Le blog de Laurent GUERBY

dimanche 18 mars 2007

OFCE sur la campagne electorale

Via SOS SES et Démocratie Economie et Société, j'apprends que l'OFCE publie un "ebook de campagne à l'usage des citoyens". En relation avec mon billet heures travaillées, lire Combien de temps les Français travaillent-ils ? (PDF).

Bonne lecture.

dimanche 11 mars 2007

Médias et blogs

Je n'ai toujours pas écrit de billet sur ce sujet méta-passionnant mais je trouve celui de Calculated Risks vraiment percutant, je cite "Media Inquries Policy" (je grasse) :

[...] Dear Inquiring Minds:

Calculated Risk is a hobby blog, created and maintained by a retired executive, with occasional assistance from a former bank officer and mortgage lending specialist who is currently on extended medical leave. Both of these people get endless questions, answers, hat tips, links, analysis, and overall inspiration from a very diverse group of commenters, regulars and occasional de-lurkers, all of whom are beloved except some of them.

CR regularly gets emails and comments from paid reporters who wish to know if CR or Tanta would like to be interviewed, or would simply like to answer one or several questions that the reporter has about economic or housing or mortgage issues. Because, so far, the answer has always been something on the order of "no," we would like to explain to you why this is the case. (CR Note: I have no problem discussing general economic and housing issues offline).

Calculated Risk is a blog. That means that it is a medium on which CR, Tanta, and the commenters are free to publish the things they want to say about subjects in which they are interested and to which their expertise is relevant. It is possible that there are bloggers out there who are publishing blogs with the secret hope that they will be discovered by the Big Paid Media and get interview requests, so that they may see their names next to a short, context-free, undetailed, possibly memorable or pithy but usually just crudely-edited quote in the newspaper. Some people may have ambitions that go beyond that, such as becoming a freelancer for Big Media companies, in order that they may get paid in the high two figures to produce short, simple-minded articles that Big Media won't fact-check any more than they fact-check anything else. There may even be bloggers so delusional innovative that they still have hopes that the Big Media, print or online, will quote directly from their blog postings and provide links (text or hypertext, as the format allows) so that Big Media's readers can be directed to the blog for further information. It's a big internet, we're not all alike, and neither CR nor Tanta intends to be speaking for any bloggers other than themselves here. Suffice it to say we are not in the above categories.

Dear reporters, we quote your stuff periodically, giving credit both to the reporter and the publication, under fair use terms. We have no objection to your returning the favor. If you have an editor who will not allow that, and you think that the problem can be solved by getting one of us to drop our online personas, give you our real names, and say the same thing to you over the phone, so that you can get your editor to accept it as something other than just blogging, which everybody knows is untrustworthy ranting by anonymous nuts, you are making a faulty assumption about the relationship among us, our birthdays, and yesterday. Neither CR nor Tanta wishes to play into a set of assumptions that render what we say on the blog as unworthy of coverage by the Big Media, but what we might say on the phone to Intrepid Reporter as good dirt and straight skinny.

Do you, can you, understand the implicit insult in that? You want to talk to us because of what we have written on this blog, instead of simply engaging with what we have written on this blog. You are saying that blog entries we have written, at our own inspiration, on our own time, for our own intellectual purposes, backed up by our own research, are not good enough for you to use as source material (properly credited). It only "counts" if you get to ask the questions, form the story angle, edit the material, and put names on it. This is the message we're getting from you, and the only reason that our answer to many of your inquiries is "no" is that we areCR at least, istoo polite to make it "no, and go take a hike with the horse you rode in on." [...]

Allez lire le reste.

Des réactions et/ou liens sur le sujet pour alimenter la réflexion ?

mardi 6 mars 2007

Pierre Cahuc et Patrick Artus vs Nicolas Sarkozy et François Bayrou

Ca va chauffer dans la blogosphère économique et politique demain, dans les echos du 6 mars 2007 on peut lire :

Des économistes du CAE critiquent la défiscalisation des heures supplémentaires

Effet incertain.

Les économistes Pierre Cahuc et Patrick Artus présentent ce matin les conclusions d'un rapport qu'ils viennent de rédiger avec André Zylberberg pour le Conseil d'analyse économique, instance rattachée au Premier ministre, sur « La réglementation du temps de travail ». Selon les auteurs, une défiscalisation des heures supplémentaires, comme l'ont proposée les deux candidats à l'élection présidentielle Nicolas Sarkozy et François Bayrou, est susceptible de modifier les comportements des employeurs. Ces derniers pourraient être tentés, estiment les auteurs, de minorer les heures normales de travail pour accéder plus rapidement aux heures supplémentaires, moins coûteuses. L'effet d'une telle mesure sur l'emploi est, en outre, très incertain, jugent ces économistes.

Et un deuxiéme scoop pour le prix d'un : la source de cette information est le tout nouveau Blog d'un économiste du travail animé par Etienne Wasmer, bienvenue à bord :).

Lire aussi son billet défiscaliser les intérêts d'emprunt?, je cite sa conclusion :

Bilan: une nouvelle niche fiscale, une contribution à l'augmentation des prix de l'immobilier, un transfert des pauvres vers les riches. Une vraie mesure de droite.