2020年10月9日 星期五

No takes, just reading material.

I'm all out of takes!
Author Headshot

By Jamelle Bouie

Opinion Columnist

The email subject line of this week’s newsletter should tell you where my head space is. I spent a lot of time working on my columns this week, as well as speaking on panels and generally thinking through the week’s events. I always like to have another argument or perspective or observation for you at the end of the week, but today the well has run dry. The rest of the newsletter is as usual, of course, so please check out my columns and my selection of reading for this week, and I’ll see you next Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT

What I Wrote

On Tuesday, I argued that contrary to perception, Donald Trump is actually very bad at politics.

Trump was the unexpected winner of the 2016 presidential election. That victory led many, including Trump himself, to believe he had some special sauce, some superpower that helped him defy political gravity. There’s no question he has some political skills. A lifelong showman, he’s good with a crowd, or at least certain kinds of crowds. He can distill an entire governing agenda into a few simple phrases. And he’s been able to build an emotional connection with a significant part of the American electorate. But even with those assets, Trump doesn’t win the 2016 election without a huge amount of luck.

And on Friday, I continued building my argument for expanding the Supreme Court, this time focused on accountability for a Republican Party that has nearly wrecked American democracy in its drive to control the courts.

To allow the American people to govern themselves, to rein in the judiciary and break a would-be reactionary super-legislature — to show Republicans that they cannot keep the ill-gotten gains of the Trump years — Democrats will need to expand the courts.

Now Reading

Hakeem Jefferson on Black voters and the two-party system at FiveThirtyEight.

Josephine Livingstone on grocery shopping at The New Republic.

Mike Giglio on the right-wing Oathkeepers group in The Atlantic.

Michael Lewis on the anti-mask movement in California at Bloomberg.

Evelyn L. Forget on universal basic income in Foreign Affairs.

Jason Blakely on right-wing Catholic “integralism” in Commonweal magazine.

Kathleen Belew on the plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, in The Washington Post.

ADVERTISEMENT

Feedback

If you’re enjoying what you’re reading, please consider recommending it to friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week’s newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at jamelle-newsletter@nytimes.com.

Photo of the Week

The removal of a Confederate monument.Jamelle Bouie

Albemarle County in Virginia recently took down the Confederate soldier’s monument near the courthouse, one of three Confederate monuments in the area. The other two, equestrian statues of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, are still standing.

ADVERTISEMENT

Now Eating: Slow-Baked Beans With Kale

This very tasty, incredibly comforting meal always has a place in my cold-weather recipe rotation. I’ve made a couple of changes and substitutions to the original recipe, which I got from The New York Times Cooking section. First, instead of tomato paste dissolved in water, I use an equivalent amount of whole canned tomatoes, puréed (or put through a food mill). Second, I use chicken stock instead of water, although if you are a vegetarian, feel free to use vegetable stock (or stick with water). And I use fresh bread crumbs from stale bread. As for the beans, if you can get your hands on some Royal Coronas from Rancho Gordo, I recommend them.

Ingredients

  • 1 bunch kale, stemmed and washed in two changes of water
  • 3 tablespoons extra virgin olive oil
  • 1 medium onion, chopped
  • 1 carrot, chopped
  • 1 rib celery, chopped
  • 4 garlic cloves, minced
  • 1⅔ cups white beans (¾ pound) or dried lima beans, picked over and soaked for at least 4 hours and drained
  • 1 6-ounce can tomato paste, dissolved in 1 cup water
  • 3 cups additional water
  • A bouquet garni consisting of four parsley sprigs, two thyme sprigs and a bay leaf
  • 1 teaspoon herbes de Provence
  • Salt
  • A generous amount of freshly ground pepper
  • ½ cup bread crumbs

Directions

Preheat the oven to 225 degrees. Meanwhile, bring a large pot of water to a boil, salt generously and add the kale. Blanch for 2 minutes, then transfer to a bowl of ice water. Drain, squeeze out water and cut into ribbons. Set aside.

Heat 2 tablespoons of the olive oil over medium heat in a large ovenproof casserole. Add the onion, carrots and celery. Cook, stirring often, until the onion is tender, about 5 minutes. Add the garlic and cook, stirring, until fragrant, 30 seconds to a minute. Add the dissolved tomato paste and bring to a simmer.

Add the drained beans, the remaining water, the bouquet garni, herbes de Provence and salt and pepper. Stir in the kale, bring to a simmer, cover and place in the oven. Bake 3 hours until the beans are tender and creamy. Taste and adjust salt.

Mix together the remaining olive oil and the bread crumbs. Sprinkle the bread crumbs over the beans and continue to bake another 30 minutes to an hour until the bread crumbs are lightly browned. Remove from the heat and serve, or allow to cool slightly and serve.

IN THE TIMES

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Jamelle Bouie from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

On Tech: Facebook’s China tactics backfire

Facebook is now complaining about something for which it is partly to blame.

Facebook’s China tactics backfire

Daniel Maarleveld

Instagram’s boss had a message this week for the White House and the world: It was counterproductive for the United States to try to ban TikTok, the popular video app from China.

