Continuing my rant on the media

Continuing my rant on the media, I will admit to not watching Live! with Dan Abrams, but I do, from time to time, click over to his show during the commercials of another. The thing I noticed last night was that Dan both opened his show and closed his show with Brittney Spears. The opening segment went on for at least 10 minutes at which time I gave up flipping over to that channel disgusted that so much air time had been given over to Brittney.

When you think of how much time these so-called news outlets spend on crap, is it really any wonder why Americans are so ill informed of world happenings? Now the suits will say the reason they cover crap like Anna Nicole, Brittney, and OJ is because that's what people want. And to that I say Bull Shit! The real reason is the same reason we don't have any real reporting on any of the Presidential candidates, reporting isn't easy; reporting costs money. It is so much easier to just pick up a tabloid or go to a website and see what the latest exploits of the rich and famous than it is to do an critical look at why there have been so many food recalls lately.

There is so much news out there that isn't being reported, and so much more news just waiting to be dug up. It's a pretty said statement, but they only TV coverage I saw of the falling dollar was on the Colbert Report. While there was all sorts of coverage of the failing housing market and the “sub-prime meltdown” there has been no coverage of why this has happened, the only discussion on the causes of this problem I've heard was on the Thom Hartmann show. What we get instead is the same news stories told over and over, and to break it up a bit we get hours of celebrity crap. Lou Dobbs gets an hour every day to blame every bad thing that happens in the US on illegal immigrants, yet they don't have enough time to cover all the other times Blackwater went cowboy and killed civilians.

While MSNBC runs their annoying “Doc Block” about life in jail, they leave the actual news aspect of what they are covering to the Discovery Channel. Koppel on Discovery will actually cover the part of the story that is important, the fact that we are running out of room in our jails and prisons.

MSM Hearts Hillary

You gotta love the MSM. According to them there is no way for anybody to win the the Democratic nomination except Hillary Clinton. Wow, it's amazing how their time machine works now, but didn't work in the build up to war. If you listen to the media, if Edwards wins in Iowa it kills Obama everywhere else and Edwards won't be able to win anywhere else (Hillary wins). At the same time the media also says if Obama wins Iowa it doesn't matter because Bill Clinton sat out Iowa and Edwards will never get the nomination without the first big win in Iowa (Hillary wins again). The only other option, according to the media is for Hillary to win in Iowa which means she will win everywhere else. So what is the fascination the MSM has with Hillary? Is it just a matter of the MSM willing Hillary to become the nominee? I would have to guess that if Hillary does indeed become the nominee, the very media that is in love with her now will be on the attack in the general.

When it comes to debates the talking heads all say as long as Hillary doesn't lose she wins. What the hell does that mean? In every post debate wrap-up I have seen (to be fair I haven't seen them all), there is at least one person saying Hillary won. In fact, only the last debate on MSNBC that I've seen has the number of people saying Hillary won been so low; Pat Buchanan was the only one stating that Hillary won the debate this time, but the others were quick to point out she didn't lose (however that seems to kick dirt in the face of all of their past post-debate analysis when they declared Hillary the defacto winner by “not losing”). In the pre-debate coverage it is all about how do the other candidates make themselves stand out from Hillary.

When covering the other candidates it seems to always be from the angle of how do they catch up with Hillary Clinton. When you listen to some of the people in the media they state that every Democratic candidate BUT Hillary is too far left to win. While few in the media actually come out and say that, t's implied by saying things like “John Edwards is courting the far left side of the party,” and “Hillary is a candidate that even some Republicans are looking at and saying they could live with her policies.”

Really though, this is a rant about the Media- not Hillary Clinton. I welcome reporting on Hillary along with all the other candidates as long as it is about something. Right now all anybody in in the MSM is doing is reporting on the reporting. I don't think I buy the case some are trying to make that Hillary is the least threating Democratic candidate to the Corporate overlords that control the media (at least not yet, we'll see where this Dan Rather stuff goes) and that is the reason they are so addicted to her. I think it is much simpler than that: lazy reporting (if one can even call it that). There is no journalism going on, these media outlets commission a poll and then yammer on and on about it. There's no digging around, there's no critical looks at her positions, there isn't really any arguments for or against what she is saying. It's not even just picking the low hanging fruit, it's buying the fruit that has all ready been picked, cleaned, and dyed to appeal to the eye regardless of the actual substance that fruit contains.

