Subject: RE: at DC Berman's suggestion |
From: "Moyers, Scott" <Scott.Moyers@us.penguingroup.com> |
Date: 6/13/11, 15:55 |
To: Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com> |
Sure, happily.
From: Barrett Brown
[mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 3:50
PM
To: Moyers, Scott
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's
suggestion
Would you be interested
in taking a look at any such proposal if I were to develop it on my end?
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Moyers, Scott <Scott.Moyers@us.penguingroup.com>
wrote:
Hmm – really, for your sake, you should probably at this point find
a good agent who can help you develop the proposal – which should in the end be
substantially more than 2 pages, but I don’t have the bandwidth to play that
role. S
From: barri2009 [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 2:19
PM
To: Moyers, Scott
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's
suggestion
Would you want to
see a two-page proposal, then, or just a bit more on what it would consist of?
Sent via
BlackBerry by AT&T
From:
"Moyers, Scott" <Scott.Moyers@us.penguingroup.com>
Date:
Mon, 13 Jun 2011 11:50:41 -0400
To:
Barrett Brown<barriticus@gmail.com>
Subject:
RE: at DC Berman's suggestion
Hi Barrett – thanks for this; it’s good to hear from you.
This sounds winning; sort of HOW TO START A REVOLUTION. I’d be happy to
read more. Scott
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2011 9:05
PM
To: Moyers, Scott
Subject: Fwd: at DC Berman's
suggestion
Just got an
auto-reply saying you're with Penguin now; here's what I just wrote you, in
reference to our discussions a few months back.
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: Barrett Brown <barriticus@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's suggestion
To: Scott Moyers <smoyers@wylieagency.com>
Hi, Scott-
This is Barrett Brown again; we spoke a few months back about my manuscript. At
the time, you noted that the book would work better if it were to deal more
directly with a solution to these problems, rather than being largely a
compilation of failures on the parts of major pundits. I wasn't particularly
interested in doing something of that nature at the time but I'm now thinking
that I'd like to do a book in which the better parts of that manuscript are
perhaps distilled into a single chapter, with the rest dealing with the
solutions that I and others have been pursuing through new online methods over
the past two years. You may be aware that I was heavily involved in the
Anonymous syndicate for a while, during which I helped define strategy and
served as a de facto spokesperson. I recently quit (for reasons noted here: http://blogs.computerworld.com/18307/face_of_anonymous_quits_exclusive_interview_with_barrett_brown)
in order to concentrate on my own group, Project PM, which I founded in late
2009, and which I've since retooled to do two things: oversee a crowd-sourced
investigation into the secretive intelligence contract industry and the
capabilities it collectively provides to the intelligence community as well as,
increasingly, corporations; and to help incubate the creation and deployment of
other groups for the purpose of engaging in effective, information-based
activism (an early version of the guide I'm writing may be seen here: http://wiki.echelon2.org/wiki/Guide_to_Pursuants).
Such a book would draw upon my "career" with Anonymous as well as
others with whom I'm associated, such as Ian Murphy, the fellow who called the
Wisconsin governor pretending to be one of the Koch brothers (and to whom I
served as "Minister of Moderately Dirty Tricks" during his recent
Green Party candidacy in the Buffalo special election for Congress). Basically,
it would make the case that the current political/media system is broken beyond
repair from within and then concentrate on how the internet can and has been
effectively deployed in such a way as to replace portions of that broken system
and supplement or repair others while also bringing pressure to bear on those
aspects that are unambiguously hostile to the reasonable aspirations of the
individual. All in all, the purpose would be to prompt those individuals who
recognize the system as broken but who are reluctant to give up to begin
thinking about the information environment in a different way, one that takes
full advantage of the fact that anyone may now influence the information flow
as well as the equally important and under-appreciated fact that any individual
may now collaborate with any individual on the planet.
Let me know if this interests you and if you'd like to discuss further.
