Jason Clarke

As mentioned by other bloggers, I am participating in a new blogger outreach program courtesy of Nikon USA and a PR firm, MWW Group. Nikon has loaned me a Nikon D80 digital SLR camera for a six month period beginning Thursday, when I received the camera and a lens (along with standard accessories and a 1GB memory card) in the mail.

What are the terms of the program?
At the end of the six-month loan period, I may purchase the camera (at an “editorial discount”), extend my loan for six months, or return the camera. To get me going, MWW Group has offered a 30-minute training session in person or on the phone.

In their welcome letter offering me to participate in the program, Nikon stated that they expect no explicit published mentions of my use of the camera; only that I disclose my participation in the program when mentioning my use of the camera, which of course is what they should require following last year’s Microsoft laptop PR debacle. Kudos to Nikon and MWW Group for a stated commitment to transparency (View a JPG of their invitation letter).

While we’re on the topic of disclosure, it’s important to note that I’ve had a previous working relationship with Tom Biro, Senior Director for New Media Strategies at MWW Group (the agency handling this outreach program). I’ve known Tom since 2004, when we both began serving on the Board of the Media Bloggers Association.

How am I going to use the camera?
If you check out my Flickr photostream, you’ll see that my wife Heidi and I are currently taking around 20 photos per week and uploading around 5-10 pictures a week to Flickr with our current camera, a Kodak EasyShare CX7430. For starters, we’ll attempt to switch over to the Nikon D80 almost exclusively for family and personal photos, about 40% of which make it up to our Flickr account (the rest live on our hard drive).

In addition, we’ll also be using the camera in conjunction with an as-yet-unfinished personal project that combines blogging and photography and will be launching within the next two weeks.

Finally, I may share comments and/or reviews of the camera here on this site. You should know that my perspective is as a technologist who is interested in trying and mastering tools, such as this camera, but that as a photographer I am squarely amateur. So at least in the early stages, my comments will likely revolve around making the shift from a mid-level consumer device to a power-user camera and whatever learning curve comes along with that.

If you have any questions or comments about the program or my and other bloggers’ participation in it, please share them in the comments.

If you’re reading this site via RSS, take a second and check out the new header image. It’s a shot I took last spring at the Orono Bog Walk. It replaces the traditional winter/spring image of fireworks over Hong Kong. Flashback: Almost a year ago, the fireworks header was replaced by a shot from a ski lift over Henniker, New Hampshire.

If you follow my Flickr photos, you may have noticed a recent uptick in the amount of food photos we’re posting to our Good Food set. This is all in preparation for a new project I’m working on that I hope to take the lid off over the next couple of weeks. Here’s a preview.

If you visit this site from a compliant mobile device, you’ll now be automatically re-directed to the mobile version of jasonclarke.org. I’m still working out some kinks in my mobile version (permalinks are not mobile-friendly yet), and of course I also need to add auto-redirection for other mobile devices. But overall I’m glad to be taking incrimental steps towards mobile compatibility.

Tim O’Reilly, owner of O’Reilly Media, recently proposed a blogging code of conduct in light of recent threats against blogger Kathy Sierra and the ensuing controversy that arose around the discussion of those threats.

While this is obviously a move born of positive intentions, I think that a blogging code of conduct is a terribly misguided idea.

Clearly, a community such as the blogosphere does not condone terrifying threats: the outpouring of support for Kathy Sierra demonstrated that fact. In addition, the blogosphere is also regarded, I believe rightly so, as a community willing and often able to commit acts of self-reflection, analysis, and adjustment. In that context, it’s difficult to see how any kind of codification could serve to do anything beyond artificially limit and stifle speech and the interactions that arise from it.

In short, what we have is a community fully adept at policing itself, the positive and group-building effects of which are infinitely more powerful than any kind of codification could hope to be.

If you need a code to interact from, define one for yourself, and by all means live by it– heck, even publicize for your readers to consider. And if it’s in line with norms, or catches on (lord knows the blogosphere is nothing if not self-policing…and trend happy), who knows? Maybe your code will be adopted informally, organically, subconsciously, where it might, just might, have a positive impact. Anything less natural is destined to fail, and by its definition limit our collective speech in the process.

Note: This post was scheduled to be published tomorrow morning, but after learning via CNN.com that Imus has now been suspended for two weeks, I’m posting it now.

Last week on his radio show, Imus in the Morning, host Don Imus made some cruel, stupid, and insensitive comments regarding the Rutgers University Women’s basketball team. ESPN.com carries an Associated Press recounting of the comments:

“That’s some rough girls from Rutgers,” Imus said. “Man, they got tattoos … .”

“Some hardcore hos,” McGuirk said.

“That’s some nappy-headed hos there, I’m going to tell you that,” Imus said.

Imus has since apologized twice over the past five days, adding today that “…because the climate on this program has been what it’s been for 30 years doesn’t mean that it has to be that way for the next five years or whatever because that has to change, and I understand that.”

Despite two public apologies, some including Al Sharpton are still calling for Mr. Imus’ retirement or firing.

So let’s take a moment to consider the concept of “grass is greener” or “shell game” politics, as I think the Imus case represents a fine example. In this case, Imus made some decidedly inappropriate, unkind, hurtful comments. Those who see clear public relations profiteering from the situation- namely, Mr. Sharpton- then launch into action, ready to take two tacts. One, if Imus stands by his comments (or explains them as a joke), his opponent will then demand whatever course of action hasn’t happened- in that scenario, an apology.

But since Mr. Imus did offer an apology, the shell game continues, with his opponents such as Sharpton now demanding something else- in this case, an outright dismissal.

This shell game of never ending consequences for public relations gain is just one small, insignificant reason why Mr. Imus should decidedly not be fired. The larger reason is that he has now twice publicly apologized for these unwise comments.

Personally, I’d prefer to see somebody like Mr. Sharpton- who has inflicted actual damage on America’s race relations for over 20 years- be the subject of such furor…again. That is, if anybody still takes him the slightest bit seriously.

UPDATE: Some people still take Mr. Sharpton seriously despite his history, as Imus’ radio program has just been suspended by both CBS Radio and MSNBC television for two weeks (see link at the top of this post). While this is yet another conciliatory step on Imus’ behalf, it won’t likely do much to deter Mr. Sharpton, as it should be beyond obvious by now that his aim is not to extract amends, but instead to further amplify his own persona.

I’m taking a (nearly) one-month hiatus from reading any RSS feeds. I’ll come back to Google Reader on May 1st, mark all items read, and go from there!