Chris Uggen's Blog: radio ga ga

Monday, May 08, 2006

radio ga ga

we're doing a little radio tour for locked out this summer, so i got up early today to appear on daybreak usa and cable radio network. the interviews were fun and the hosts were gracious, so we're off to a decent start. here's the first leg:

May 6, 9 pm: WBZ Boston (Jeff)
May 7, 10 am: KPFA Berkeley (Jeff)
May 8, 8:35 am: USA network/Daybreak, Scott West (Chris)
May 8, 9:50 am: Cable Radio Network, national (Jack Roberts) (Chris)
May 16, 2:30 pm: American Urban Radio (Jeff)
May 22, 7:36 am: Jacksonville, Ed Furbee show (Chris)
May 25, 10:00 am: Tron in the Morning, Colorado Springs (Chris)


we often get calls and emails after such appearances. sometimes they are friendly, sometimes angry, and sometimes we just don't know what to make of them. i didn't hear jeff's bay area interview this weekend, but it sparked the following email:

In the books you have written, you probably have not addressed the initial "con": the courts' use of devious language and legal fictions, which are first responsible for the accused natural person (the "Defendant"), to unwittingly grant jurisdiction to the de facto "courts". (I.e.; statutory, non-Article III. courts.) While this material is distinctly not taught in "law" school, it is the observation of those of us who study the perverse manifestations of what purports to be "Justice" in the U.S.A., that several devices are used by the "courts" to entrap the "guilty" (often of victimless "crimes"), as well as the innocent. These (most briefly), are the use of the Fictitious Plaintiff, Fictitious Defendant, STRAMINEUS HOMO (Strawman), IDEM SONANS, and the deceptive question: "Do you understand the charges?" If some or all of these are unknown to you, you have failed in the very first part of your reportage, or mission. And, most greviously, you have failed to warn future victims of the "Just Us" system of any hint whatsoever, of how to avoid prosecution, in the first place!

i never know how to respond to such comments, except to thank the writers for their interest in my work. "dialogue with interested publics" sounds good in the abstract, but in such cases i often find that i have little to say beyond what i just said -- in the media or in my research. still, i think such radio tours create a nice opening to do a little public criminology outreach work.

NOTE: speaking of radio, the pic and post title are taken from the electric 6 cover of radio gaga. the band has a knack for combining the tasteless with the funny. depending on your perspective, the results are either "tasty" or "funless." the video doesn't quite match the six's classic (pg-13 rated) danger! high voltage!, but a line like "fire in the taco bell" doesn't come along every day.

4 Comments:

At 1:19 PM, Blogger Kim said...

How about,

Thank you for your "interest" in our research. You're correct in noting that we don't address some of the key "issues" that you raise, but we of course welcome other "scholars" to "study" them rigorously and "systematically."

Nah, I suppose that would be too snarky...

 
At 3:22 PM, Blogger Mike W. said...

Funny, Loic Wacquant usually signs his letters.


I kid I kid.

 
At 6:43 PM, Anonymous chris said...

kim, i think the emailer is probably making some interesting points, but i couldn't get past the quotation marks either. since i absolutely abuse italics, i can't get all snarky about a few excess quotation marks. fortunately, you can...

mike, for the record, i've only had positive interactions with professor wacquant (including a gathering last month). i can't vouch for his pugilistic acumen, but in my experience he is a mercurial thinker and an engaging conversationalist.

i thought i dropped enough hints about the emailer's identity, but i should probably fess up now to avoid future speculation: the email was written by the ghost of freddy mercury (and he is really cheesed off about that video). i kid, i kid...

 
At 10:01 PM, Blogger Kim said...

Off topic, but italics bother me much less than scare quotes. Italics just emphasize a word, but don't typically change its meaning. Scare quotes, by contrast, imply that the word in quotes isn't really what the author has in mind, but s/he isn't going to tell you what is. Annoying.

My personal writing bugaboo is parentheticals. Well, that and wordiness. And making overly lengthy comments on blogs when I should be grading.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home