On Fri, Apr 8,
2011 at 4:08 PM, Scott Moyers <smoyers@wylieagency.com> wrote:
Hey, yes, I was just waiting for the proposal, let me read it now
and call you, I assume on 512-560-2302 . S
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 5:07
PM
To: Scott Moyers
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's
suggestion
Hi, Scott-
Should I give you
a ring? Didn't know if you were going to call me or if the ball was in my
court. Here's the first draft of the proposal, which I just realized I didn't
send earlier (left it in draft as I'm incompetent, apparently). A lot of the
marketing section will need updating in light of the past two months.
Summary
In 2003, Thomas Friedman won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary. In
2005, Friedman was invited to join the board of the Pulitzer committee. Our
nation is killing itself from within.
Most every industry contains within itself a system of negative
feedback by which to ensure that those who fail in their efforts are
discouraged whereas those who succeed are encouraged. The most notable
exception is the opinion media, which is itself among the most crucial and
fundamental of all industries, being fundamental to the manner in which the
public thinks - and thus votes, donates, and convinces its fellows, with the
cumulative process thereafter being translated into action on the part of the
greatest superpower to have ever existed. Thus it is that one of the most
influential institutions in the world - the institution of the American
punditocracy - is the least accountable. Once a pundit is made, he is rarely
unmade.
Thomas Friedman is one of the most influential individuals to work
in the most influential of industries, having written a popular New York Times column for well over a
decade, having graced the various network news and cable networks for a similar
period of time, and having written several bestsellers which are themselves
read and respected by a large swath of the nation’s decision makers right on up
to the current United States president. That Thomas Friedman has made a large
number of terrible predictions while not elsewhere having made any particularly
astute predictions, that his assertions sometimes directly and hilariously
contradict assertions he mas made elsewhere, and that other columnists and even
bloggers of far lesser influence have exhibited a far superior track record
without having won any comparable acclaim is among the most obvious of
indications that the United States is incapable of managing and distributing
the information it requires to perform its role as a global superpower with
reasonable regard for the consequences. It does not help matters that he is
famously read by the current
To the extent that we actually examine the output of the most influential
and widely-read of what a hippie or Nixon might term to be the
"establishment" pundits, we find the same extraordinary rhetorical
and informational failures perpetrated by the majority of them. Charles
Krauthammer has managed to get entirely and profoundly wrong every
The picture remains grim or hilarious - depending on one’s sense
of humor - even as we expand our view of it. Richard Cohen remains a respected
staple of The Washington Post despite mounting evidence that he is unqualified for
such a role by intellect and temperament. William Bennett’s mediocre
partisanship and routine delivery of demonstrably incorrect information on
topics ranging from Prohibition to the present day have not prevented CNN from
drawing on his talents for the benefit of historical election-night coverage
that one might prefer consist largely of the competent. Martin Peretz continues
to do his part in making anti-Arab bigotry acceptable by way of his purchased
stewardship of The New Republic even as he earns further contempt from many of
his own writers and others who share his views but can't help but notice the
bizarre manner in which he seeks to advance them. And then, there are those
less respectable pundits with whom we need not bother to criticize but with
whom we nonetheless ought to concern ourselves in the literal sense of the
term.
There are two bits of silver lining to a situation that is all the
more serious by virtue of not being widely acknowledged. For one thing, the
communications age has barely begun to make its presence felt in comparison to
the new solutions it will soon bring thanks to those who have decided to take
advantage of them. Secondly, the pundits who have caused all the aforementioned
trouble are largely douchebags whose profitable forays into douchebaggery are
just as profitably outlined.
Marketing
I have a number of methods by which to market the book from my
end, some more conventional than others. My first book, Flock of Dodos: Behind Modern Creationism, Intelligent
Design, and the Easter Bunny, was blurbed by Alan Dershowitz (“Flock
of Dodos is in the great tradition of debunkers with a sense of humor, from
Thomas Paine to Mark Twain.”), Matt Taibbi ("Here's the problem with
America's born-again wackos: only a gifted comic is capable of describing them,
but no one with a sense of humor can stomach being around them. That's why
there are so few books like Flock of Dodos.”),
Cenk Uyger, (“Jesus Christ and lesbian monkeys in the same book. Brilliant.
`Smart' and `funny' in the same book. Genius.”), and others while also
receiving universally positive reviews (except from those attacked in the book,
who seemed not to have enjoyed it).
