So much has been written about Reverend Wright that it is impossible to add any original commentary to that dialogue. And that's really the problem.

The cable news outlets should all chip in and buy the Reverend a new car, or maybe a bigger house, because he has single-handedly provided with them with enough content to fill a news hole the size of the Grand Canyon. Last week Reverend Wright "generated more news than both Hillary Clinton and John McCain," according to a new study. The Obama/Wright relationship alone accounted for 42% of the past week's news stories. Imagine if for the past month newscasters were forced to discuss healthcare policy and social security. Their ratings would be in the toilet.

Luckily for them, or maybe because of them, this year's extended primary battle has moved from one bit of tangential news to another. Sparing the viewing public from an endless discussion of the issues.

For a while it seemed like the furor over excerpts from Wright's sermons was actually dying down. Then he decided to reignite the debate with a spot on Public Television and a press conference at the National Press Club.

It is still not clear what motivated him to make these appearances, or whether he was getting any PR counsel. At one point, it might have made sense for the Obama campaign to hire an outside advisor to help the Reverend resurrect his image, but that was clearly not the case.

The real question is, how much does all this matter? Based on the extensive media coverage and the endless discussion by pundits, one could surmise that what Wright has said is more important and more damaging than what the candidates have said.

In the end, I guess the voters will decide what weight to give Wright's rants. But one thing is certain, media advisors in the future will have to vet everyone associated with the candidate before the campaign begins. Even then, the demand for constant news will surface an errant school teacher, college roommate or neighbor to fill the daily cycle. In the real world, no one has lived a life so politically correct that they don't have at least a few friends or relatives who would embarrass them on the nightly news.

By now many people have heard of Randy Pausch, the professor who recently gave his "Last Lecture" at Carnegie Mellon University. Apparently, last lectures are quite common in Academia but what made this one so unique is that Professor Pausch was dying of Pancreatic cancer and only had a few months to live.

He confesses at the end of his optimistic and uplifting presentation that the main reason he agreed to do it was so his young children would someday in the future be able to know more about their dad. To that end, he made sure the school taped it and gave him a copy of the disc.

That wasn't really necessary. As of today, more than 2 million people have viewed his 75 minute lecture, complete with Power Point slides, on You Tube. That number rises to over 6 million when you include the abridged version. In fact, he became so famous on the internet that Hyperion Books published an expanded version of his story, which is already a national bestseller.

I don't know how long his video will appear on You Tube but I can say for certain that his children are going to have a very famous father. And no one is probably more surprised about what has happened than Randy Pausch. I doubt he ever envisioned that his final visit to the classroom would become a cultural phenomenon. And a few years ago it wouldn't have. Today the internet is an archive not only for the immediate family but for the whole human family. I suspect that a generation from now, Randy Pausch's grandchildren will be able to log on from their cellphones and listen to a few inspiring words from their Grandfather. This Last Lecture will last for a very long time.

The Wall Street Journal recently reported on Facebook's impact on political activism in the Arab world. Over the past few months, more than 70,000 Egyptian citizens joined a group on the popular social networking site where they discuss government policies, plan protests, and form alliances to stimulate social change.

With nearly 1.4 billion humans now connected via the Web worldwide, digital communication tools have become staples of modern day activism.

Governments are taking notice, going so far as arresting dissidents for their online activities. In severe cases, security forces have even shut down electronic modes of communication in an effort to prevent discourse or civil unrest.

Last month, a student from UC Berkeley was detained in Egypt for snapping pictures of a political demonstration. Minutes after his arrest, the young man used his mobile phone to send news of his detainment to followers around the world. Using micro-blogging tool Twitter, he quickly decreed, "ARRESTED" from his mobile phone. Friends and supporters immediately contacted the U.S. Embassy and news outlets. He was released the next day.

A Snapshot of the Detained Activist's "Tweets"

Dubai has already blocked Twitter nationwide, according to ZDNET.

Efforts by governments, NGOs and big businesses to squelch contrarian voices are increasingly ineffective in the digital age, when younger citizens have literally grown up sharing ideas openly online. By closing modes of communication, groups literally fan the flames of dissenters and drive more dialogue about hot issues, not less.

This reliance on digital tools to communicate, share, and congregate will surely expand. Our own research on trusted information sources (referenced on this blog previously) illustrates the growing importance of "social" media tools and channels -- particularly for citizen influencers -- who increasingly embrace the use of technology to share thoughts with others.

Governments, businesses and all varieties of organizations need to be prepared to take part in these lively discussions online. The days of simply "pulling the plug" may be drawing to a close. With more global scrutiny on censorship and interference with communication, the only way to influence conversations is to join them.

The US media has been obsessed with gas prices for a long time. Rising prices at the pump is a staple for the local news. Lately prices have also become political fodder for the presidential primary, even though the cost of a gallon of gas in the US is still about half of the price it is in Europe.

