In recent months, I’ve found myself gravitating toward this site’s crystal clear videos – many of which cover fascinating topics, the pinnacle of power and behind-the-scene glimpses at a world I typically don’t see.
The professionally-made videos tell a story as well as capture historic moments. Plus, there are plenty of videos from which to choose.
Am I talking about Vimeo? YouTube? Hulu? PBS? Network or cable news? National Geographic?
No, no, no, no, no, no.
To the online hip and especially Inside-the-Beltway types, just say – or rather type: WH.gov.
continue reading…
While two branches of the federal government have embraced social media, it looks like the Supreme Court is doing what it does best: Hearing cases and issuing opinions. Photo source: Supreme Court of the United States
As I was scanning The New York Times article about President Obama’s State of the Union speech, I came across the part in which Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito apparently disagreed with something that the chief executive said.
The Times reported that Alito, as he was sitting on the House floor, appeared to have mouthed the words, “No, it’s not true.”
I don’t know much about Alito. So, I decided to visit the Web site of the Supreme Court of the United States.
My first reaction after seeing it: Wow.
Based on the judicial branch’s Web site – which has a blue background, simple navigational buttons and a photo of the Supreme Court – the justices seem to be a pretty sober-minded group of intellectuals.
Which is fine. Being a sober-minded group of people is part of the duty of representing the judicial branch of the federal government.
But isn’t the 21st century about digital transparency and being a hipster, tech geek in the United States?
Where are the Twitter, Facebook and flickr icons? Where’s the YouTube introduction of the justices, say, enjoying a barbecue on the Potomac?
continue reading…
rss feed
