Link Clickers Beware - But You Can Opt Out

[Update, August 12]:  An anonymous comment provided a link to the FTC guidelines covering endorsements and testimonials. You can see the relevant section for bloggers in the third comment at the end of this post. It sure looks to me that this totally violates those guidelines.]

BloggerBuzz had a post recently announcing a new way to 'monetize' one's blog:

. . . Any time you write about a product or service, you're connecting your audience to that product. If someone makes a purchase, the seller benefits from your written word—you influenced a purchase. There are thousands of websites that will pay you a fee for any business you bring them through a form of online advertising called affiliate marketing. With affiliate ads, web publishers are compensated for driving online actions.

VigLink is a content monetization company that makes affiliate marketing very easy for bloggers. We offer a simple snippet of code you can install in your blog that automatically and transparently does all the work for you. We've catalogued and signed up for more than 12,500 affiliate programs and we collect all the performance information and deliver you a single integrated payment. In return, VigLink takes 25% of the incremental revenue you earn. [emphasis added].

There's also a two minute video.




What's wrong here?    Most might say, nothing at all.  This is the American way of life.  Nothing has value unless it has a price.  Unless we can make a buck off of it.  People who blog for free are losers.  Well, here are the problems I have:

1.  The reader doesn't know the blogger is being paid and thinks the endorsement is uninfluenced by a payoff.


When I was a cab driver in LA, a fare once wanted to go to a strip club.  When I dropped him off, the club guy came to my window and gave me $5 and told me it was always $5 per person I dropped off.  So if someone asked me if there were any good clubs around, you know where I'd take him.

This is the same sort of problem these unmarked links set up.  The reader thinks it's a genuine endorsement uninfluenced by the promise of a payoff. Currently, there are ads in some blogs, but they are labeled as such.   Readers suspect or know that the blogger gets a commission on these. 

In their FAQ's, the company writes this about reader awareness:

Will my users notice?

Likely not. VigLink does not change the user experience one bit. No links are inserted or removed on the page, there are no double-underlines or pop-ups, and mousing over a link looks "clean."

But, it's really dirty is what they seem to be saying.

This is like tv shows and movies that pay film makers to embed their products in their shows.  So buying Full Circle Farm produce no longer is an integral aspect of the character, but rather they wrote that in because FCF has paid them for this stealth ad.

I've gotten emails offering me payments if I plug a product on my blog and they will pay more if I don't say that I'm getting paid.  The advertisers believe that if the readers don't know the bloggers are getting paid, they are more likely to believe.

In the FAQ's, they even tell merchants:

Additionally, VigLink increases confidence, click-through rates and conversions by making the links to your site appear to be "natural" links instead of obviously embedded affiliate codes. [Emphasis added]

They are selling the fact to merchants that they are deceiving viewers into thinking these are natural links.

As a viewer, YOU CAN OPT out.  There's a page where if you click on the button, it says

If you'd like to disable VigLink on sites that you visit, click the button below.

I'm not sure what that means.  I have no idea how the average viewer would ever find the page, or even know there is something to opt out of.  Does it mean they won't collect data on you?  Does it mean that the blogger doesn't get his payoff if you purchase something through his link?  There's a link there to a long privacy policy which includes statements like:

We do not knowingly collect personal data from children under the age of 13. If you are under 13, please do not give us any personally identifiable information.  [Emphasis added]

How many kids read privacy policies?  How many adults read privacy policies?  How many people even know this company exists? 


2.  The blogger starts pushing products, not because he really likes them, but because they will make him money.

Behavioralism is a school of psychology that tells us, among other things, that people repeat behaviors that are rewarded.  So, if bloggers get paid for writing posts that get people to click on links and buy products, they will start writing more such posts.  And eventually, some bloggers will recommend products they don't really believe in because they know they will get rewarded.  


3.   Trust in Blogs Will Turn to Suspicion

Before this new company arrived, readers knew that if they clicked on an ad, the blogger would get some small amount of reimbursement, but if they clicked on a link in the post, there was no compensation.  They could reasonably assume that the blogger put in the link because he believed it was in the reader's interest to click on the link.

