I am currently working on a website (not a blog, not a news site…I don't know what to call it other than a "website." Think a small-scale good.is, but pushier and containing much more rigorous intuition) and want to write a piece about the history of crack in America, but this is one subject where the real gnostic details seem very hidden and convoluted. Most other content that I'm working on I've had some success with research and thought construction, but I'm at somewhat of a loss when it comes to the rise of crack in the American ghettos.
Basically this project is a way for me to leverage my skills in design and research since I find a lot of really progressive "activist" pages to be severely lacking in formal design and visual communications. I'm of the school of thought that bad presentation denigrates the message and in some cases even discredits it. I'm sure we've all tried linking to a poorly-designed site in order to support an argument, only to have our opponent tell us that they can't or won't trust the message based on bad presentation. I don't have any big dreams for it, but I want to use what I know constructively for good. For instance, I have a HUGE al qaeda interactive timeline / map in the works, as I've never seen anything like this before and I think it would really help researchers understand the connections in tracing back to Afghan-Soviet war, the rise of radical Islam, and it's connections to US defense and intel.
You don't need to apply your personality or personal info at all, as this won't be like a punk zine q and a format; it's for pure information-gathering purposes only. You can use a a pseudonym as I'll be writing/designing under a pen name anyway (and rigorous intuition will probably be one of the only places that i'll be linking the site to a personal account).
I have no timeline for publication but I plan on letting the lounge know when I launch.
What's funny is that searching the forums for "crack+cia" only returns hits that mention this connection offhandedly as if it's something we're just supposed to "know" - and not just Reagan-era contra connections, but the more complete history dating back to the 70's and earlier.