When someone tries to do a halfway thoughtful analysis of some of the claims the media is making, the discussion is steered right back to where it began. If someone tries to put some of these polling numbers into context, they are told how wrong they are and that the only context the poll numbers need are the polls themselves. Their argument is that the poll numbers are in line with the other polls, and since those numbers have always been in one candidates favor, they will always be in that candidates favor. But when reality is pointed out that in the past this is rarely the case, the media is quick to say this time is different. The past cannot be a predictor of what's to come this time they state because: Currently we have a very unpopular president, there is a woman candidate, there is an African American candidate, Democrats just want someone who can win, the campaign season started earlier this time, every single national poll has Hillary in the lead, one of the candidates is a former first lady, Republicans don't have a clear front runner, or any number of other nonsense they can come up with.

I have no problem with Hillary being the nominee (I do happen to think there are better candidates though), but can the media at least pretend that we still live in some sort of democracy? If we are to believe the media, all the other candidates should just drop out right now and we shouldn't even have a primary process. In fact we don't even need an election in 2008, Hillary won. I guess I really shouldn't expect anything more from an industry that punishes those who accurately report the news, and dare to ask a couple of difficult questions.

iPods & Schools

The iPod idea is already starting to make some waves, but this idea though isn't one that should be discarded right away however. Let's not forget where the idea came from, Duke University (and I'm sure there were others but I not sure who they were) began giving iPods to every incoming freshmen.

Right now I am helping a company develop a new training system to get it's new employees up to speed faster and more efficiently. Right now this company gives an mp3 player to all of the new associates for the first few months to help train them, along with what are basically podcasts on their private website that also contain training material in both audio and video formats. These combined resources have helped this expanding company train people quicker, cheaper, better, and the associates come away with a better understanding of the material.

Of course the success of something like this would all depend on how it is implemented. If used correctly it could indeed be a powerful tool to help educate students. The hardest part would be training educators on how to best use the technology and developing lessons to be used on the iPods.

Both MIT and Stanford have their own Podcast on iTunes that contain prominent lectures from some of their classes. Other universities have entire recording available for free download on their websites.

If you buy into the idea that this could have a potential pay-off to our educational system, the question becomes is now the right time to invest in this? The idea arose in a discussion over how to fix the states budget problems, and therefore was immediately under attack since it meant making an investment rather than making a cut. The implementation of this idea of course will not yield results for sometime, and the short term impact to the budget will be the cost of implementing the program. There is no doubt that a program such as this would be a hard sell the the general public. How does one justify the cost of giving students a high tech device that little in the public will see the educational value of during such hard economic times?

I have long thought that education has always been a little behind the times. Schools have always been on the back end of adopting technology, and it would be nice to see schools embrace technology for once; not to mention adopting to the way students intake information now days. It truly is time to schools to evolve beyond text books and chalk boards. I would like to see more computers and technology in the classroom (many classrooms only have one computer in them).

I'm not sure if this is the right idea right now but I'm certainly not opposed to it, nor do I think it is a silly idea. I am actually very encouraged by this idea! This shows that the Democrats are willing to think out side the box, are willing to make long term investments rather than the quick fixes proposed by the Republicans, and that they realize it takes more than mandating higher tests scores to fix education. It's important to remember that without long term investment, any budget “fix” will be only short term.

Quick idea, maybe the idea would be received better if iPods were switched to PDAs. Most PDAs can do just about everything an iPod can (short of sycning with iTunes).

As far as the Detroit News Editoral goes, This is all you need to remember from it:

Democrats are either entirely indifferent to the idea that extreme hard times demand extreme belt tightening, or they are bone stupid. We lean toward the latter.
-Snip-
Stop the stupidity. Michigan can't tax or spend its way out of this economic catastrophe.

Ah, yes. Gotta love that liberal media.