Now though, as surfers begin to understand this new system, they will become suspicious of all blogs and bloggers (and probably the websites of newspapers and everyone else will do this as well.  Maybe they already do.)

Even if bloggers, like me, post announcements saying that we do not have paid links, there's nothing to stop people who DO have paid links from putting up the same announcements. 

Note:  People should be skeptical about what they read on blogs.  But there has been a sense of innocence in many blogs that are written by people who just enjoy sharing their ideas and without the corrupting influence of money. 

4.   Bloggers are probably also being ripped off

So, if VigLinks is willing to hide from the viewer the fact that the blogger is getting paid, why should we be surprised that they are also snookering the blogger?

• Blogger pay is probably pretty tiny.  One reason putting up ads is not even a temptation is that I know I would get so little revenue from the ads anyway.  If I'm going to sell out it's going to be for a lot more than $50.   I looked into google-ads  when I first started blogging and learned that only blogs with at least thousands of daily hits are likely to make any real money.  The ads for this company don't talk about how much a blogger would actually get.  I looked through more of the links on the website.  You get vague things like:

How does payment work?

VigLink will pay by check in the United States and PayPal anywhere it is available. We are expanding our payment options over time. VigLink will ask for payment information and pay publishers as soon as their balance reaches $25. VigLink typically takes 25% on commission earned by publishers. Often publishers still receive higher payouts due to collective bargaining and high volume commission levels. We will issue an IRS Form 1099 to any publisher who makes more than $400 in a fiscal year.

What percent of bloggers will even earn that $25?  If they don't, what happens to the money?  So, we don't really know how much you get per click.   Actually, another FAQ says you get paid if someone makes purchase only.  It doesn't say how much.  Instead it says,

How does VigLink make money?

You earn a commission for every sale made on a linked site. VigLink takes a small fee from that commission and then passes on the rest to you.

Small fee?  It's true it will be a small fee in absolute cents.  But it is 25% of what the blogger earns.  Gryphen at Immoral Minority said that Tank Jones and Rex Butler's commission from Levi Johnstons' earnings is only 20%.  I don't know if that's true, but Gryph seemed to think that was a significant chunk.  This company takes 25%.

But if the blogger doesn't make much money at all, what's 25% of nothing?  Well, there's something called the salami technique:

Employee embezzles large amount of money by stealing small sums from many different accounts.

This linking scheme isn't stealing because they tell the blogger and the blogger agrees to it. Though they intentionally do not want the viewer to know what is happening.   But, the vast majority of bloggers who might sign up for this probably wouldn't make much money.  It's possible a lot won't even reach the $25 threshold necessary for them to write the first check.  And as I asked earlier, what happens to this below threshold accumulation?  Why don't I think they'll donate it to decrease our national budget? 

I'm guessing, based on talking to people who have google ads, most people won't make more than, say, $50 a year, and that's probably high.  A few of the very big blogs with  thousands of hits a day, might do well.  But if this company got a million blogs to sign up - and it's really easy to add the code - and they get 25%, and if that amounted to about $10 per blog, that would be $10 million per year. (Hatrickassociates claims there are 400 million active English-language blogs in 2010, so my estimate is probably way low.)

So a scheme like this would

• pollute general trust in blogs with 
• minor benefit to most bloggers who sign up, 
• cause deception for readers, and 
• cause companies to pay a salami slice commission for links that they had in the past for free. 

The main beneficiary would appear to be this new company, and, probably Blogspot, WordPress, and TypePad also get a cut.  I couldn't find any mention of that.  


It seems to me that blogs with stealth links like this should post a notice at the top of the blog:

"This blog may receive kickbacks from merchants if you click from here and our reviews of products may be biased because of that."

Share the Road

Mushroom Run

After I finally put up a post about all the rain on Saturday, the sun was out Sunday.  So I really had no more excuses for not doing a run.  Besides, I figured there'd be lots of mushrooms. 

There were.   This one looked like a golf ball on the moss. 

They were all over the place but I was supposed to be running so I limited my stops to take pictures to within ten feet of the trail.

This one was just emerging.

This one is clearly a young amanita before it opens and looks like a pizza.






















I'm not sure what made these markings, but they rubbed off, so they weren't part of the mushroom itself. 

