January 15, 2005
My Article "Shaken and Stirred" Is Really Excellent!
Paragraph 8 of my author's agreement with the Atlantic Monthly reads:
You agree to use your best efforts to participate in the promotion and marketing of the Work and The Atlantic Monthly by making reference to the Work and The Atlantic Monthly in settings including, but not limited to, articles or books written by or about you or the Work, interviews, editorials, press conferences, press releases, television appearances, Internet Web sites maintained and operated by you, and any other media available for the promotion of the Work to which you have access.
So, completely seriously, you all should immediately go and subscribe to The Atlantic Monthly so that you can read the excellent Stephen S. Cohen and J. Bradford DeLong (2005), "Shaken and Stirred," The Atlantic Monthly January/February 2005, plus many other articles of equal or greater excellence and value. What The Atlantic Monthly publishes by Mark Bowden, James Fallows, Robert D. Kaplan, and William Langewiesche alone is easily worth ten times its subscription price.
You say you want to read it online, here on this website, now? Alas, paragraph 7 reads:
You agree not to publish the Work, or material from or based on the Work, in English or in any other language, in print or in any other medium now existing or hereafter developed, for a period of one hundred twenty (120) days from the newsstand on sale date of the issue or issues of The Atlantic Monthly in which the work appears.
Posted by DeLong at January 15, 2005 07:45 PM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference My Article "Shaken and Stirred" Is Really Excellent!:
» ANOTHER blogging-for-dollars scandal -- Brad DeLong takes the from PRESTOPUNDIT -- "An intense brain-buzz, guaranteed" (2blowhards)
full disclosure route.... [Read More]
Tracked on January 15, 2005 11:01 PM
Now, what medium do they really expect to be developed within the next 120 days? Technology is really evolving too fast.
Posted by: trotsky at January 15, 2005 07:58 PM
"Easily worth ten times its subscription price"?!
You are either taking this author's agreement very seriously indeed, or taking it not very seriously at all.
(I bought the issue. But I'm not ready to commit to a subsription).
Posted by: mcm at January 15, 2005 07:59 PM
And you know what else is worth 10 times its subscription price?
Closing italics :)
Posted by: Karmakin at January 15, 2005 08:01 PM
I read it, perfessor sir, and I liked it alot though it scared the shit out of me. Was this the "scare the living daylights out of America" issue? I like the comments about Hacker, though, and I like how you put things in historical context rather than relying on a partisan political narrative. I'm surprised that your concerns about offshoring provoking a more widespread backlash amoung white collar workers never really seem to have made it into your daily blogging. I'm interested to see how Drezner responds to it.
I don't think the Langewiesche piece is his best work, however. Kind of hysterical, and I would have liked more facts on where he actually traveled, because it doesn't seem like he got out of Baghdad. More support on his claims about Allawi becoming some new kind of dictator would have been nice. Maybe his trip just scared him so much.
Posted by: praktike at January 15, 2005 09:02 PM
I've been a subscriber for five years or so; Langewiesche's best work may have been his 9-11 articles, but the shipwrecking industry one was very good as well.
Fallows is reliably interesting. I'm sure our host's article will be also.
Posted by: Linkmeister at January 15, 2005 09:13 PM
I'm already a subscriber, and have read the article. I have a few questions about the article, well one major one, and a few others. Is globalization a zero sum game? Is the US going to suffer a decline in it's standard of living? From what my layman's mind can see on the horizon is wages and prices for goods coming down, and that would be ok, but the price of property, rent etc is going up,and that's going to hurt the working class more then jobs going overseas, or anything else I can think of.
How do we get politicians to first balance the budget, and second start preparing for the blow globalization is going to deal the working class. I've seen a cut in pell grants, and college kids leaving school in serious debt, if the future job market is going to rely on you having personal savings is it smart that as a society we are going into so much debt right from the jump?
From what I see the US is failing to prepare properly for the future, and I don't see how we can change this with who is currently in charge of policy in this country.
BTw, the Atlantic Monthly is worth the price for this article, but it'd be worth it anyway just to read the great work James Fallows has done, and is doing.
Posted by: jbou at January 15, 2005 09:18 PM
If it's shaken, why does it need stirring?
Posted by: Brian Boru at January 15, 2005 09:22 PM
Posted by: muckdog at January 15, 2005 09:43 PM
Welcome to the machine.
