Don't blame yourself; blame the Internet!

Sorry for all the ranting today, but this article from Scotsman.com annoyed me. Scotland's exam pass rates are falling, and the Scottish Parent Teacher Council (SPTC) is blaming misinformation on the Internet.

Let me get this straight: the two primary sources of influence in the lives of young people--teachers and parents--are blaming Wikipedia for the fact their children aren't learning? What kind of blame-passing rubbish is that? When a child is sitting in a classroom taking a math test, which do you think is more associated with that child's performance--the way they were raised to value education by their parents, the methods used to mold young minds by teachers, or the information that child found when searching for math information on Wikipedia? (Do kids really go searching for math info on Wikipedia?!?!)

If I sound like an angry old man today with my posts, it's because the two articles I posted--The AP's depressing op-ed piece and the Scotsman's story about parents and teachers--happen to inadvertently hit on two of my biggest frustration with modern culture: The media and an inability to take responsibility.

The media bothers me because it pretends to represent an objective view of the happenings that matter, but never does. I'm not just talking about FOX News here; I'm talking about all of the news media!

The constant focus on news that isn't news is offensive and depressing. Turn on your local TV news tonight and what do you think the lead story will be? Will you learn about something happening in Washington, a change to laws or policy that impact your life, or international changes that will affect the US economy or foreign policy? Or will the lead story be a "breaking news" item from an area of town which you never visit about a murder of someone you don't know and that won't have any impact on the world of you or a loved one? Murders aren't news in modern life; the media's focus on each murder serves no function except to keep viewers in a state of heightened anxiety and glued to their 24-hour-news cycles.

As for the issue of personal responsibility, I am growing weary of people shopping only on price but then complaining when their employers are forced to cut costs; consumers visiting Wal-Mart and McDonald's while lamenting that their local businesses are failing; voters who gripe about falling government services while electing politicians who promise tax cuts; parents who ignore their children as they surf the Internet or watch TV in the privacy of their own bedrooms while objecting to pop culture's influence on America's youth; drivers of gas-guzzling SUVs who criticize the wars and US foreign policy in the Middle East; and people who live 20 miles from their employer who won't be caught dead in mass transit but complain about the price of gas.

Change won't come about by complaining, and it certainly won't happen by blaming others. Change won't even occur simply because you mark the ballot box next to Obama's name in November. Change will happen when you (and I) change our behaviors.

This officially ends my morning of griping. I'm going to change my attitude right now!

Associated Press Depresses Me

This past week, the Associated Press made headlines for trying to rewrite the nation's copyright and "fair use" laws by tell bloggers what they can and cannot do when copying from or linking to their articles. Maybe they should worry a little less about how bloggers are driving traffic to their sites and a little more about whether their news articles are actually news.

This pessimistic, pandering, non-news item ticked me off this morning: Entitled, "Everything seemingly is spinning out of control," two AP writers offer an editorial that isn't labeled as such and a "news" item that contains no news. (Hint to AP: When you need to use the word "seemingly" in the headline, it's a sign to go back and reconsider the objectivity and factual basis for a news piece.)

Their contention is that everything is spinning out of control and Americans are feeling helpless. Of course, there are problems today--such as flooding, gas prices, water shortages, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without end, and air fares rising--and to AP this all means, "The can-do, bootstrap approach embedded in the American psyche is under assault" from "dour powerlessness." The "article" ends with this: "Maybe this is what the 21st century will be about — a great unraveling of some things long taken for granted."

The Associated Press can go screw themselves. I get angry when, in times of challenge, the media accelerates anxiety by focusing on every piece of iffy news and glossing over positive signs. For example, we all know the doom and gloom in the economy, but did you know there's been positive news as of late? Keep in mind "good news" is relative, but in the past month or two came word the US economy is not in a recession (at least not yet) by any definition used by economists and the government, that manufacturing is showing surprising strength, that construction spending was stronger than expected, that the US Service Sector is still growing (albeit by a small amount), and that first-time claims for unemployment fell.

Part of the reason I get angry about this media fixation on negativity is that consumer expectation is its own self-fulfilling prophecy. If we feel anxious about the future, we stop spending and this feeds a poor economy. If we feel optimistic about our futures, we spend and live as if tomorrow will be better than today.

Perhaps it isn't Americans that feel helpless, as the AP claims, but instead are news organizations that feel helpless. Newspaper subscriptions are dropping, TV ratings are down, more people are getting their news online where ad revenues are a challenge, and the AP is lashing out at bloggers. Must be sorry times to be an AP employee!

My greatest gripe is that there are always reasons to be concerned. My grandfather lived his life assuming the very foundation of the American economy and way of life was always about to crumble. His pessimism pervaded his entire life, and while he may someday be proven right--maybe decades from now, maybe centuries from now--he could have lived a better life if he didn't think the end of our culture was imminent.

Perhaps the two AP writers who find that today is so much more uncertain and fearful than the past are young and do not remember 9/11, stagflation, the cold war, race riots, and other dark periods in American history. The Associated Press can ring its hands and worry that the country and the world are unraveling, but if Americans and other citizens of the globe would ignore the pandering and alarmist media, we'd all be much better off.

