Fresh Sheets for a Week

Technological advances ... some are worth having, others aren't worth their weight in gold (or the quarters and dollars it costs to buy them). But, when technology can deliver a benefit that consumers really want, then it's a win-win.

Case in point: Downy.

Through the wonder of microencapsulation technology, Downy can now deliver scent pearls that offer long-lasting freshness ... up to one week of freshness, to be exact. And where do consumers most want to smell that freshness? In their sheets of course. Downy promises that every night you crawl into your sheets - for one entire week - you will smell fresh sheets!

Staying in line with P&G's promise last year, Downy has established a Facebook presence that is actually worth checking out. Ads direct consumers to http://www.facebook.com/downy, where they can “share [their] love of clean sheets.” They also give a plug to their cause marketing program, "Quilts for Kids."

Great photos on Facebook. Nice linkage between the brand (providing comfort) and philanthropy. Great opportunities for storytelling.

No surprise from the 2009 Marketer of the Year. Congratulations Procter and Gamble on a job well done.

NYT Article Makes Peculiar Claim About Plagiarism In The "Digital Age"

According to New York Times reporter Trip Gabriel, the "digital age" raises questions about what constitutes plagiarism. Gabriel argues that the availability of information on the Internet complicates traditional notions of ownership and originality.

Citing examples of students copying information from websites without attribution, Gabriel makes the following claim:

[T]hese cases — typical ones, according to writing tutors and officials responsible for discipline at the three schools who described the plagiarism — suggest that many students simply do not grasp that using words they did not write is a serious misdeed.

It is a disconnect that is growing in the Internet age as concepts of intellectual property, copyright and originality are under assault in the unbridled exchange of online information, say educators who study plagiarism.

Digital technology makes copying and pasting easy, of course. But that is the least of it. The Internet may also be redefining how students — who came of age with music file-sharing, Wikipedia and Web-linking — understand the concept of authorship and the singularity of any text or image.

My Take
I am completely unpersuaded by Gabriel's argument. The availability of information on the Internet -- along with technology that allows for simple "cutting and pasting" of text -- undoubtedly makes plagiarism easier to accomplish. These innovations, however, do not change the definition of plagiarism. Rather than relaxing the standards of academic integrity, educators need to police plagiarism more intensely in the digital age.

Is Obama Telling Rangel to Retire? Sounds Like It

President Obama has offered an opinion on the fate of Representative Charlie Rangel of New York. Recently, the House Ethics Committee charged Rangel with 13 violations.

During an interview with CBS News, President Obama seems to argue that Rangel should hang up his hat:

I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served -- his constituents very well. But these -- allegations are very troubling. . . .

And he'll -- he's somebody who's at the end of his career. Eighty years old. I'm sure that -- what he wants is to be able to -- end his career with dignity. And my hope is that -- it happens.

Obama's comments come as some media reports speculate that Rangel will survive the storm. While other commentators have argued that an ethics trial could harm Democrats, it is unclear whether Rangel's situation would actually have national implications. Obama's comments, ironically, will probably bring more attention to the situation and make it an issue that more likely implicates the reputation of the Democratic Party.

Will Rangel heed Obama's "advice"? According to Ben Smith of Politico, Rangel is unfazed by Obama's statement. Quoting an anonymous source, Smith reports that Rangel "doesn’t give a damn about what the president thinks about this."

Another "Beer Summit"? Breitbart Wants To Meet With Sherrod

A day after Shirley Sherrod announced her intent to sue blogger Andrew Breitbart, Breitbart has offered to meet with her privately. During an interview with Newsweek, Breitbart says that "This thing has gotten to a place that’s far beyond where it should be." Breitbart then said he would like to discuss the matter privately with Sherrod :

[Breitbart] I’d be more than happy to meet with her in private and have a discussion with her.

[Interviewer] Is that an invitation?

[Breitbart] Sure, I’ll go whoever she wants. I’ll go to Albany, Ga. I’ll go anywhere to have a private discussion with her.

Although stranger things have happened, I seriously doubt that this "beer summit" will take place.

Sherrod to Sue Breitbart; Probably Has Stronger Suit Against The USDA

Shirley Sherrod says she will sue conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart. Breitbart posted a heavily edited speech that Sherrod delivered at an NAACP event. The portion of the speech, along with commentary on Breitbart's blog, misleadingly portrays Sherrod as a racist. The full version of the tape, however, paints a completely different story (see here).

It is unclear what type of action Sherrod will bring, but she will probably sue for libel. In order to prevail, she will have to prove that Breitbart acted with actual malice. This standard requires that Sherrod prove that Breitbart published information about her that he knew was false or that he acted with reckless disregard for the truth. Although this is normally a tough standard, Sherrod might prevail, given the circumstances of the scandal. It will be difficult, however, given the First Amendment interests at stake.

Stronger Case Against the USDA
Sherrod probably has an even stronger lawsuit against the government (unless she is a "political appointee," which would change this analysis significantly; update below). USDA officials forced her out of her government job without due process of law. She was not given the opportunity to explain herself, nor did her supervisors listen to the full speech before demanding her resignation.

Federal statutes and constitutional law provide procedural protections for government employees who face potential discharge. Although Sherrod has not indicated that she will sue the government, she would probably have an even better chance with that litigation.

Links to this article: Ta-Nehisi Coates, The Atlantic, Sherrod's Chances

Update: Readers here and elsewhere have made very good points. First, some readers have argued that Sherrod should not sue the government because she can make a stronger statement in a litigation against Breitbart. After all, the government has apologized and offered her another position. I do not question the soundness of those claims. Nonetheless, saying that a particular course of action is stronger from a legal perspective does not mean that the plaintiff should actually take that path.

Second, at least one reader at The Atlantic has pointed out that Sherrod was a "political appointee." If this is true, then her chances against the government under any legal theory are sharply diminished. This does not alter the difficulty of a libel action against Breitbart. Both paths represent an uphill battle.

White House Seeks to Expand FBI Power, Erode Privacy

The Washington Post reports that the White House seeks to expand the power of the FBI to command access to electronic communications without a warrant. According to the Washington Post,

The administration wants to add just four words -- "electronic communication transactional records" -- to a list of items that the law says the FBI may demand without a judge's approval. Government lawyers say this category of information includes the addresses to which an Internet user sends e-mail; the times and dates e-mail was sent and received; and possibly a user's browser history. It does not include, the lawyers hasten to point out, the "content" of e-mail or other Internet communication.

Agents could compel companies to disclose the information if they believe it will assist anti-terrorism or intelligence investigations.

Naturally, privacy advocates vehemently disapprove of the White House proposal. Critics also argue that President Obama is betraying his promise to back away from President Bush's policies that expanded government authority over civil liberties. These critics have a pretty solid argument.

Gaffe A Minute: Sharron Angle Thinks Disclose Act Is Already Law (But It Is Not)

The Las Vegas Sun reports that Sharron Angle has made another major gaffe. During a recent interview, Angle stated that the Disclose Act already exists. It, however, does not. Furthermore, debate over the proposed campaign finance legislation has been tabled because not enough Senators were willing to invoke cloture.

Angle is providing a gaffe a minute. Also, Rasmussen, a conservative pollster, released a poll today showing Harry Reid leading Angle 45-43. Rasmussen says that the Nevada race "leans Democrat." It is not surprising that Angle's handlers are trying to keep her away from the media.