BlatherWatch never asks for anything. We just give, give, and give...
But we have to eat, buy stool softeners, butter lettuce, and condoms like everyone else. Please, please, please help tide us over until we ask again. Anonymity guaranteed. Please use the PayPal Tip Jar in the right sidebar. For larger sums, or if you don't want to use the corporate evil PayPal, send to Michael Hood, PO Box 28043, Seattle, WA 98118.
Is this one of those Nigerian scams that I have heard so much about.
I'm not falling for that. You shall get nothing from me. Go find some sucker in Oregon or some other foreign country.
Sheesh, do you think we are stupid?
Posted by: chucks | October 07, 2009 at 09:00 PM
i'm gonna put a donation jar on my desk for the little kids to donate..and if they don't donate... I'm gonna shake em down.. don't worry.. I'll get their lunch money outta them..
Posted by: j-o-a-n-i-e | October 07, 2009 at 09:21 PM
Oh look who's back.
Posted by: sparky | October 07, 2009 at 09:29 PM
chux, it's obviously not a nigerian scam- he hasn't asked you to marry him. Do like you did with the last one that proposed to you and send him 10k, now.
Posted by: Drew | October 07, 2009 at 09:52 PM
If President Umaru Yar'Adua himself operated a fine blog such as this I might send him a little compensation to.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 07, 2009 at 10:41 PM
COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC....SORRY
But then this is a blog on Seattle talk radio. What is the deal with the B. J. Shea show? Is there a radio show anywhere with more re-runs that this one? Why do I get the impression that everyone, especially the host, is one flip-out away from being institutionalized? I know, I know....most of it is all an act.
Even so it seems that one of them is flipped out and can't do the show. Again today the show is doing a re-run after spending all week promoting the return of one of their members, (RR) from some retreat in Canada where visitors are attending to get their head together.
Okay so this has nothing to do with KIRO or KOMO or KVI or how evil one viewpoint is. But it is Seattle chat radio, sort of. Anyone know whats up with this show?
OK, thank you.
Posted by: ryder | October 08, 2009 at 09:35 AM
Could someone please explain to me why Blatherwatch is asking for money?
The costs related to this blog can't be more than $25/month!?! He should consider it a few visits to Starbucks.
Are we paying Hood a salary? Doesn't the dude have a real job? The whole concept seems bizarre to me.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 09:55 AM
why should he not ask for money?
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 10:17 AM
Because it's the internet...it's free! Duh.
Put up a few links for gutter helmets, ducks beds, etc. How do you think KIRO supports themselves.
Earn money that way rather than outright begging.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 10:20 AM
OK, what about NPR? Should they stop begging for money and run ads? Should everything you ever buy for anything come covered in advertisement stickers and covered with promotional materials?
And you say this is free? You threw out the number $25/mo, which would be $300 a year. Hardly a cup of coffee.
Don't worry your pretty little head about it. If you don't want to pay for something you obviously use and enjoy then others with pick up the tab for you.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 10:29 AM
On the topic of paying for NPR, a big issue I have with contributing to them is that I don't find the majority of their programming enjoyable. If it's not outright excruciating (delicious dish, tavis smiley) it's dispassionate and tepid(weekday, to the point, the conversation). And for this I never make it a priority to listen to NPR, yet if I give them money for what I do listen to such as A Prairie Home Companion or Says You, I feel that I'm giving them a thumbs up for all the other programming I have no intention of supporting.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 10:51 AM
Advertising on political blogs is distasteful for many, especially when the advertising comes in "Better Rate Packaging" that requires the sites to hang some ads from companies that are ethically corrupt, or run against the philosophies of the blog and it's base readers. We have enough ads forced on us everyday, and we don't need more.
As for NPR, I cut back on my listening when they made the decision to not be as critical of White House policies under Bushler/Che Ney, and then carried that a step further by placing a director who was hand-picked by Bush's administration. I still listen to Inland Folk, Car Talk, Thistle and Shamrock, and Prairie Home Companion. The rest of the time, if I can't get KPTK or KPOJ, it has to be CDs.
Posted by: Drew | October 08, 2009 at 11:49 AM
During the pledge drive people do leave their comments about programming and some are read on the air.
