Like many, I was surprised to learn that the New Republic's current cover story, Against Transparency, is written by Larry Lessig. Could the godfather of the Free Culture movement actually be against the Open Government movement?
Well, why not? Perhaps I was the victim of my own biases, assuming the two concepts to be inextricably linked. Perhaps there are good reasons to oppose the trend towards discolusure. I read Lessig's article with interest.
Well, if there's a compelling argument to be made against transparency in government, this isn't it. After struggling through Lessig's rambling essay, I'm not even sure he is in fact opposed to transparency in government! Others who've taken on the task of parsing it have come to similar conclusions.
It seems what he's really saying is that raw data without meaningful analysis is pointless. Which may be true, but wouldn't make for nearly as compelling a cover as "Against Transparency".
So my qestion is: has Larry been tarted up? Has a New Republic editor slapped a deliberately controversial headline on a fairly benign argument?