ID badges for Teachers

I'm not to sure how many of you know about a little village called Clinton Michigan, but right now it is being dragged into the spotlight and causing The Daily Telegram to support a teacher while bashing the school board and Superintendent. The issue that is dragging this little school into the limelight is a new safety measure that is being adopted by other schools in this area and has already been adopted in larger districts. The district is requiring all school employees to wear a name tag and that every visitor to the school wears a visitor pass. When the policy was implemented, all of the teachers complied, all but one and this teacher is facing losing his job over it. The problem the teacher has with this policy is that he states that wearing a badge takes away his individuality. The School states that the badge is a way to help first responders identify staff in an emergency situation saving time and hopefully saving lives and as a way to identify people who are not supposed to be in the building. The police chief of the village supports the IDs as does a security firm hired by the school over the summer before the policy was implemented.

When the teacher was first asked to comply with the policy he walked out of class in the middle of the day and has not been back, taking sick days up to this point. At Monday's School Board meeting the teacher made his case to the board, after failing to make it to the superintendent. The School Board stated that they did not want to see an “excellent teacher” leave the district over this matter, but that he had to wear the name badge. The teacher then offered a few comprises; he would personally introduce himself to every student and learn every student's name, in addition to personally introducing himself to every Clinton Police officer and he would take one week unpaid as a deterrent to other staff members also not wearing their badges. After the meeting he offered another compromise to the superintendent where he would sign a liability weaver stating that he would be willing to be shoot by any intruder if he did not have to wear the badge.

This item popped up in both The Daily Telegram and The Tecumseh Herold and my problem with both stories is how one sided they both are. Both articles made the School Board meeting sound as if it were the entire community versus the School board and all but two members of the audience were in support of the teacher. Sorry, but that just wasn't the case. My understanding from someone there in support of the board, is that the teacher had a lot of support in the audience (I guess he is a very well liked teacher by his students) and his supporters were by far the most out spoken members of the audience, but they were not the only members. The articles also fail to mention that the state has required schools to beef up their security measures by requiring schools to do two lock-down drills a year*, along with the fire drills, and tornado drills it is already required to do. Oh and the articles also fail to mention how all of the other staff members of the district have complied with the policy and that many teachers support it. Did I forget to mention that that The Daily Telegram compares the teacher to Henry David Thoreau? Both articles make the school board sound as inflexable tyrants, when really what they are doing is applying this policy to everyone equaly.

To a certain extent I understand the teacher, but I still have to side with the School on this one. The IDs are not just for the safety of the person waring them, but for everyone in the school. Clinton is indeed a small town (that fact was raised as a defense for not wearing the ID), but it has still had its issues. Parents have had to be hauled away from the school by the police for violent behavior. Kids have brought guns to schools (in elementary, middle and high school). Students have beaten up teachers and any number of other things have all happened in this small town's schools. Even if the teacher were to introduce himself to all of the Clinton Police Officers, if there were a major incident the small Clinton Police force would not be able to handle it themselves. If the ID had more than just the persons name, picture, and Clinton Community Schools on it the teacher would have more of a case, but I have many friends that work places where they have to wear an ID badge (including as teachers in other districts) and most of the time that ID has much more info on it than the one Clinton Teachers are required to wear.

Even in a small district like Clinton not all staff members know each other as evident by a security check ran in the districts buildings. This check was one reason the new policy was enacted. A member of the security firm hired by the School walked through each of the buildings, timing how long it took to be told to go to the office to sign in. The member of the firm was able to walk all around the middle school and high school buildings before being asked to sign in at the office (The elementary staff stopped him almost as soon as he walked in the door). In the middle school the security member was able to wander the halls for 13 minutes before being questioned as to why he was in the building.

I don't always like all these new security measures all the time, but wearing an ID badge at work is not something I consider over the top. A lot of those working in the private sector have had to wear IDs for a very long time. Even at a fast food joint people are required to wear name tags. If I knew the guy I would most likely have more sympathy for him, but it is not worth losing your job over having to wear what is really just a name tag.

* There are two levels of lock-down one where every door into the building is locked, every door to classrooms are locked and the windows are blocked and one where in addition to have the lights have to be shut off and students and teachers have to sit in the corners of the rooms silently. Each version of lock-down must be practiced twice a year.

