If you enjoy watching Koolhaas, Eisenman, Hadid, etc on Charlie Rose, if you like the series on FLW, or the Frontline on WTC than this is architecturally related.
There is nothing in that news item that references any sort of architectural topic.
One could then make the argument that any news that affects buildings is architecture news. Alan Greenspan says the economy is good? Architecture news. A Building is bombed in Iraq? Architecture news. Donald Trump gets a new Hairpiece? Architecture news. Also, this politicizes the site, which I'm not a fan of either.
I feel like the validity of the News section is being challenged by various interests, including the "featured jobs" section. I'm no editor, but value the unique services that Archinect provides; and am saying my piece to keep it valuble and non-diluted.
all architecture is a political act. every bill passed, every building built, every election held shapes and changes the environment we live in.
CBP and PBS is one of the few outlets for us to talk frankly about the role of architecture and its place in the world.
Look at the high regard that architecture has in Europe and Japan... It's is apart of everyday conversation -- here architecture is perceived as a self-centered, ego driven, closed shell, arrogant, non-inclusive profession... I feel it's time to support those outlets that challenge that ideal.
As John said if you don't like it don't read it, filter your news (see the nifty thing on the righthand side). There are alternatives you can [url= read this instead or better yet, shock horror, make suggestions via the threads or emailing one of the editors......
That is preposterous, MiesvanderRice. And my next comment may enlighten the topic a bit more. Obviously no one gave you any Manfredo Tafuri in school. In any case, Archinect welcomes your suggestions here
I am writing you about an unfolding crises in Congress with regard to public broadcasting. Proposed funding cuts now before the full House pose a serious threat to public radio and television -- and to KCRW.
The proposed cut is 25% to KCRW's CPB grant this October and next October as well. Moreover adding the proposed additional cuts to PBS childrens' programs and station digital conversion -- the total reduction adds up to a whopping 45%!
Facility funding, which provided oportunities for stations to modernize and extend their service has already been zeroed out. These are the grants that helped KCRW purchase it's first modern transmitter in 1979 and launch NPR's Morning Edition. Later they enabled KCRW to extend sevice to Ventura and the
Antelope Valley.
If these cuts stand, KCRW may lose over $1,000,000 from its
operating revenue. This would severely impact KCRW's local programming and our ability to sustain NPR.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is the independent organization created by Congress to support public broadcasting and act as a heat shield against political interference. But now, ironically, the Corporation itself is providing the heat.
Chairman Ken Tomlinson has politicized matters by framing the issue of balance on news programs as liberal versus conservative. We vehemently object to this characterization which is intended to put public broadcasting on the defensive
and influence program decisions.
* We cherish our editorial independence and the political diversity of the audience we have attracted.
* We believe in objective journalism, free from political constraints.
* While we welcome constructive criticism, we reject partisan judgements masquerading as impartial analysis.
We can't reverse the funding cuts by ourselves. We need your help.
THE MOST IMPORTANT VOICE IN PUBLIC BROADCASTING IS YOURS!
Please register your opinion by contacting your Congressional Representative right away.
**besides all the good music and the news on KCRW, the station also independently produces and broadcasts DnA (Design and Architecture) (Relevant enough for you now, Mies van der Rice?)**
Kind of fucking ironic that a fucking hoax email petition became a reality under this fucking presidency. Kind of like a fucking hoax presidency all in all.
I got that hoax a week ago from a very high totem pole type and it was listed with a bunch of other big shots... I then forwarded a letter from NPR to them on the fact of the hoax and then the house cuts the funding. crazy...
I'm buying you two a drink. Although it did make me think we should get Francis on here as a guest editor or to do a 'view' -- the state of design criticism or something.
Listen, I know the current events under the neo-cabal is highly troubling. I grew up a Texas liberal, so it's been with me from day one. Partisan, black and white politics were in my third grade classroom.
My comments are just intended as watchdog barks to try to keep archinect on-topic and un-partisan. If there was legislation that cut funding from the GSA "Excellence in Architecture" program, or if KCRW specifically decided to remove DnA from it's lineup because of budget constraints, that would be Architecture news. Danger to a general program at large is national news, not architecture news. I can use www.nytimes.com or anything else for regular news. For architecture news I depend on archinect, which until now has kept remarkable discipline over it's content.