Posted by: Coiler | October 08, 2009 at 11:57 AM
I think it would be awesome if you could pledge money to a given program or programs, and in effect underfund the stuff you dislike, just the like congress.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 12:09 PM
Advertising is the American way!
Please answer my basic question. Why is Hood asking for money?
1. To provide him a salary. If so, why?
2. To pay for the costs of this blog. If so, what are the costs?
Is Hood paying taxes on these contributions? Like most liberals probably NO!
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 12:16 PM
Why do businesses exist for profit????!!!? Shouldn't they just give stuff away?
And if that wasn't bad enough, why do waitresses expect TIPS?! I just payed you! You get a paycheck don't you?
I agree with Rado is Dead. Bloggers should exist in a special pocket of reality where money has no meaning and they don't need nutrition to stay alive and they have no desire to purchase nice things. Typing words isn't real work anyway. Little to no calories are expended. Bloggers should be a sub class relegated to servitude, providing free amusement to a greedy capitalist audience. The Seattle Times offices should be made a holding pen and the employees shackled to their work stations. If they get thirsty, simply pee on them.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 12:35 PM
I don't believe that a blog like Blatherwatch can be considered a business. It's unsustainable in the Hood-format.
What is the problem with putting a link to Gutter Helmet or Invisible Fence...why beg?
Again nobody seems to answer my basic question...
Why is Hood asking for money?
1. To provide him a salary. If so, why? Doesn't he have a job?
2. To pay for the costs of this blog. If so, what are the costs? 10 bucks?!?
Please provide me an answer. ...shouldn't be that difficult of a task.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 01:11 PM
Because he wants it, and wanting money is a cherished American value. Hood is a patriot.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 01:15 PM
Gutter Helmet is that thing worn by Dori's show...why would anybody want to have one of Dorkboy's advertisers on their blog?
Posted by: Drew | October 08, 2009 at 01:19 PM
Republicans are generaly in favor of begging. They believe private charity should replace social welfare instatutions, and how does one get money from a charity if they should have the need? Anyone? Yes, they BEG FOR IT.
And while we're on the subject of batshit logic, you said "Is Hood paying taxes on these contributions? Like most liberals probably NO!" Liberals like taxes. Conservatives hate taxes and the welathiest among them routinely hide their money in off shore tax havens.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 01:22 PM
OK...Hood wants it. Thanks for the answer.
Allow me to continue Capitalism 101.
Now...we need to assess the following...
1.What service/product does Hood provide?
2.Are people willing to pay for this service/product? (I doubt it....does one send checks to KIRO?)
Looking forward to your response.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 01:26 PM
Liberals love taxes because of the following:
1. They're so rich (i.e. Soros, Gates, Olbermann, Moore...) that is doesn't affect them.
2. They're so poor they live off the public dole.
Conservatives are the bulk of the middle class.
Last I checked Conservatives contribute significantly more to charities, church organizations, etc. Liberals expect the government to take care of that.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 01:33 PM
1. he's an entertainer and disperser of information, he provides entertainment and disperses information.
2. Yes I pay for it the same way I used to pay for the news paper, the same way I pay for cable TV or a magazine.
You have a very misguided understanding about what constitutes value. When you pay $10 to see a movie your not paying to use the facility, you're mostly paying for the costs required to make the movie. If Mr. Hood spends one hour writing a blog entry and you read it then you have personaly gained from that hour he put into it. And you think he should go unrewarded?
Ask yourself this: if Mr. Hood said "give me one dollar or I'll shut down this blog", would you rather lose the dollar or this blog? I think deep down you know that you've derived more that $1 of entertainment value from all of this.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 01:38 PM
"Liberals are so rich they live off the public dole...." If that is so, Haliburton is so broke they have to hold a fund raiser to start a war.
Where does home schooled come into this?
Posted by: Coiler | October 08, 2009 at 01:45 PM
The free market is beautiful because if there is a demand that product or service will materialize out of nowhere.
If Hood shuts down Blatherwatch, and providing there is some economic viability,someone would start a similar blog.
