusted on his beat even with disclosure. … Clearly, by the conventional MSM standards, Kurtz should be taken off the beat. The Post wouldn’t let a reporter who had a lucrative gig with General Motors cover General Motors, as Charles Kaiser has noted. … The issue was settled, in my mind, when Kurtz went soft on CNN in the Eason Jordan/Saddam atrocity scandal. He’s a great reporter, but you can’t trust anything he writes about CNN anymore. They have him by the balls. (That’s especially true now, when CNN’s whole programming approach is under review. Does Kurtz want to offend Jon Klein, the man who’ll decide whether to cancel his show? He sure didn’t when he interviewed his paymaster in this January 6 WaPo story.) …

The big question, I guess, is what do you do? Kurtz is a one-man media empire. You could, I guess, say that such things shouldn’t exist. Or you could rely on a system that’s big, and diverse, enough that they don’t matter so much when they do. I tend to favor the latter approach. Diversity, and markets, are better than regulations.

UPDATE: Reader Richard Samuelson emails:

I realize that this point is easing into satire, but I am making a serious point. In principle wouldn’t true full disclosure, if we were really to get serious about it, require that reporters disclose who is paying their spouses, and perhaps children? If it were Kurtz’s wife who worked for CNN, rather than Kurtz himself would the conflict of interest be any less real.

Incidentally, Jonah Goldberg was very good about that when his wife was working for Attorney General Ashcroft. But he’s an opinion journalist, so it is easier for him. How many others have been similarly good? The age of the two-earner family makes things difficult in this regard, but that does not mean that we should have no standards.

Yeah, there’s a huge array of things you might disclose. The problem is that it gets unwieldy. And I think that although Kurtz’s Gallagher story makes clear (sort of) that the case isn’t an Armstrong Williams pay-for-play story, it’s being spun that way. One ethical consideration for journalists, beyond conflict of interest, involves covering stories in ways that contribute to that sort of spin. I don’t know how you could make a rule for that, but it’s certainly a consideration. This is especially true when the herd instinct strikes, and “me-too” journalism leads latecomers to try to make their stories sound more like others that were big news than they really are.

One also wonders why people like Bill Moyers don’t get more attention. Or — to pick a somewhat less significant example — CNN commentators James Carville and Paul Begala, who joined the Kerry campaign while staying on the air for CNN. In Carville and Begala’s case, I guess the viewer expects them to be shilling for whoever the Democratic nominee is.

Then again, that’s probably true for Moyers, too. Nonetheless, his case seems rather significant.

ED MORRISSEY says that the Washington Post is offering its readers a rare experience.

WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT that the 21st Century’s biggest problem would be underpopulation?

There seems to be a growing consensus that this is a serious issue.

GLOBAL WARMING: At least we’ve got a dialogue! Gregory Benford and Martin Hoffert are criticizing Michael Crichton, while Jerry Pournelle is debating a climatologist.

JAMES KIRCHICK writes that Yale has a diversity problem.

So, according to this report, does Dartmouth.

UPDATE: More on Yale and diversity here, from Tico Almeida. And there’s more on Dartmouth, with lots of links to related posts, here.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Diversity problems at Kansas State, too.

SOCIAL SECURITY UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal (free link) has an interview with Edward “Ned” Gramlich, a U.S. Federal Reserve governor who chaired a Social Security advisory commission a decade ago. He’s only partly on-board with the Bush reform plan.

UPDATE: David Hogberg offers some thoughts on the shape of the debate.

RUNNING THE NUMBERS WITH BIDEN AND RICE: Ed Morrissey has been corresponding with Andrew Rosenthal of the New York Times.

THE AMERICAN COPTIC UNION is crying foul at claims that the New Jersey killings weren’t motivated by religious hatred.

IF YOU GO TO THIS USA TODAY STORY on the Iraqi elections, you’ll see a sidebar of good news compiled by blogger Dave Weigel.

TRAFFIC CAMERAS are a longtime InstaPundit concern, but I haven’t paid enough attention to the issue lately. Eric Scheie, however, offers a serious rant on the subject.

ACTIVISM AS RITUAL WORSHIP: A phenomenon of the left and right.

IT’S NOT A NATIONAL ID CARD:

Oh sure, it will add a magnetic identification strip and identifying photo to your existing Social Security card, and you’ll be required to present the new card for identification any time you want to apply for a new job. At that point, your prospective employer would then check the identification listed on your card against a national database which identifies eligible employees.

But Rep. Dreier’s bill will not create a national identification card.

(Via Arthur Silber).

AIRBRUSHING at the Washington Post?

ANOTHER BLOGGER SUCCUMBS TO SCALZI’S irresistible charms:

You can chalk me up as another victim of John Scalzi’s Old Man’s War. The book arrived this afternoon, and I’ve hardly put it down.

I liked it, too.

AUSTIN BAY’S COLUMN is up. Plus, on his blog, he has a critique of easily-fatigued pundits.