Here you can see these mushrooms all over the place.  Those white spots in the back left is a long line of mushrooms too.

And while most attention is on road construction during the summer, at least one of the bike trails got new surfacing as well.  This is along Northern Lights just east of Goose Lake. 

Yamaya Seafood - Downtown Hidden Treasure

After the Energy Fair Saturday, our wives met us at Yamaya Seafood Restaurant. 

It's hidden behind the Holy Family Cathedral between Fifth and Sixth Avenues downtown.  The front door faces west onto the parking lot and it's easy to overlook from 6th. (It's 825 W between H and I.)

We try to stop in here when we're looking to eat downtown and we remember it's here. Saturday, when my clothes were wet from biking in the rain, the hot tea was great.




I had the broiled eel dinner.  That's a taste I acquired in Hong Kong.  I'd challenge anyone to order it when they're at a place that prepares it well.  The idea might stretch your boundaries, but I suspect most will appreciate its rich flavors. 

While it's not exactly like being in Japan, it isn't like being in Anchorage either. 

The owner told us how she came to Alaska 30 years ago and it took a year to fix up this building so they could open the restaurant.   One of her granddaughters served us and a grandson was working there too.

Anchorage Renewable Energy Fair - What About Rain Power?

JL and I rode our bikes back along the Coastal Trail through the rain to the Anchorage Renewable Energy Fair on the Parkstrip.  JL knows everything there is to know about electricity and has been bending my ear about geothermal for a long time now. 

We pushed our bikes along.  He has just resuscitated his bike after 20 years and doesn't have a lock yet.  I had a lock, but I'd left my keys at home.  I also hadn't put the fender over the back wheel so my seat was pretty wet from wheel spray.  So I stopped here long enough to take this picture.  Is Weather Climate? It was a good question and I wasn't completely sure I knew the answer, so I checked today   NASA has a long page on this that begins with:

The difference between weather and climate is a measure of time. Weather is what conditions of the atmosphere are over a short period of time, and climate is how the atmosphere "behaves" over relatively long periods of time.

 Electric motorcycle anyone.  As much as I like the idea of a silent motorcycle, my guess is that the noise is one reason people buy them. 

 I really didn't want to push my bike around the whole time, so I asked if we might leave them at this booth.  The guy pointed across the way to where BCA was providing bike parking.

 These are the folks who were providing free coffee and muffins last week when I rode to the court room for an early hearing. 

 JL got to talk to some folks about wind turbines.  He's got a specific project in mind, but is concerned about reliability (it's an expensive to reach spot) and ability of the turbine to withstand high winds.

They had a turbine that had survived 200 mile/hour winds in Antarctica.

REAP is the organization that sponsored the fair, if I understand it right.  Since it was still raining, getting under the tents was a good incentive, but I my clothes were wet from the bike ride and I was getting colder. 

There were lots of different products and ideas floating around.  But it was clear to me that a lot of people have taken renewable energy and a clean planet seriously.  Here they had stains that were billed as environmentally safe.   I couldn't find their website to link to.

The obligatory T shirts were for sale.











The solar panels on display were decorated with raindrops.  

 This is a storage battery from Outback, a company from Washington State, which sells in Alaska mostly to people with off grid remote cabins.  It can connect to solar panels, micro-hydro, or wind turbines, and probably bicycles too. 

 I stopped to talk to folks here simply because I think, based on hearing KSKA's Bioneer show, that this organization has managed to focus on the perfect mix of science, passion, vision, and practicality as they pursue how we get to a more sustainable and livable future.  Their Anchorage conference is

7th Annual Bioneers in Alaska:
Creating Sustainable Communities
University of Alaska Anchorage, October 15-17, 2010

AKPIRG, the Alaska Public Research Interest Group, an affiliate of the Pirgs all over the US started by Ralph Nader,  also had a presence.  Director Matt Wallace was available to answer questions about AKPIRG's interests in renewable energy.

Rainy Summer

We had about double our normal July rain.  But it isn't about how much rain we get - double means a little over 3" for the month.  Parts of Iowa had 3-5 inches in 24 hours in June and in Jamangar in India's Gujarat state, almost 3 inches fell in 2 hours in July.  But in Anchorage that 3 inches was spread out over most of the month.  So, how many days of rain is as important to know as total inches.  