This is a blog not Starbucks.The internet is full of "people writing stuff" and it's free. That's the way the internet works. It's also why newspapers will be gone completely in 5 years. Typing a bunch of words day after day (particularly lies and slander) does not constitute a monetary value.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 01:47 PM
I don't want to get into the merits of conservative ideas versus liberal ideals, but the accusation that Hood would avoid taxes has no basis in reality. My understanding is that unless the gift is in excess of $12,000 the IRS doesn't care.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 01:51 PM
Another simple question...
1. Why doesn't Hood post links to Gutter Helmet, Invisible Fence, Kiel Mortgage, Stupid Prices....??? those folks would gladly pay him $.05 per hit...that's how google does it.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 01:52 PM
What do you mean "gift"...you yourself claimed that Hood expects us to "pay" him for the service of dispersing information...the IRS looks at that as "income".
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 01:55 PM
Your assertion that the internet is inherently free is frankly idiotic. There is no rule or guideline anywhere that says it should be free. There are many websites that charge users for their service, whether it be porn or a premium news service.
Mr. Hood is a professional journalist by trade, I consider blogs to be an extention of that trade and therefore his request for compensation, optional or otherwise, is more than reasonable.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 01:56 PM
I'm not sure whether blog donations are legally considered gifts or compensation but I have no reason to believe Mr. Hood is a tax dodger. You're flirting with libel.
Your assumption that a blog should resort to adversiting is also short sighted and idiotic. As someone else pointed out, it creates a conflict of interest because then it behooves the blog to never report or say anything unfavorable about that advertiser.
Your assumptions about how the world should work are hair rediculously uninformed. It's a real struggle to mop up all the brain puke your leaving on this thread.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 02:02 PM
"There is no rule or guideline anywhere that says it should be free."
WHAT!!! The internet is free. It is the free market at its finest. A website that earns money has "something" people are willing to spend money on.
Hood can request for money all he wants. He can also claim he's a journalist. People claim all sorts of stuff...doesn't mean it's true.
The bottomline is that this blog can't stand on its own legs because of the content. There is no monetary value to the junk I read on this blog.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 02:03 PM
Saying the internet is NOT FREE would be like saying a Shopping Mall is NOT FREE!?!
Do you get charged 5 bucks at the door as you enter Southcenter Mall?
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 02:06 PM
This blog is a form of regular entertainment for most people that come here to read and comment, like RayDeeOh, just like if they buy a book or watch tv. None of those things are free, and somebody has to pay for the overhead of computer maintenance and internet access. If B'Lam puts up something a couple of times a day for us to read and comment on, and then is expected to keep the site functioning when the site breaks or needs updates, what's the big deal if he says he can't do it for free? Everybody that benefits from this site, whether it be for humor or insight into the days events, keeps coming back. Repeat "customers" means there's a level of satisfaction for most of you, but "customer" is the wrong term, because we get that pretty much without paying anything for it. We don't have to take any effort to research and post articles, but we continually come back to see what's been posted for us. RayDeeOh is one of these, a returning viewer who hates the blog he loves to come back to- go figure.
BTW, the last time radio checked, cons give more to charities; by what source do you come up with that? Do cons specify they want their contributions made public, in case anyone checks to see what they've done today? Get real.
Posted by: Drew | October 08, 2009 at 02:08 PM
radio, are you getting your vast knowledge of the "internets" from Ted "Tubes" Stevens? Don't make us pull out his famous quote...
Posted by: Drew | October 08, 2009 at 02:11 PM
How do you feel about street musicians who leave a hat for tips? Both priovide a service, entertainment freely to anyone who passes by. Do you yell at the street musician about his asking for tips? How is this substantially any different?
Every time you reload the site more bandwidth is used and that costs Mr. Hood. If you visited one time and moved on that would be one thing but here you are visiting the site on a regular basis and even making use of the comments feature. The way I see it you're running a defecit at this point.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 02:13 PM
PROOF:
Arthur Brooks, the author of "Who Really Cares," says that "when you look at the data, it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more." He adds, "And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."
And he says the differences in giving goes beyond money, pointing out that conservatives are 18 percent more likely to donate blood. He says this difference is not about politics, but about the different way conservatives and liberals view government.