The book in question, meanwhile, has received advance blurbs from
author and war correspondent Michael Hastings (“"A hilarious, brilliantly
crafted, full-on verbal assault on
I’m a contributor to Vanity Fair, The Huffington Post, The
Guardian, Skeptical Inquirer, and D Magazine, and my work has also appeared in
al-Jazeera, Skeptic, The Onion, New York Press, Nerve, National Lampoon,
American Atheist, and dozens of other outlets.
Project PM, which I founded in summer of 2010, is made up of about
150 scientists, journalists, authors, and other media figures who are intent on
taking a more active and technology-driven stance against the media structure
described above while also developing similar methods by which to solve a
variety of other problems. Upon formal launch in early 2011, PM will consist
largely of two different networks - a blogger network and a citizen network -
both of which operate under the same fundamental schematic that I've designed
for the purpose. More information can be provided on request; suffice to say
that the manuscript has been instrumental in bringing together many of our
participants and will benefit from serving as the central manifesto around
which this group is organized.
Aside from whatever useful bits of notoriety I've gained through
my early support for Wikileaks and my work with key figures in the Anonymous
movement, I have also appeared on a number of media including NBC, Fox News,
and Russia Today, served as an advisor to Virginia Democratic Senate candidate
Wynne LeGrow in the 2010 election cycle, have long acted as director of
communications for the Godless Political Action Committee, and have otherwise
been involved in a variety of efforts that will be useful in bringing attention
to my work in general in and this book in particular.
On Fri, Apr 8,
2011 at 9:51 AM, Scott Moyers <smoyers@wylieagency.com> wrote:
Great.
From: barri2009 [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 12:46
PM
To: Scott Moyers
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's
suggestion
Certainly, and
I'll send you the proposal a bit before, as soon as I get back to my computer.
Sent via
BlackBerry by AT&T
From:
Scott Moyers <smoyers@wylieagency.com>
Date:
Fri, 8 Apr 2011 16:40:09 +0000
To:
'Barrett Brown'<barriticus@gmail.com>
Subject:
RE: at DC Berman's suggestion
Sorry, I’ve been knocked out with strep. I’m going to be
in the office this afternoon. Would ca 4pm work to talk?
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011
10:54 PM
To: Scott Moyers
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's
suggestion
I may not have
time tomorrow due to the rally and whatnot as I've got a series of meetings and
will be followed around by a documentary film crew and Rolling Stone all day;
would Friday work? Also, I need to tweak the proposal a bit to update, which I
should be able to do on Friday morning.
On Wed, Apr 6,
2011 at 6:19 PM, Scott Moyers <smoyers@wylieagency.com> wrote:
Barrett, thanks, and godspeed with the rally. Why don’t
you send e the proposal, and I’ll read and be at least warmed up I that sense
when we talk. I’ll read and call you tomorrow if that works. Scott
From: Barrett Brown [mailto:barriticus@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011
9:02 PM
To: Scott Moyers
Subject: Re: at DC Berman's
suggestion
Hi, Scott-
Sorry for the
delay in getting back to you and thanks for reaching out. I'm actually in NYC
for a week as I'm speaking at this press conference:
... and holding
some meetings with various journalists and activists. Give me a ring at 512-560-2302 if you like and I'll
do my best to explain the convoluted situation I'm in. I've got a book
proposal you can take a look at as well if you'd like for me to send it along.
Again, thanks for getting in touch.
On Fri, Apr 1,
2011 at 2:06 PM, Scott Moyers <smoyers@wylieagency.com> wrote:
Dear Barrett
Brown:
DC Berman was good
enough to tell me a bit about the back and forth you and he have been
having. Based on what he told me, his suggestion that I might reach out
to you sounded like a fine idea; you’re obviously on the side of
righteousness. I’m not sure how much if any background David gave you
about me, so I’m happy to overshare, but for now I’ll leave it that I’d be very
happy to have a conversation with you about your work.
Yours,
Scott Moyers
The Wylie Agency
t. 212-246-0069
f. 212-586-8953
The Wylie Agency,
website: www.wylieagency.com
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302
--
Regards,
Barrett Brown
512-560-2302