Another guy named Ben

Whenever I meet people named Ben or hear of a famous Ben, I find some intrigue in what that Ben has in common with this Ben. How is that person different? What have they done that I would do? What have they done that I wouldn't do? What have they done to contribute to the namesake of Ben?

Well, Ben Schott is one of those Bens who seems to be raising the stakes for the other Bens. A terrific holiday gift I received this year was his book, Schott's Almanac for 2007. It is filled with facts and observations from the year that was 2006. Some seem useless. Some seem impotant. Others are just plain out of left field. It makes a great little bed-side book, coffee table book, or conversation starter.

Ben's other book that I own is Schott's Original Miscellany. This book is seemingly more random in it's subject matter, but is just as thrilling. Each time you open it, you have another opportunity to be wowed by the connections in the data and observations he makes.

I just came across an interview that Ben Schott did with Radar Magazine. It was interesting to me to read how he views his own work and that of other news organizations, almanacs, blogs, and sources of information. He doesn't shy away from the fact that his work is his opinion. He describes it as a filter:

I tend to write it quite selfishly. I don't think you can write for a particular audience. I tend to look at any news story and say, Well, what do I need to know? Who are these people? Has this happened before? What's increasingly interesting about modern media is its filters: if you actually look at websites, technology from TiVo to iPods to blogs, it's all about filter. What we mean when we say we like a blog or we like a website is that we like somebody's filter. And we have several filters for different things. Of course our friends are filters. Word of mouth is the ultimate filter. So what I try to do is act as a personal filter. When I say personal, I don't mean political or partisan, I mean, What's the Schott's Almanac take on this? It's almost a sort of character.

This intruiges me because it is a way of saying that all facts are subjective and that no one person will ever really see the same piece of information in the same light.

Way to keep us thinking, Ben!