And August has been much the same.  But nevertheless, my nasturtiums are starting to bloom.  And we've had breaks in the clouds.

And, of course, rain means mushrooms.  Best as I can tell, these are a kind of coral fungus growing in our yard.  The biggest are under two inches.  My Audubon Field Guide to North American Mushrooms  (the link goes to a cool section of the book with mushroom silhouettes that make it easier to find the mushrooms) says:

Coral fungi resemble pieces of underwater coral, and are club-shaped to many-branched, white to yellow, ochre, orange, pink, red, or purple.  Most grow on the ground, some on logs and stumps, and all seem to be most plentiful in late summer and fall in coniferous woods.  Many coral fungi are eaten and, although a few are known to cause a laxative effect or gastric upset, no serious poisonings have been reported. 

So, when I got a call asking if I wanted to meet a friend on the Coastal Trail, I jumped at the chance.  But even the ducks were trying to get out of the rain.

I don't recall doing this trail by bike in the rain before.  It's a little less crowded and it felt good to ride.


Since he had started at Kincaid, and I started at home, we met up around Pt. Woronzof and then went back (for me) toward downtown.













The trail is what is sometimes called a multi-use trail. It goes right near the north-south runway at the airport and you're sharing the trail with 747's. 

JL saw a moose and two calves between Kincaid and Pt. Woronzof.  I saw Sandhill Cranes out of the mudflats.

The Family is Doomed

A footnote to yesterday's post on separating blog life and private life.  I started reading White Like Me in anticipation of Tim Wise's visit to Anchorage September 13, 14, 15. In the preface he quotes Polish poet Czelslaw Milosz,

"When a writer is born into a family, the family is doomed."

 He goes on,

I hope Milosz exaggerated, but in any event, I should now warn my family members, to whom I did not provide any of this material as I was writing it, before you go any further:  what follows will not always be easy to digest.  Some of it, in fact, will be painful, and not because I am trying to hurt you, but because I am trying to tell the truth, and the truth is sometimes unpleasant.  If it is any consolation, the parts that will make you uncomfortable were as difficult for me to write as they will be for you to read.  But they were necessary to this story, my story, and the larger story of what whiteness means.

Fortunately my ego is such that I don't think there's anything I could write that would be important enough to risk damaging relationships with my family members by writing something about any of them without their approval or at least consent.


A footnote to the another recent post which mentioned that Kenny G tickets in Anchorage started at $84 ($80 discounted).  In today's Anchorage Daily News they are down to $50.  I'd like to think this reflects well on the taste of Anchorage folks, but it's possible that this price was always the Ticketmaster price and I just found other, more expensive, ticket sites.    If so, that should be a warning to be careful when booking tickets on line. 

Separating Private and Blogging Worlds

I tend not to drag family and friends into the blog, but sometimes it would feel almost dishonest to not mention that I'm visiting say, my mom, but I try to do it in passing.  Sometimes there are milestones I really want to share with readers who know my family or friends, because it affects, to an extent, what I'm thinking and feeling.  However, sometimes the person involved will say something like, "Your private and blogging lives should stay separate."  So I won't mention that someone I know got approval of an important document and now moves on to a new stage in life.  And I'm delighted and pleased and proud. 

"A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION"

That seems to be a major reason why US District Court Chief Judge Vaughn Walker ruled today that Proposition 8, the initiative approved by voters in November 2008 to outlaw same-sex marriages in California, is unconstitutional.   I'm not an attorney and I haven't yet read all of the decision carefully, but that seems to be the underlying theme.

Most people only know about major court rulings from bumper sticker-like headlines and soundbites.  The people with the loudest opinions are often people who haven’t read the court decisions.  And it’s not always easy to do that.  But the internet today makes finding them a cinch.  Reading through them is a little harder.

So, I’m going to post some excerpts from the conclusions of law from today's ruling.  
[Other sites have posted the conclusion.]  Specifically where the judge goes through the Prop 8 proponents’ arguments for why the State of California had a compelling interest to ban same-sex marriage.  In each case he says something like “the evidence shows beyond debate” or “These purported interests fail as a matter of law”. 