Like Mr.Jourden noted (with John Cage flair) in another post in which I commented; "everything is architecture". If you start posting ,as news, everything that affects the effects of architecture, this would become a diluted and unecessary website.
That’s great. Glad you could post your comments and thoughts.
Obviously, I don't agree with you or your perspective. Perhaps, the larger point about this website is that you can voice your opinion and your beliefs and your unique perspective (unlike the NYTimes), but just because you think you have a lock on what should and shouldn't matter to the world of architecture doesn't mean that Archinect will become relevant.
I think each editor has items, issues, and beliefs, which matter and drive them and since some of us are architects, designers, or what have you, doesn't mean we shouldn't post items we think are relevant to a larger audience in the world of aesthetics. Also, who ever said this site had to only included architecture news? There are categories designed into the site (which I use) for different types of content. If you want architecture only you can get it…like this
These topics relate directly to our world, our environment, and the way we think within the frame of aesthetics. As these are facets of architecture and design I believe as an editor that they are relevant, important, and critical to the discussion of how we live and what matters in the world we construct. As you said “if†you start posting everything, as news etc… My response is that this is an editorial decision and you can leave the “ifs†to Paul and Javier.
As I said before you don't have to read my contributions, especially if you cannot handle my unique perspective on these matters. Like you said there are 28 other editors…read their submissions and comments instead.
Thank you again for voicing your criticism. in the future I think Javier gave you a proper location to voice these types of concerns. If you do not wish to contribute to the content of the news blurb, you can do so Here
(beats a hasty retreat in fear of being smited by senior editors)
The choice for Archinect, I think, is between media and blog. Indeed that is up to you editors, but I thought I would interject an outsiders opinion on something that might not be apparant from the inside.
15 Comments
If you enjoy watching Koolhaas, Eisenman, Hadid, etc on Charlie Rose, if you like the series on FLW, or the Frontline on WTC than this is architecturally related.
There is nothing in that news item that references any sort of architectural topic.
One could then make the argument that any news that affects buildings is architecture news. Alan Greenspan says the economy is good? Architecture news. A Building is bombed in Iraq? Architecture news. Donald Trump gets a new Hairpiece? Architecture news. Also, this politicizes the site, which I'm not a fan of either.
I feel like the validity of the News section is being challenged by various interests, including the "featured jobs" section. I'm no editor, but value the unique services that Archinect provides; and am saying my piece to keep it valuble and non-diluted.
well if this is of no value to you than don't read it!
all architecture is a political act. every bill passed, every building built, every election held shapes and changes the environment we live in.
CBP and PBS is one of the few outlets for us to talk frankly about the role of architecture and its place in the world.
Look at the high regard that architecture has in Europe and Japan... It's is apart of everyday conversation -- here architecture is perceived as a self-centered, ego driven, closed shell, arrogant, non-inclusive profession... I feel it's time to support those outlets that challenge that ideal.
As John said if you don't like it don't read it, filter your news (see the nifty thing on the righthand side). There are alternatives you can [url= read this instead or better yet, shock horror, make suggestions via the threads or emailing one of the editors......
That is preposterous, MiesvanderRice. And my next comment may enlighten the topic a bit more. Obviously no one gave you any Manfredo Tafuri in school. In any case, Archinect welcomes your suggestions here
Following item in my inbox:
Message from KCRW General Manager Ruth Seymour
Dear KCRW Listener,
I am writing you about an unfolding crises in Congress with regard to public broadcasting. Proposed funding cuts now before the full House pose a serious threat to public radio and television -- and to KCRW.
The proposed cut is 25% to KCRW's CPB grant this October and next October as well. Moreover adding the proposed additional cuts to PBS childrens' programs and station digital conversion -- the total reduction adds up to a whopping 45%!
Facility funding, which provided oportunities for stations to modernize and extend their service has already been zeroed out. These are the grants that helped KCRW purchase it's first modern transmitter in 1979 and launch NPR's Morning Edition. Later they enabled KCRW to extend sevice to Ventura and the
Antelope Valley.
If these cuts stand, KCRW may lose over $1,000,000 from its
operating revenue. This would severely impact KCRW's local programming and our ability to sustain NPR.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is the independent organization created by Congress to support public broadcasting and act as a heat shield against political interference. But now, ironically, the Corporation itself is providing the heat.