A bigger inflationary factor on the horizon is the cost of food. As the world's population increases there is always a fear of food shortages, but according to the World Bank, in the last 36 months global food prices have risen 83% and are expected to stay high until 2015 (Business Week). This increase has resulted in riots in poor countries like Egypt and Haiti and the rationing of rice at some Costco and Sam's Club stores.

Just in the last year prices of eggs in the US are up 40%, and milk has risen by 26%. Globally, one billion people may face starvation if prices continue to exceed their dollar-per-day incomes.

The reasons for the price hikes include drought, trade regulations, energy costs and demand in China and India. Another factor is the use of corn to produce Ethanol to power our vehicles. It is estimated that the grain needed to produce 25 gallons of pure ethanol - roughly an SUV-sized tank of fuel - contains enough calories to feed one person for a year (Foreign Affairs).

Gas prices are going to continue to make headlines but the cost of food will be the major topic for business and governments around the world in the coming decade.

My wife often tells me I talk too much.

She jokes about my constant phone calls, texting, emailing, instant messaging, video chatting, etc., to communicate with friends, family and colleagues. Even during "down time" in the evenings long after our son has gone to bed, I'm catching up with others from coast to coast.

"Shut down, already, honey!" she frequently asks.

I've always been the kind of guy who loves good conversation, and technology has only made it easier. The only problem is, I now find myself wasting precious time "syncing up" my digital life across multiple properties to share similar information with different groups of people.

If I upload a terrific photo of my son to Facebook, a good portion of my family won't see it because they aren't signed up. And if I email that photo just to family members, close friends might miss it.

As digital communications tools and properties have evolved, they've done so largely "disconnected" from one another. The information you share online usually doesn't move across all your personal online touch points, as you create it. Basic syndication goodies like RSS have helped, but it's only been a rudimentary first step.

This week ends with some encouraging news. MySpace and Facebook have each announced new initiatives to help make the information you post on their properties more portable, and more easily shared across the many tools and channels which represent you online.

Yesterday, Myspace shared news of its wide embrace of data portability and special deals with Yahoo!, eBay, and Twitter to help make digital omnipresence a bit more possible.

And today, Facebook followed suit, announcing "Facebook Connect", a set of tools, enhancements and standards which will allow consumers to share their identity, content, friends and privacy preferences with other 3rd party Web properties.

This is a big deal for professional communicators for a couple reasons:

1.) It's removing another barrier from posting content, sharing ideas and exchanging information online. I have plenty of friends who have shied away from social communications tools because they think of them as too rigid with limited reach. That's beginning to change. Expect advances like these to stimulate even more digital dialogue by the masses, not just the "geek" crowd.

2.) The voices of individuals gain even more potential to build brands or tear them down. If you've had a bad experience at a restaurant and share it on your social networking page, data portability might also allow your quip to appear as a restaurant review on Yahoo! Local (if you permit it). The same goes for raves. Word of mouth can travel farther, and even faster than it does today!

I'm excited by the convenience and time savings these advances may bring. Who knows? With all this extra free time, maybe I'll be able to heed my wife's call to disconnect some night soon.

About 10 day or so, the Olympic flame arrived to Chinese soil to begin a 3-month long relay that will culminate on August 8 at the Olympic Stadium in Beijing. And just 2 days ago, a devastating earthquake hit Sichuan, the most populous province in China.

From these two tales I have noticed how Chinese media has reacted to these two incidents. And here are some observations.

The Olympic torch relay overseas was heavily broadcasted by state media. I think it is fair to say that no one expected such violent disruptions to the relay for obvious reasons. From my conversations with local Chinese friends, and officials, they underestimated the power of NGOs and other private organizations. They were too focused on media, but forgot that media is just a medium. To many Chinese, the idea of NGO is foreign. Unlike the Coca-Colas, the Nikes, the Fords, there was no familiarity of these entities. It was hard to put a face onto a NGO, thus unable to fight back in an uniformed way. Thus when the CNN incident broke (Cafferty's remarks), it was a perfect chance to put a face to the disruption, and CNN was a big brand that Chinese loves to single out and challenge. But putting outrage aside, Chinese government and corporations are only starting to understand NGOs, and from a PR prospective, these are groups that will bring the most trouble and challenges to Chinese corporation when they decide to go abroad.

While citizens rally to boycott CNN, the media is also playing a bigger role in bringing the country together in time of devastation. 24hr non-stop of live report on the earthquake aftermath really put everyone on the same boat. Cash and goods donations have arrive in tons and the image of Premier Wen in the hard hit areas, visiting the victims really spell out "change" of some sort. In the past, China has been reluctant to broadcast tragedies, such as the Tangshan earthquake in late 70s, or the recent SARS. Yet this time is different. As if the government is trying to use the media to tell its stakeholders on what's happening, what the government is doing, and what are the challenges that it is facing. In some ways, the media reports have shown a positive attitude taken by the government, and we have heard high praise from the citizens on how the government has reacted quickly and effectively.