Posted by: Jon Koppenhoefer at January 16, 2005 12:45 AM
I admit to having bought an Atlantic subscription (I asked whether they'd be prepared to take the full cost of a print subscription and refrain from sending out the magazine, since I'm much happier reading it on-line, but they refused), but must confess on bended knee that it was Richard Clarke rather than yourself that swung the decision.
It's absolutely fantastic; better commentary than The Economist, which I wouldn't have thought possible. And the weak dollar makes it significantly cheaper than most UK monthlies :)
Posted by: Tom Womack at January 16, 2005 04:36 AM
"Better commentary than the Economist...."
Anyone other than me who finds the Economist, lately, sounding like just another organ of the Bush propaganda machine?
I've had an Atlantic sub for quite awhile and it is a great read. Added bonuses: online reading Jack London's piece from 1904 on scabs and the piece from 1912 about the Lawrence Strike.
Posted by: matt at January 16, 2005 07:03 AM
So, completely seriously, I'm sure I speak for all of us who enjoy your blog when I say we are happy, and relieved, to see you fulfilling the responsibilities of paragraph eight of your author's agreement. Moving along now...
Posted by: Dubblblind at January 16, 2005 08:28 AM
Am I the only one who found the pictures of future terrorist attacks accompanying the Clarke article to be more in the style and taste of The Onion than The Atlantic Monthly?
Posted by: Charles Kinbote at January 16, 2005 08:40 AM
I haven't picked up the atlantic in some time. I recall reading a Mokheiber piece where he described the new management team as attempting to subtly rebrand the magazine. Russ went on to describe a place where young Repubs are siren-songed to read the mag, as well as the old audience.
That is exactly what I see in this issue (bought for Brad's, Clarkes, and Langeweische's pieces) - attempting to attract an audience on both sides of the think-tank divide.
Perhaps this is the reason for the comical quality of the Clarke article and the Fallows as well...
Posted by: Dano at January 16, 2005 10:04 AM
I have long been conflicted about "off shoring" and it's impact on my work in the IT field. My economics training tells me that trade is good; but my personal employment prospects are truly frightening. Somehow I believe that once equilibrium is achieved, we’ll all be better off. But I’ve also sensed that the cost of achieving that equilibrium will wreak (indeed is already wreaking) a huge change in the US standard of living – at least in what we’ve come to expect. Your article seems to confirm this fear.
Despite the hyperbole in the press, addressing this transformation will be the major political and social undertaking of the generation coming to age today. I applaud your reasoned discussion of the mater. (I already subscribe to The Atlantic.)
Posted by: Jay McAnally at January 16, 2005 11:22 AM
I would be a lot more likely to buy it to read the article if I had some idea of what the article was about.
Recent earthquakes ? James Bond's drink preferences in a changing world ? Bush's cabinet changes ? I can think of some more possibilities, but it would be nice to know.
Posted by: Marshall Eubanks at January 16, 2005 11:32 AM
This particular edition of Atlantic Monthly is paticularly good. If they could consistently produce this level of work, I would definitely subscribe.
Beyond the policy pieces, "What would Amy Do" and "Lost in the Meritocracy" are very enjoyable.
Posted by: RickG at January 16, 2005 05:55 PM
Somehow I believe that once equilibrium is achieved, we’ll all be better off.
That's almost certainly true. "We all" stretches from Lisbon to Vladivostok, from Anchorage to Punta Arenas, from Murmansk to Cape Town. The world's GDP, increased by a factor two for the benefits of globalisation, spread out over the six billion, comes to nearly $16,500 [2004-dollars] each. Counting just the Chinese and the Indians, that's made two and a half billion people better off on average by a factor ten.
Posted by: Tom Womack at January 17, 2005 02:32 AM
I subscribed to The Atlantic back in the 1990s, but the turn it took when the late Michael Kelly became editor of the magazine left me very cold. I'd rather read the library's copy now. If PJ O'Rourke was given the boot though, I'd take up Brad on his invitation...
Posted by: David W. at January 18, 2005 06:48 AM
I used to read The Atlantic Monthly regularly, and found it a very valuable reference. They had an invaluable online archive, so I could look things up and refer others to them as they came up later. Unfortunately, last year they locked everything behind a subscription firewall; while I enjoy reading The Atlantic Monthly, it's no longer a useful reference, so I've been reading it much less. I'll have to check out this article in the bookstore--it sounds interesting--but The Atlantic Monthly isn't getting a dime from me until their content is useably available again.
Posted by: SamChevre at January 18, 2005 01:40 PM