There's little doubt this case will be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals (which includes Alaska) and then to the US Supreme Court. 

[Note:  People daily hear terms they recognize, but have no real grasp of what they mean, like, an acre.  I've made links to two terms above - US District Court and 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  If you can't write down a description of, or orally explain, how they relate to each other and to the State and Federal Constitutions, you probably should stop reading this and go look them up so you understand the whole context of this.]

First, here’s the table of contents of the ruling:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BACKGROUND TO PROPOSITION 8.............…………………...1

PROCEDURAL HISTORY OF THIS ACTION..........……………. 3

PLAINTIFFS’ CASE AGAINST PROPOSITION 8........…………. 5

PROPONENTS’ DEFENSE OF PROPOSITION 8.........………...... 6

TRIAL PROCEEDINGS AND SUMMARY OF TESTIMONY...…10

CREDIBILITY DETERMINATIONS...............…………………….25

PLAINTIFFS’ WITNESSES...............……………………………....25

PROPONENTS’ WITNESSES...............…………………………....35

FINDINGS OF FACT....................…………………………………..54

THE PARTIES....................……………………………………….....54

WHETHER ANY EVIDENCE SUPPORTS CALIFORNIA’S
REFUSAL TO RECOGNIZE MARRIAGE BETWEEN TWO
PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THEIR SEX……………………………....60

WHETHER ANY EVIDENCE SHOWS CALIFORNIA HAS
AN INTEREST IN DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN SAME-SEX
AND OPPOSITE-SEX UNIONS…………………………………....71

WHETHER THE EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT PROPOSITION 8
ENACTEDA PRIVATE MORAL VIEW WITHOUT ADVANCING
A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT INTEREST................………….85

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW...................………………………….... 109
    DUE PROCESS....................………………………………….....109
    EQUAL PROTECTION..................... ………………………..…117
CONCLUSION.......................… ………………………………...,. 135
REMEDIES........................... ……………………………………....136

The excerpts  (the . . . indicate that the text continues on) are from pages 123 - 131 of the ruling.  This comes after the finding of facts and at the end of the conclusions of law, just before the conclusions.

Again, this is the section where the judge analyzes each argument made by the proponents of Prop 8 for why the State of California has a compelling reason to outlaw same-sex marriage: 

PURPORTED INTEREST #1: RESERVING MARRIAGE AS A UNION BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN AND EXCLUDING ANY OTHER RELATIONSHIP 

Proponents first argue that Proposition 8 is rational because it preserves: (1) “the traditional institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman”; (2) “the traditional social and legal purposes, functions, and structure of marriage”; and (3) “the traditional meaning of marriage as it has always been defined in the English language.” Doc #605 at 12-13. These interests relate to maintaining the definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman for its own sake.

Tradition alone, however, cannot form a rational basis for a law. Williams v Illinois, 399 US 235, 239 (1970). The “ancient lineage” of a classification does not make it rational. Heller, 509 US at 327. Rather, the state must have an interest apart from the fact of the tradition itself.

The evidence shows that . . .


PURPORTED INTEREST #2: PROCEEDING WITH CAUTION WHEN IMPLEMENTING SOCIAL CHANGES

Proponents next argue that Proposition 8 is related to state interests in: (1) “[a]cting incrementally and with caution when considering a radical transformation to the fundamental nature of a bedrock social institution”; (2) “[d]ecreasing the probability of weakening the institution of marriage”; (3) “[d]ecreasing the probability of adverse consequences that could result from weakening the institution of marriage”; and (4) “[d]ecreasing the probability of the potential adverse consequences of same-sex
marriage.” Doc #605 at 13-14.

Plaintiffs presented evidence at trial sufficient to rebut any claim that marriage for same-sex couples amounts to a sweeping social change. See FF 55. Instead, the evidence shows beyond debate that allowing same-sex couples to marry has at least a neutral, if not a positive, effect on the institution of marriage and that same-sex couples’ marriages would benefit the state. . .



