given that over 100,000 delegates attend the wsf, the prominence of one particular delegate is probably an indicator of the media's celebrity obsession more than that delegate's greed for publicity.
while we're on the subject, should celebrities have opinions on political, social, economic issues? should they voice them? especially in a media market that will pay scant attention to the issue unless they do? even if all they're bringing to the party is their celebrity? On 11/23/06, Ramakrishnan Sundaram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/23/06, Ingrid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > inevitably, a group that evolved as a response to that bunch of > businesspeople, would display counter-dependent "anti" stances. is that, or > the fact their meetings are relatively unstructured, enough reason to > dismiss their ideas? No. The FoU meet being planned here will probably display "couter-dependent "anti" stances, and will be unstructured. It is more of a dismissal by association, in this case of people who are > publicity hogs like > Arundhati Roy So, shall we start discussing Ms Roy now? Ram
-- "An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex." - Aldous Huxley