Chairman Ken Tomlinson has politicized matters by framing the issue of balance on news programs as liberal versus conservative. We vehemently object to this characterization which is intended to put public broadcasting on the defensive
and influence program decisions.
* We cherish our editorial independence and the political diversity of the audience we have attracted.
* We believe in objective journalism, free from political constraints.
* While we welcome constructive criticism, we reject partisan judgements masquerading as impartial analysis.
We can't reverse the funding cuts by ourselves. We need your help.
THE MOST IMPORTANT VOICE IN PUBLIC BROADCASTING IS YOURS!
Please register your opinion by contacting your Congressional Representative right away.
The full House votes next Thursday or Friday.
Find your Congressional Representative at:
http://kcrw.convio.net/site/R?i=r5syyt0eIfhBY8ImqsS8ag.
Sincerely,
Ruth Seymour
KCRW General Manager
Visit KCRW.com for additional information and background:
http://kcrw.com/about/frame_funding.html
**besides all the good music and the news on KCRW, the station also independently produces and broadcasts DnA (Design and Architecture) (Relevant enough for you now, Mies van der Rice?)**
Kind of fucking ironic that a fucking hoax email petition became a reality under this fucking presidency. Kind of like a fucking hoax presidency all in all.
Javier, ease up off the java dude... your making Bill Moyers nervous.. PBS will soon be Please Bush Supporters..
I got that hoax a week ago from a very high totem pole type and it was listed with a bunch of other big shots... I then forwarded a letter from NPR to them on the fact of the hoax and then the house cuts the funding. crazy...
I'm buying you two a drink. Although it did make me think we should get Francis on here as a guest editor or to do a 'view' -- the state of design criticism or something.
Mr.Arbona, Mr.Jourden, Mr.Sinclair,
Listen, I know the current events under the neo-cabal is highly troubling. I grew up a Texas liberal, so it's been with me from day one. Partisan, black and white politics were in my third grade classroom.
My comments are just intended as watchdog barks to try to keep archinect on-topic and un-partisan. If there was legislation that cut funding from the GSA "Excellence in Architecture" program, or if KCRW specifically decided to remove DnA from it's lineup because of budget constraints, that would be Architecture news. Danger to a general program at large is national news, not architecture news. I can use www.nytimes.com or anything else for regular news. For architecture news I depend on archinect, which until now has kept remarkable discipline over it's content.
Like Mr.Jourden noted (with John Cage flair) in another post in which I commented; "everything is architecture". If you start posting ,as news, everything that affects the effects of architecture, this would become a diluted and unecessary website.
I stand by my comment.
That’s great. Glad you could post your comments and thoughts.
Obviously, I don't agree with you or your perspective. Perhaps, the larger point about this website is that you can voice your opinion and your beliefs and your unique perspective (unlike the NYTimes), but just because you think you have a lock on what should and shouldn't matter to the world of architecture doesn't mean that Archinect will become relevant.
I think each editor has items, issues, and beliefs, which matter and drive them and since some of us are architects, designers, or what have you, doesn't mean we shouldn't post items we think are relevant to a larger audience in the world of aesthetics. Also, who ever said this site had to only included architecture news? There are categories designed into the site (which I use) for different types of content. If you want architecture only you can get it…like this
These topics relate directly to our world, our environment, and the way we think within the frame of aesthetics. As these are facets of architecture and design I believe as an editor that they are relevant, important, and critical to the discussion of how we live and what matters in the world we construct. As you said “if†you start posting everything, as news etc… My response is that this is an editorial decision and you can leave the “ifs†to Paul and Javier.
As I said before you don't have to read my contributions, especially if you cannot handle my unique perspective on these matters. Like you said there are 28 other editors…read their submissions and comments instead.
Thank you again for voicing your criticism. in the future I think Javier gave you a proper location to voice these types of concerns. If you do not wish to contribute to the content of the news blurb, you can do so Here
(beats a hasty retreat in fear of being smited by senior editors)
The choice for Archinect, I think, is between media and blog. Indeed that is up to you editors, but I thought I would interject an outsiders opinion on something that might not be apparant from the inside.
Back to the hole -
MVDR
related|nytimes
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.