PURPORTED INTEREST #3: PROMOTING OPPOSITE-SEX PARENTING OVER SAME-SEX PARENTING

Proponents’ largest group of purported state interests relates to opposite-sex parents. Proponents argue Proposition 8:  1) promotes “stability and responsibility in naturally procreative relationships”; (2) promotes “enduring and stable family structures
 for the responsible raising and care of children by their biological parents”; (3) increases “the probability that natural procreation will occur within stable, enduring, and supporting 
family structures”; (4) promotes “the natural and mutually beneficial bond between parents and their biological children”; (5) increases “the probability that each child will be raised by both of his or her biological parents”; (6) increases “the probability that each child will be raised by both a father and a mother”; and (7) increases “the probability that each child will have a legally recognized father and mother.” Doc #605 at 13-14.

The evidence supports two points which together show Proposition 8 does not advance any of the identified interests: (1) same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents are of equal quality, FF 69-73, and (2) Proposition 8 does not make it more likely that 
opposite-sex couples will marry and raise offspring biologically related to both parents, FF 43, 46, 51. . .


PURPORTED INTEREST #4: PROTECTING THE FREEDOM OF THOSE WHO OPPOSE MARRIAGE FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES

Proponents next argue that Proposition 8 protects the First Amendment freedom of those who disagree with allowing marriage for couples of the same sex. Proponents argue that Proposition 8: (1) preserves “the prerogative and responsibility of parents to provide for the ethical and moral development and education of their own children”; and (2) accommodates “the First Amendment rights of individuals and institutions that oppose same-sex marriage on religious or moral grounds.” Doc #605 at 14.

These purported interests fail as a matter of law. Proposition 8 does not affect any First Amendment right or responsibility of parents to educate their children. See In re
Marriage Cases, 183 P3d at 451-452. Californians are prevented from distinguishing between same-sex partners and opposite-sex spouses in public accommodations, as California antidiscrimination law requires identical treatment for same-sex unions and opposite-sex marriages. . .


PURPORTED INTEREST #5: TREATING SAME-SEX COUPLES DIFFERENTLY FROM OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES

Proponents argue that Proposition 8 advances a state interest in treating same-sex couples differently from opposite-sex couples by: (1) “[u]sing different names for different things”; (2) “[m]aintaining the flexibility to separately address the needs of
different types of relationships”; (3) “[e]nsuring that California marriages are recognized in other jurisdictions”; and (4) “[c]onforming California’s definition of marriage to federal law.” Doc #605 at 14.

Here, proponents assume a premise that the evidence thoroughly rebutted: rather than being different, same-sex and opposite-sex unions are, for all purposes relevant to California law, exactly the same. FF 47-50. The evidence shows conclusively that moral and religious views form the only basis for a belief that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples.



PURPORTED INTEREST #6: THE CATCHALL INTEREST

Finally, proponents assert that Proposition 8 advances “[a]ny other conceivable legitimate interests identified by the parties, amici, or the court at any stage of the proceedings.” Doc #605 at 15. But proponents, amici and the court, despite ample
opportunity and a full trial, have failed to identify any rational basis Proposition 8 could conceivably advance. Proponents, represented by able and energetic counsel, developed a full trial record in support of Proposition 8. The resulting evidence shows
that Proposition 8 simply conflicts with the guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Many of the purported interests identified by proponents are nothing more than a fear or unarticulated dislike of same-sex couples. Those interests that are legitimate are unrelated to the classification drawn by Proposition 8. The evidence shows that, by
every available metric, opposite-sex couples are not better than their same-sex counterparts; instead, as partners, parents and citizens, opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples are equal. FF 47-50. Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it does not treat them equally. . .

Finally, before going on to the conclusion, which you can read here at Henkimaa, the judge seems to make the point that you can't use personal opinions as the basis of legislation that discriminates against a class of people.

A PRIVATE MORAL VIEW THAT SAME-SEX COUPLES ARE INFERIOR TO OPPOSITE-SEX COUPLES IS NOT A PROPER BASIS FOR LEGISLATION

In the absence of a rational basis, what remains of proponents’ case is an inference, amply supported by evidence in the record, that Proposition 8 was premised on the belief that same-sex couples simply are not as good as opposite-sex couples.
FF 78-80. Whether that belief is based on moral disapproval of homosexuality, animus towards gays and lesbians or simply a belief that a relationship between a man and a woman is inherently better than a relationship between two men or two women, this belief is not a proper basis on which to legislate. See Romer, 517 US at 633; Moreno, 413 US at 534; Palmore v Sidoti, 466 US 429, 433 (1984) (“[T]he Constitution cannot control [private biases] but neither can it tolerate them.”).

