This picture has gotten a lot of attention because of the tiny desk and weird room decor. But geek-Americans like me are focused on something else: the microphone boom and stand, which are emblematic of this administration’s distain for expertise. Let me explain.
The thing is a “C-stand” with a microphone boom pole attached to it with via a grip head and boom holder. These things are not designed to be used together, but points for improvising.
The first thing you might notice is the lack of a counterweight on the boom. It wants to tip over, although the pole is carbon fiber and fairly light so they got away with it. But the real problem is the way the stand is being used.
C-stands are designed as portable support for small lights. They have three unequal length legs that can be folded flat for storage. This makes them tricky to use safely, esp when balancing a boom. There’s one main rule: the long leg goes directly under the center of gravity.
Notice that here (you have to look carefully because of the angle), the boom arm is centered between two of the three legs. That’s exactly the most dangerous way to use this kind of stand. And there should be a sandbag on the opposite side.
Someone was trying to bean POTUS.
The mic itself looks ok. I’d guess from the color and shape of the windscreen that its a Schopes Collette, probably with an MK41 (super cardioid) capsule. It’s a standard boom mic for film production, but I’ve never seen one in a WH photo before.
A bunch of people have pointed out that the attachment between the pole and the grip head is actually a Remote Audio boom holder made for this purpose, which I missed (I’ve only seen the K-tek, which looks different). But the setup is still unstable for all the reasons above.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Trump/Kraken legal strategy makes the most sense (for low values of "sense") if the goal is not to win, but rather to get cases thrown out quickly, setting the stage for you to claim for years that you were victimized by a "rigged system".
If the goal is to be able to continue selling things to the people who supported you for as long as possible, it may work quite well.
The 2021-2024 talking point will be "we filed eleventy zillion lawsuits and the corrupt courts refused to even give us a trial on a single one! You're saying not a single one of our cases had any merit? Don't be naive!". Etc.
There are a LOT of bad faith claims being made right now about security vulnerabilities and rigged elections, but those citing vulnerabilities as a reason to conduct post-election audits are correct.
Security experts have long advocated post-election audits be done routinely.
Hopefully, moving forward, this will result in bipartisan support for investment in and harmonized standards for securing US election infrastructure.
I hope we can all agree that election security is (and should be) an entirely nonpartisan goal that we all share.
An excellent overview of the security issues in US elections, and the safeguards recommended by experts, can be found in this National Academies study (note free pdf download link): nap.edu/catalog/25120/…
People who study election technology have been warning for years that there are security weaknesses in voting systems, but have taken pains to point out that this is not the same as rigged elections.
Unfortunately, sloppiness about this distinction on the part of over-eager advocates helped set the stage for the misinformation currently being used to sow doubt about the current election.
Facts and nuance matter a lot here. Please be careful not to exaggerate.
Election security in the US is improving (a lot), but it’s not yet where it needs to be. Improving the security and robustness of our elections is important whether your preferred candidate won the last election or not.
And let me repeat again: there are indeed serious weaknesses and flaws in the tech and processes used in US elections, and there will always be. But that does not in and of itself mean that any particular election has been stolen or outcome tampered with. Maintain perspective.
One of the things about working in this area is no matter what you do, no matter how truthful, someone wants to either exaggerate or dismiss it.
Don’t make the mistake of treating the delay in getting results this year as evidence of some kind of systemic problem that we urgently need to solve. This was a tight election held under extraordinary conditions, and yet we learned the outcome within a few days. That’s not bad.
The big lesson learned this year on election processes is that state legislatures need to provide more clarity (in advance) on how to flexibly handle voting in emergencies, in ways that better resist political gamesmanship during the emergency itself.
This was not the first election disrupted by a crisis. Sandy, for example, wiped out polling places and displaced voters. We generally handle emergency voting poorly, in a way that often needlessly confuses and disenfranchises voters. We can and should do better.
Yes, it will make little difference to a base that would cheer him for shooting someone on Fifth Avenue, but still, wow.
One group this story has potential to influence (and it’s unclear how many voters are actually in it) would be people who were taken in specifically by the “he’s a brilliant businessman” mythology.