It’s bad for U.S. tech companies and people in the United States, Adam Mosseri, the head of Instagram, told Axios, if other countries take similar steps against technology from beyond their borders — including Facebook and its Instagram app. (He and Mark Zuckerberg have said this before, too.) “It’s really going to be problematic if we end up banning TikTok and we set a precedent for more countries to ban more apps,” he said.

Mosseri has a point. What he didn’t say, though, was that Facebook has itself partly to blame. The company helped fan the fears about TikTok that Facebook is now worried will blow back on the company. This is bonkers.

Facebook complaining about a bad policy that Facebook helped initiate might seem like an eye-rolling joke, but it’s more than that. It’s the latest evidence that the company’s executives are incapable of foresight. Facebook not predicting how its own actions might cause harm later on is partly why we have sprawling conspiracies and autocrats harassing their own citizens.

I genuinely wonder what Facebook expected to happen with its TikTok fearmongering. Over and over again for at least a year, Zuckerberg and other top Facebook executives privately and publicly spoke out against censorship by TikTok and other Chinese technology companies and complained that Chinese government support for domestic technology companies gave them a leg up over American companies.

ADVERTISEMENT

They weren’t wrong. There are reasons to be worried about TikTok and other Chinese technology operating in the United States. But I don’t believe Facebook was bringing up these concerns out of principled commitment to American values. What Facebook was doing was pure short-term self-interest.

The company’s executives implied that if U.S. lawmakers regulated or restrained Facebook, then somehow — it was never clear how, exactly — Chinese companies like TikTok and Chinese values would take over the world. Playing up often legitimate concerns about Chinese apps also sought to distract people from real problems about Facebook by yelling “LOOK OVER THERE!” about China.

There was plenty of concern in Washington about TikTok and Chinese technology even without Facebook pressing its points. But the company encouraged the sentiment that led American officials to try to bar TikTok from the United States.

TikTok probably won’t be banned. A ban never really seemed to be the point of the bizarre political theater. Still, a precedent has been set. As Mosseri warned, countries that are mad will probably feel emboldened to take it out on foreign tech companies by barring them from their borders.

ADVERTISEMENT

A large proportion of people who use Facebook and its Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp apps are outside the United States, so those companies could well become the victims of government bans.

Only now are Facebook officials realizing that their TikTok trash talk helped unleash a monster that might hurt them. Usually the consequences of Facebook’s myopia falls on the most vulnerable people. This time — to the company’s utter shock — Facebook’s lack of foresight might hurt Facebook itself.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Let’s talk about internet ads!

Did that headline make you excited?! Yeah, OK, no. But really, we should talk about internet ads.

Ads we see on websites and other digital spots passed television commercials several years ago as the dominant way companies pitch their new cars, travel packages, and other products and services.

ADVERTISEMENT

But there is a question that has been whispered for years about online advertising, including the types of personalized ads we see on Facebook and Google. What if … it doesn’t really work?

That question is getting renewed attention now because of a new book from a former Google employee who argues that the pervasive online ads based on digital dossiers of our habits are less accurate and less persuasive than its proponents believe.

That idea is overstated, I think. Online advertising is sprawling, and there is a lot of waste, outright fraud, overpromises and wasted money. A lot. That’s less true of the ads sold by Facebook and Google and more of the very long tail of advertising on the rest of the internet. (This is a good read on this topic.)

So yeah, some internet ads work really well. Some are garbage. But the problem is that all of it creates the conditions for a land grab to collect as much information on people as possible to craft ads targeted at each individual. Even if the ads are persuasive, the downsides of online advertising have gotten out of control.

What’s the way out of this? Comprehensive government regulation to force companies to collect less information about us. Period. That may be too much to hope for. But I am excited about experiments in advertising that are based not on who we are but what we’re doing right now.

If you are searching for Nike sneakers in Google, you’re probably going to be tempted by an ad for Nike sneakers. If you’re reading an article about Hawaii vacation spots — at some point in the future, when we can travel freely again — you might be interested in ads for holiday packages to Hawaii. Some news organizations are experimenting with this kind of advertising, as are companies like DuckDuckGo, a web search engine that competes with Google.

So, yes, some online ads are exceedingly persuasive and even useful to us. But almost all online ads are too creepy and we should welcome alternatives, whether through regulation or different business approaches.

Before we go …

  • This should be interesting: Twitter said it would force people to pause before they pass along others’ tweets and made several other temporary changes to its routine features. The changes are an attempt to control the spread of misinformation in the final weeks before the U.S. presidential election, my colleague Kate Conger reported. Some experts have said it would improve online conversations if Facebook, Twitter and other websites made it harder for people to rashly share information without thinking.
  • Fix Facebook by breaking Facebook: Charlie Warzel, an Opinion writer for The New York Times, writes that the best step Facebook can take is to entirely redesign itself. The plot to kidnap Michigan’s governor, which prosecutors said was coordinated in part on Facebook, is more evidence that the company must distribute information around values other than what gets people’s attention, Charlie says.
  • How to make your Alexa less creepy: This is not a project for everyone, but one writer built his own device like the Amazon Echo Show in about 45 minutes, without the snooping company.

Hugs to this

The human sprayed water at the octopus. The octopus turned it into a water fight game.

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you’d like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don’t already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018