The Politics of 24

Well, first off let me premise this post by saying I fell a little dirty liking a show that Chaney reportedly “loves.”

I started writing a post similar to this after watching the 2nd half of the season opener of 24, but abandoned it after meandering all over the place and not really saying much. Then I came across this article and my thoughts were once again focused on this subject.

24 is really quite an interesting show. Being a film and TV nut when I first heard about a show that would take place in “real time” I was interested and after watching a few episodes I was hooked. It had a fascinating gimmick, lots of twists and turns, and loads of action. It was fun to watch. I never really thought of the show much until the who torture issue bill arose, and the fictional Television show 24 was not only used as a justification of torture, but also as in argument that Americans supported torture by watching the show. WHAT!? Then this season premier came along and within 4 hours of the show's day, middle eastern terrorist blew up a nuclear bomb in California. That's when I realized that what some are saying just might be true: 24 could well be a NeoCon's wet dream.

The show portrays America as constantly under threat from terrorist and that only the Government can protect us from those threats. Jack Bauer, the hero and only character still alive from the first season, uses any means necessary to get the info or the man he wants. In the second season of the show he kills a government witness against a bomber to reestablish the bombers trust, Jack was undercover in the bombers organization in the past, to find out if the intel was true about the bomber's plot to blow up a target in LA. In every season and just about every episode Jack resorts to torture to get his information, and not only does the torture always work (sometimes it takes longer than others), but it is correct 95% or more of the time.

I have to say that I never gave the politics of 24 much thought until the torture issue was raised at the national level. I have always and continue to view the show as purely fictional. It's an action movie made for TV, and to view it as anything else seems silly. But yet I have heard all sorts of people use the show as a justification of torture and the importance of the Federal Government becoming more and more involved in our everyday life (“We don't want something like 24 to happen.”) I'm sorry, but a show like this cannot be used as a justification for anything, like I said it's basically an action movie made for TV. I don't want to defend the politics of the show because I don't agree with what it seems to be saying, but on the other hand if this ever was meant to be some kind of propaganda, it sure isn't subtle about it, and I can't see many people being won over to their cause because of this clearly fictional TV show.

The Daily Telegram shows it's stripes once again.

In a recent Editorial they yak about how how the Democrats in the US House locked Republicans out of debates, wouldn't allow amendments and yada, yada, yada. They repeat the exact same talking points against these bills as every other Republican shill. And come on, you have to love this last paragraph:

It’s no surprise that Michigan’s newly elected District 7 Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton, has voted “No” — as have most Republicans — on the first four of these issues. (He voted “Yes” on the student loan bill.) Until Pelosi’s Democrats pay more than lip service to their pledges of reform and bipartisanship, perhaps the best thing anyone can say is “No.”

They praise Walberg for voting no on every other bill and basically blast him for voting yes on the student loan bill (in an earlier paragraph they blast the bill). Reading this article it really seems that they don't really follow the national news that they are supposedly reporting on and commenting on. If this is the way that a lot of local newspapers are run and if people actually read those newspapers, I guess it isn't any wonder why there are so many red states.

http://lenconnect.com/articles/2007/01/19/news/news06.txt

Media Vs. Barack Obama

The attack dogs have come out early and are nipping at Mr. Obama already. Is Barack the best canidate for 2008? I don't know yet, but some of the things the media is saying about him are just silly.

Here's CNN saying he looks too much like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's President.



You could expect this from Fox, but CNN? Come on.

Detroit News Vs. Teachers & Education

The Detroit News needs to be run out of town. Now they are bitching about Detroit not fining teachers for striking, and are bitching, albeit not directly, for school vouchers.

In this article The News bitches about how the court won't up hold the anti-teacher strike law. My guess is the reason this law wasn't enforced is because the judge knew that if the law was ever challenged in the Supreme Court they would side with the teachers, and the school district and the state would waste money pursuing it.

This is a stupid law, and I don't think it is even constitutional. The state doesn't out law auto workers from striking. All they would have to do is say the auto industry is too important to Michigan, a strike would cripple the manufacturer, which would then be in trouble of going under, which would cripple Michigan. There is no law like that, and there never will be a law like that because the court understands that workers have rights. So why should they be able to pass a law outlawing a teacher from striking? All that does is say that state employees rights are less important that every other worker's rights, and that just isn't true.