"You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away," Brooks says. In fact, people who disagree with the statement, "The government has a basic responsibility to take care of the people who can't take care of themselves," are 27 percent more likely to give to charity.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 02:15 PM
I agree that conservatives give more to charity but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 02:19 PM
It's the free market.
As Dori says "public artists are "scam artists" but a street musician that plays well will get paid by those that are entertained. The quality street musician doesn't have to beg.
Hood has his little tip jar. Obviously nobody is contributing. Therefore I can only conclude that the content of the blog doesn't warrant "tips"...By posting a direct plea for money is basically his cute way of begging.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 02:23 PM
So maybe it isn't a quality blog by your own subjective measure, but finally you concede that he's in the right to ask, as might a lower quality street musician in your words, which answers your original question "why does Mr. Hood ask for money", a game ending concession on your end. Thanks for playing, it was fun. I'd send you a nickel.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 02:31 PM
I think it's fine that Hood has the "tip" jar. I'm offended by the begging just as I'm offended by the rat with the sign at the traffic intersection.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 02:34 PM
Arthur Brooks has several websites promoting his books etc., and it's apparent that he limited his data gathering to his own circle of conservatives. Radio has shown here today that he will continue to visit the blog, and he'll do it on everyone else's dime. Cons do this everyday. It's the "I don't want to pay the bus fare, but I still demand a free ride". That's the kind of "compassionate conservatism" that shows conservatives to be the cons that they are.
Posted by: Drew | October 08, 2009 at 02:38 PM
Mr. Hood provides infinately more value than intersection beggars, who provide absolutely nothing. Street musican analogies are valid but panhandling comparisons are not. As a debate opponent, you're a total mess.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 02:39 PM
AA...Your personal attacks demonstrate your ignorance and impotence.
Bottomline...this blog doesn't deserve a penny. If you send Hood money it's a personal choice but IMO you're an imbecile. Instead send it to a charity.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 03:00 PM
In my experience conservatives don't conceptualize in the abstract as liberals do, like "should people die sooner just because they didn't play the money game as well as someone else?", while conservatives rationalize the circumstantial.
A wellspring of an example of this how Jesus was a "keep only what you need" socialist, while conservatives are "I bought it, I can burn" capitalists, and all the fibers they use to bind these two together is text book rationalization. Most conservatives have far more than they strictly need. Even tithing is miserly in comparison to the extremely benevolent standard set by Jesus.
At least libertarians are somewhat internally consistant in their world view, but they're also heartless and greedy. Liberals by far come the closest to actualy satisfying the ideals of Jesus.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 03:02 PM
Radio is Dead, you can't fault my personal attacks then call me an imbecile, that level of hypocrisy is illegal.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 03:05 PM
AA...Last I checked Jesus was not pro-choice...an absolutley terrible argument.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 04:32 PM
"keep only what you need" suddenly is the definition of a socialist...
Most conservatives I know are frugal pragmatists that save for rainy days, help those less fortunate through charity and hold their families as foundation of their lives.
Most liberals I know are materialistic spend thrifts with strident anti-family, anti-religion, anti-country values.
Posted by: Radio is Dead | October 08, 2009 at 04:38 PM
Since it is expressly written in several places in the Bible that man has been granted free will by God, it would appear that being pro-choice is only forbidden by those "compassionate" cons, even the ones who hustle their daughters off to get abortions before anyone in their church notices she was pregnant.
Posted by: Drew | October 08, 2009 at 04:39 PM
Radio, I said "Liberals by far come the closest to Jesus", which is true, obviously liberals are not 100% believers. I also never claimed that all socialists are minimalist, I imply that some are, which is true. You can't read to save your life.
I think I've made a pretty strong case that conservatives would have been Jesus' worst enemy were he alive today. Conservatives advocate sink or swim capitalism. They seek to drive down the minimum wage and widen income inequality. Own up to what you are. Attacking liberals won't make you suddenly pretty.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 05:06 PM
Does the Bible actualy specify when life begins? At conception? I don't suspect they parsed things so carefully back in those days.
I don't give a shit if conservatives don't want to have abortions, that's their business. I would just prefer they don't impose that decision on other people who might want an abortion.
Posted by: AuthenticAndrew | October 08, 2009 at 05:14 PM