Here's how it's listed:


KRISTIN M PERRY, SANDRA B STIER,
  PAUL T KATAMI and JEFFREY J
ZARRILLO,

Plaintiffs,

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,


Plaintiff-Intervenor,

v

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, in his
 official capacity as Governor of 
California; EDMUND G BROWN JR, in
 his official capacity as Attorney
General of California;
MARK B
 HORTON, in his official capacity
 as Director of the California 
Department of Public Health and
 State Registrar of Vital
 Statistics;
LINETTE SCOTT, in her 
official capacity as Deputy 
Director of Health Information &
 Strategic Planning for the 
California Department of Public 
Health;
PATRICK O’CONNELL, in his 
official capacity as Clerk-
Recorder of the County of
 Alameda; and
DEAN C LOGAN, in hi s
official capacity as Registrar-
Recorder/County Clerk for the 
County of Los Angeles,

Defendants,

DENNIS HOLLINGSWORTH, GAIL J 
KNIGHT, MARTIN F GUTIERREZ, HAK-
SHING WILLIAM TAM, MARK A 
JANSSON and PROTECTMARRIAGE.COM –
YES ON 8, A PROJECT OF CALIFORNIA
 RENEWAL, as official proponents 
of Proposition 8,

Defendant-Intervenors.

For My DC Readers, The Goldenberg Duo - A Musical Treat

The world works in mysterious ways* and the internet makes it seem more so. There's a concert in DC on August 8, 2010 - the 36th anniversary of Richard Nixon's resignation**:

William Goldenberg, Distinguished Professor of Piano at NIU, and his sister, Susan Goldenberg, violinist in the Kansas City Symphony, have performed as the Goldenberg Duo for 30 years at various universities and performing arts series. On August 8, the Duo will perform at the Smithsonian American Art Museum in Washington, D.C. as part of that institution's ongoing performing arts series.

This comes from The Arts@NIU (Northern Illinois University) website, which probably explains why William Goldenberg, who is a professor there, is highlighted and not his sister, who is not a professor there.  So I'll highlight her here. 

So, what's the mysterious way here?  Well, I never heard of that website until today when someone got to my blog from that NIU post on the concert. At the very end it says:

An excellent review of a 2009 concert by the Duo may be found here.

Clicking on the 'here' above will get you to an April 2009 post I did of one of their Anchorage concerts.  I would distinguish between an 'excellent review' and a 'positive review.'  Excellent review refers to the quality of the review in my mind and while it is pretty good - mainly because of a perfect Richard Musil quote I had just read - I don't think NIU would have linked if it hadn't been positive about the music.   There's also a video from my little Canon Powershot which will give you a sense of the music. 

Anyway, I'd urge my DC readers to consider attending this concert on Sunday.  The Duo have a real musical connection and it should be fantastic.  From the Museum's site:

Steinway Series (Aug 8, 3pm)
Susan Goldenberg, violinist with the Kansas City Symphony, and William Goldenberg, distinguished professor of piano at Northern Illinois University, present an eclectic program including works by Frank Bridge, Samuel Barber, Claude Debussy, and Ludwig van Beethoven.

And it's free!  And air conditioned. 


*I realized as I was typing it that the opening sentence starts with a cliche, and so I thought I should at least find its origin.  Googling only got me uses of it online by other people.  Two quotation sites gave me:

Search Results for “World Works in Mysterious Ways”

No documents match the query.

Methinks that 'mysterious ways' simply means 'ways we don't understand.'  Probability explains a lot of 'mysterious ways' - after all, even though the odds of winning the lottery might be ten million to one, at least one person will buy a winning ticket.  And the power of google increases the odds people will make obscure connections they never would have made in the past.   

**I'd also note that the reason I know the exact date Nixon resigned is that my son was born two days before.  So, if you know him,  wish him a happy birthday Friday. 

Oh yes, one more connection.  I spent two summers at NIU in DeKalb.  That's where my Peace Corps training was.