You don't make education better by punishing teachers, all you do is lose teachers. If you want to make education better, ask for good teachers. If you want good teachers, you have to pay them well. Teaching is a thankless job to begin with; the people who are teaching right now could make much more money if they went into the private sector somewhere and left teaching. They call the teacher's union "militant", when really it is just doing its job; making sure that teacher's rights don't get trampled.

A teacher's job never ends throughout the year. When they come home they have papers to grade. They have to go back into school at night for meetings. They have to have conferences with parents. They have to put up with asshole students and parents. They have to put up with people like the assholes at the Detroit News telling them they make to much money and are ruining education.

Teachers are people just like every one else, they need money to live. Just because they are teachers doesn't mean that they get free food to eat, or a free car to to drive to work with. They don't get a free house to live in, or any other special perks just because they are teachers. They have all the expenses that everyone else has, and sometimes more. Teachers are required by law that they continue to get more education even after they have a degree and a job. Teachers have to go to conferences about different teaching techniques throughout the year. The school they work for will pay for part of this additional education and training teachers have to take, but a good deal of this costs still comes out of the teacher's pocket. Not to mention all the little odds and ends that the school district doesn't pay for that the teacher buys for their class room.

I think these Detroit News hacks should have to live on what teachers make for a year and then see if they say teachers make to much. I swear, if these people had their way teachers would be making minimum wage, with no health care. Their idea of helping schools is treating teachers like slave labor, and taking money away from public schools and giving it to private schools. All these people do is rag on education, yet they refuse to give it any more money and insist that teachers be treated like crap.

Here's the article:
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061121/OPINION01/611210305/100

Cross-posted at Michigan Liberal

Detroit News and the Auto Industry

Every once and a while, I have to question if the Detroit News is the print edition of Fox News. They are clearly very conservative and don't have a problem letting people know that.

In an article this Sunday titled “Michigan Democrats must protect autos,” the News states that with Democrats in control of Congress, Michigan's auto industry could be in danger. The article states that it is up to the Democratic representatives from Michigan to “rein in the ultraliberal Democrats who are beholden to environmentalists, unions and other special interest groups that promote their agendas without consideration of cost or common sense.” Is the Detroit News saying that Unions are bad? And if they are, they are saying in MICHIGAN?

“[Michigan Democrats will] have to work from the top. Incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has supported anti-automotive proposals at every opportunity. She has lobbied for plans that would force stricter fuel economy standards for her home state of California, and she's supported lawsuits by environmentalists that blame the automakers for contributing to environmental damage and global warming...Fortunately, at least for now, parties on all sides are promising to get along and set aside impractical legislation that could force the automakers -- and heavy manufacturers in general -- to adhere to unrealistic environmental or safety standards.”

Damn those Democrats trying to make a safe working environment. Damn them for trying to save the American people money by raising fuel economy standards. Damn them for looking to the future and trying to stop the globe from turning into an oven. What are these Democrats thinking?

Come on News get with the program here. Do you really think Democrats want to kill manufacturing in America? It seems to me that they are the ones fighting for fair trade agreements so all the manufacturing jobs don't get shipped over seas. It seams to me that they are the ones fighting for wages so the American people can afford to buy the things that they themselves manufacture.

Are you really saying that better fuel economy is a bad thing? I know I think it is. I love going to war for oil. I love not having enough money for other things because I have to spend it all on gas. And man-oh-man am I thankful that the oil companies are making record profits at my expense. I think it is great that everything is shipped now days because that means the cost of goods will go up when the cost of gas raises. Thank God someone isn't trying to raise fuel economy standards!

Yes it is true, Michigan's automakers need help (and I doubt they will get any from their meeting with Bush), but that is not to say they should be allowed to do whatever they want. What they need is to be able to better compete in the global economy. They need to be pushed to better themselves. They need huge help when it comes to health care costs.

