I’m puzzling over the New York Times article on google and Jim Moore’s Second Superpower paper in this morning’s Week in Review. Jim’s very short paper, with no footnotes and little more than an intriguing idea in its first-cut articulation, clearly grabbed the attention of the online world for a time. And google rewarded it with a high page-rank. Why is that so strange?
Dave Winer, implicated in the story, has more.
Lessig on same: “It is wrong wrong wrong to bias the rules against the free.”
Doc Searls, also one of those implicated, has a tour de force on the topic as well.
Lots of fodder for the journalism panel of our planned BloggerCon this Fall, no? Think the NYT will show up?
Also: how do you think reporter Geoffrey Nunberg feels about the fact that the link above to his article has to go away in a few days? Does that really make sense?