In no particular order, they are:

• content aggregators care much about Rupert Murdoch putting content behind a paywall,
• increasing the amount of media content in controlled spaces (ie the iPad) could significantly undermine Google’s business model,
• it will become easier to stop people breaking DRM and other copy-protection measures in the future, not harder, and
• the implication that radio stations, TV channels and other internet sites don’t read newspapers and re-use the content.

They’re all worth having a laugh at for various reasons. I’m surprised a technology writer doesn’t make more about how Google structures its search algorithim. I’m also surprised a technology writer thinks the golden age of copy protection is apparently ahead of us, not behind.

But the most interesting thing in Farrer’s piece is that citizen journalists, bloggers and tweeters have more to fear from News Ltd and other old media organisations locking up content than the other way around. Farrer makes the not unreasonable comment that if traditional news content was successfully locked away, tweeters, bloggers and citizen journos would have to go elsewhere for content to ‘riff’ off. It’s a big if but even if he was right in saying it could be done successfully, it doesn’t matter. News Ltd, Fairfax and other big media outlets should be more afraid of citizen journos having reduced opportunities to riff off their content than the other way round.

People are already paying less attention to traditional media, they’re digesting less traditional media and diversifying their sources when they do. They’re paying more attention to their Twitter feeds and Facebook updates than ever before because they feel that the content is relevant and that it matters. Locking conternt up further encourages more of that, not less. News Ltd and Fairfax et al should do everything they can to encourage bloggers and tweeters to hang off their every word.

To do otherwise risks speeding up a virtuous circle that has already begun and risks leaving old media out in the cold.

And yet, those who are online have a trump card. They have each other. This survey finds that having a chronic disease increases the probability that an internet user will share what they know and learn from their peers. They unearth nuggets of information. They blog. They participate in online discussions.

I suspect it’s similar for people with a disability.

Indeed I’d be keen to see a survey similatr in size to this one that went further and looked at whether people with a disability or a major chronic illness not only used social media to engage more about their affliction but about anything. The internet lowers the barrier for disabled people to find their tribe (whether it’s an online writing group, manga chat room or a MUD) as well as making it easier to find information about their health. It certainly has for me.

Research grant anyone?

There’s a lot to look forward to on this trip – the World Fantasy Convention in Calgary, catching up with buddies at the bar in Calgary, visiting San Franciso and Washington. But I’m most excited by the fact we arrive in New York the night before the presidential election. I love elections (and not just because it’s part of my job to help win them) but there’s such a vibrancy to them. In Brisbane we’ve got a polling booth across the road from us and it’s a great feeling to be able to simply walk out the door and vote.

Come the night of November 4 I’m looking forward to finding the right kind of bar in New York, sitting down and watching the results roll in. It could be interesting if it’s a close result because we’re booked in to have breakfast with a publisher the next morning, and I’m kinda figuring that pulling an all-nighter probably isn’t the done thing. But I’m getting the feeling it won’t be a close thing.

It’s been an interesting campaign. From a political sense it was interesting to watch McCain throw the dice again and again (choosing Palin, halting his campaign to deal with the economic crisis, and raisng the stakes by going super-negative) and lose but I’m just as interested to see the wash-up of the internet and the effect it had on the election.

Lots of people are rushing to say us inter-webbed masses have already won the election for Obama but I’m not sure whether they are confusing cause and effect. I genuinely don’t know. I think the impact is wide but I’m not sure how deep. And I think it could also be a result of Republican ineptitude. Anyway, I’m looking forward to talking about it in the US.

In the meantime, let me leave you with two intersting pieces of information pertinent to the changing face of elections The first is the information people googled during the VP debate. Read some analysis of it here.

The second is the fact You Tube wasn’t even around during the 2004 presidential election, which is a shame because it it was we may have seen more gems like this:

Here’s betting the number of views on YouTube increase tenfold in the next 24 hours.

UPDATE: YouTube received a takedown notice for the video. You can see it here instead.