Here is the article:
http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061112/OPINION01/611120310/1008

Spin

I gotta say, I'm glad that the elections are just around the corner, and not just because we are going to kick out a lot of Republicans. I'm happy it's coming up because I'm getting tried of all of it. I am getting tried of all the attack ads, I am getting tried of the lies, the spin, all of it.

Elections aren't about trying to get elected any more, they are about trying to stop the other guy from being elected. That's not the way the system is supposed to work! Facts don't matter any more, only what you can make (Force) those facts to say for your cause. Spin is king.

Things can get so out of control these days. People start to spin the facts, that spin gets spun again, and once again that spin gets spun and finally instead of reporting on the facts, the spin gets reported on as fact. We have gotten so used to it that sometimes it is hard to tell fact from spin. They are able to make facts say anything, ANYTHING, they want to to say; even the exact opposite of what those facts mean.

Spin happens on both sides of the spectrum but one side seems to take it a little farther; guess which side I'm talking about. This side is deeply versed in the art of the spin. They even have a spin-master that is a chief adviser to The President. Someone that is advising The President is doing so with spun information, information that has been filtered, polished, and of course tailored to their agenda. Even if congress was trying to make informed oversight, and they aren't, they would be doing so with the pre-spun information that the administration is giving them.

It is one thing to spin, and quite another to lie. These people may start out with spin, but it gets spun so far that the truth gets trampled over again and again. Sometimes you even have to wonder if they realize that they are flat out lying, or if they have just gotten so lost in their web of spin that they forgot what the truth really was. Even when they are confronted with the truth, they don't recognize it any more since they have been living in their own world of mis-facts and spin.

Laws are getting passed on these mis-facts and spin as if it were truth, and that is beyond dangerous.

Fox "News"

So Hannity and Colmes has an interview on right now as I write this with The President. It's just more of the same, Hannity throws Bush a softball and he bashes the Democrats with it. How can this be considered reporting? All he is doing is setting up The President so he can bad mouth The Dems.

Daily Telegram Backs DeVos

And people wonder why I don't read the Telegram. Their reasoning being that Granholm did not do enough to the economy, even while admitting that there was little to nothing that she could do.

By the way, they also came out against Proposal 5.

Sorry no link to the article, the Daily Telegram isn't exactly on top of technology.

Free Press? What's that?

According to a new international index, the US is 53rd in the world for having a free press. It is tied for that spot with Croatia, Botswana and Tonga. In 2002 the US was 17th, but since the Bush administration has has made it unpatriotic to disagree with them, the US has been steadily declining.

http://www.mercopress.com/Detalle.asp?NUM=9046

Hannity says Dems shouldn't vote

Get this, Sean Hannity thinks that Democrats should stay home on Nov. 7. He says that Democrats should not vote because they are uninformed, and that Republicans are informed; he goes on to say Democrat's vote makes no difference. He states "After all, your vote won't change who occupies the White House," and therefore "your vote doesn't matter anyway."

"Your candidates have absolutely no ideas how to win the war on terrorism... Your candidates have no idea how to keep this economy strong... They have no ideas except more tax-and-spend policies and rescinding the tax cuts that every American family has benefited from. They have no idea how to protect the border -- only solution they have there is to give us amnesty. They support open borders."

Wow.
Here's a transcript and a recording of his his radio show where he made the commits.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200610200001

What a clean campaign this has been

The Republicans should start their own ad agency, they clearly know how to make a good ad. In one ad a group called America's PAC says that Democrats don't like black babies. What the hell does that mean? They say that Dems support abortion laws that are recriminating against African Americans. In another ad, the same group tries to link Dems to a white supremacist! It's not over yet, another includes the following

Man 1: "If you make a little mistake with one of your ‘hos,' you'll want to dispose of that problem tout suite, no questions asked."
Man 2: "That's too cold. I don't snuff my own seed."
Man 1: "Maybe you do have a reason to vote Republican."

These guys really know what it's like to be African American don't they?

Then there is there is the congressional candidate that that sent out letters to Hispanics saying that immigrants, even legal ones, could go to jail if they vote in next month's elections.

I tell you, these guys really know how to campaign don't they?

Sources:
http://www.nysun.com/article/41648?page_no=1
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003309033_webimmigrants17.html?syndication=rss
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15329781/