These two tales do share something in common. With increasing easy way to get information, the government understands that hiding is no longer a viable solution. Rather, use the media to rally its citizens is a quick and effective way. Yet, what remains is how long this openness is going to last, and if the media (or government) has the courage to report "what's not working." If that happens, it will be worth of another entry on this blog.

2008 has clearly been the year for China to be featured daily in the global media. The intensive coverage began on a positive note months back as the Olympic fever began, but then turned fairly negative as protestors targeted the Olympic torch relay as it crossed the globe to air concerns on various China domestic matters, most notably Tibet. It's been interesting to read the global media coverage compared to the domestic Chinese media coverage on both of these key events. To hear both sides of the story has been fascinating. This is the kind of stuff which doctoral students live for, and I'm sure someone is already writing that thesis right now.

Sadly, though, China is now dominating the global news once again but this time following this week's devastating earthquake in Western China. As I write, the death toll is reaching nearly 15,000 but we all are braced for the reality that this toll will dramatically increase in the hours and days to come.

Unlike SARS, there does not seem to be debate on how open the Chinese media have been during this tragedy. In fact, it's in many ways been a demonstration of how far China has really progressed. Within an hour of the disaster, President Hu Jintao had called for all-out rescue efforts. By early evening, Premier Wen Jiabo had already arrived in Sichuan province. Premier Wen Jiabo then visited those areas not simply for photo opportunities but to ensure the rescue work was progressing and he was personally comforting victims, in particular children. In respect of the tragedy, the Olympic Torch relay was scaled back and donations collected along the route. Further, China readily welcomed offers of international aid, not as a sign of weakness to accept help but in the spirit that any and all help is appreciated.

For global critics of Chinese journalism, it would be interesting to hear how they now regard China's openness. Since the tragedy struck, China has been delivering comprehensive coverage of the tragedy and essentially giving international media free reign to cover the aftermath. While the world's sympathy is with China today, one would expect questions soon to follow regarding building safety standards, food and water supplies and other matters. But China isn't focused on potential criticism today, it's focused on saving lives right now. One would expect China to receive high marks with freedom of the press for this disaster. In fact, some readers of international media have already complained about the graphic images of the dead. A number of readers in Hong Kong's South China Morning Post described the front page images of dead children's bodies as highly inappropriate – one reader said “I was saddened and horrified to be confronted with the graphic and frankly gratuitous image of dead children's bodies on the front page…”

Though these are difficult stories to read and images to see, it's critical that the world see the devastation in detail… and in the process, a different side of the Chinese people's hearts and souls. It's also important to look at the actions of the central government and local authorities who have acted with great care and speed during the nation's hour of need. Without question, the media have been able to document every step.

For once, global community, let's applaud China's press… no one could have been more open or accommodating than they have been since their worst earthquake in over a generation.

When I arrived to China, I was amazed by the high utilization of instant messengers. People not only use it as a quick means of communication, but it also serves as an excellent information dissemination tool (not to say, as a good back-up when email systems breakdown). The most popular IM are MSN and QQ, and Yahoo is seldom used locally due to low penetration rates.

MSN is widely used in our office and I can understand why. The tool is highly customizable, and has certain amenities that allow personalization. Users can write a personal note next to their ID, and their friends would see it. I see sometimes good wishing notes, or just plain announcements such as "My new cell phone number is XXX."

To set aside the benefits and threats of MSN usage in an office environment, recent incidents that affected China locally and globally has made MSN a tool to voice users view points. Just let me pick two examples: the Olympic torch relay and the recent earthquake in Sichuan.

During the Olympic torch relay, many demonstrations were held overseas to voice their "anti-China" sentiments, and those graphic videos of demonstrators trying to disrupt the relay were beemed back to China. This caused nationwide uproar, and together with CNN's remarks and news that Carrefour's owner supported the Dalai Lama, really brought up the nationalism sense among Chinese. In a few days after all these incidents, a trend got started, where a "red heart" symbol could be installed along your MSN ID through a few simple clicks. The heart symbolized "Love and Proud of China" and very soon, I could see my MSN friends all with hearts in front of their ID. It felt like an unspoken solidarity, a digital and quick way for people to show their point of views. Even though it was noise-less, but the visual impact is there!!

Just two days ago, with the Sichuan earthquake affecting all of us, another trend got started. This time, it had money attached. MSN partnered with Toyota, and to show our compassion and support to those who were affected by the earthquake, for every "rainbow" that was installed in front of the MSN ID, Toyota would donate a RMB 0.1 (1cent US). And within a couple of hours, over 800,000 people have signed up and join the parade of rainbows. To me, this is not only a remarkable effort by a Japanese company trying to show solidarity (remember, China and Japan have historical conflicts that are still not fully resolved), but also how an "old" industry tries to embrace new technology, and achieving good will and CSR along the way.