FOX News Issues Three Apologies in Two Weeks

FOX News is very, very sorry. According to the New York Times, the "news" division has had to issue repeated apologies related to the way they're covering Barack Obama. They called Michelle Obama “Obama’s Baby Mama,’’ they called the Obamas affectionate fist bump during the senator’s victory rally “a terrorist fist jab,’’ and Fox News analyst Liz Trotta made a joke about a possible assassination of Mr. Obama.

What I love is that FOX addressed the latest incident by noting “A producer on the program exercised poor judgment." Why not just tell the truth and say that the producer was following the network's well-known and established practice of providing slanted coverage of the Democrats.

Why is it that a network that shows a second of a nipple or bare buttocks gets fined millions of dollars by the FCC, but a "news" network or program that regularly misreports or insinuates falsehoods in a way that could adversely impact an election gets a free ride?

Fox Being Fair and Balanced

Fox commentator Liz Trotta was being interviewed on the Fox News Channel when she mixed up Osama and Obama and then added her desire to have them both killed.

Is this more of Fox news being fair and balanced?

Bill Moyers on Reverend Wright and Religion

Bill Moyers (of course) has some thoughtful things to say about race relations, religion, and Reverend Wright. A worthy six-minute video that provide more perspective than you'll find in hours and hours on CNN or FOX News.

"Don't speak for anybody in here except yourself f*ck face"

Let me start this post with a couple of observations: I use the word "f*ck." I hear the word "f*ck" used a lot. In my relaxed work environment, it is not unusual to hear the word "f*ck." And it almost never offends me. But even though I am pretty tough to offend, I was offended by the word "f*ck" while reading a news item today.

(Let me also note that I am attempting to keep this blog, if not family friendly, at least sorta appropriate, which is why you generally won't find anything overly offensive or sexual on MartyFeldmanizeMe.com and why I use "f*ck" instead of the word itself. I started this blog with a promise to myself to have this be a f*ck-free zone.)

A federal judge has levied sanctions of more than $29,000 on a lawyer and his client because the client was incredibly vulgar at a deposition, and his lawyer did nothing about it. GMAC is suing HTFC Corp., and as a result Aaron Wider, the CEO of HTFC, was deposed.

His hostility and vulgarity in a professional setting is breathtaking. It also shines a light, at least in a small way, into the dark corners of the mortgage industry, a business category with a significant responsibility for the economic issues we face today thanks to actions that either broke or bent rules. If Wilder is an example of the folks in the mortgage business, it's no wonder the industry collapsed on its own hubris and ignorance.

You can read more on Law.com, but here are examples of some of the examplary professional conduct displayed by the CEO of HTFC Corp. (You can also get an idea of the professionalism of this organization by their unbelievably cheesy web site--music, bad animation of dollar bills, and clip art abound.):

• In one passage, GMAC's lawyer, Robert B. Bodzin asked Wider to open a file so that Bodzin could ask questions about certain documents. According to the transcript Wider erupted, saying: '"I'm taking a break. F*ck him. You open up the document. You want me to look at something, you get the document out. Earn your f*cking money @sshole. Isn't the law wonderful?"'
  
• In another passage, Bodzin said: "We're going to adjourn this deposition if this happens again because you are offending every single person." According to Robreno's opinion, Wider responded: '"Don't speak for anybody in here except yourself f*ck face."

You can read more about the embarrassing Mr. Wilder on Consumerist.com.

Heather Mills

You probably know that Heather Mills went on a bit of a tirade in front of the courthouse after winning a £24.3 million divorce settlement from Paul McCartney. She's gotten a lot of criticism for her public whining following the huge settlement, but I think this article from the Daily Mail really put it into perspective: Heather won £700 for every hour she was married to McCartney. That comes to $1,401 per hour based on current exchange rates.

Why exactly was she complaining? Hell, I'd marry Paul McCartney for $1400 an hour! And he could call me Client Number 9!

$12 Billion a month gets you one heck of a war, these days

Remember the Iraq war? Based on news headlines, you'd think Americans (or at least the U.S. media) has forgotten we're at war.

On top of the fact young Americans are dying and being wounded and the fact many feel the war hasn't made us more safe, there's this: This $%*&@ war is #*&%!+ expensive.

Stop for a moment to consider that our country is facing some of the worst economic news in decades, and then consider this: The war in Iraq is costing the United States $12 billion per month. The way the Bush administration has blundered in the planning and execution of this war will create debts and economic hardships for an entire generation or longer.

At the start of the US-led invasion, Larry Lindsey, then White House economic adviser, estimated that the war in Iraq could cost as much as $200bn. Because of this claim, he was fired from the job by the incredibly arrogant and ignorant Donald Rumsfelt, who had his own estimate of $50 to $60 billion. (I wonder if Donald has ever apologized to Mr. Lindsey?)

The total cost to date is not as easy to estimate as you'd think. The most conservative estimate of the war's cost comes from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, whose estimate through September 30th is $413bn.

But in a new book by Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize winning economist, and Linda Bilmes, a senior official during the Clinton presidency, a much higher number is calculated. Their estimate is higher because it includes the future cost of caring for so many injured soldiers, interest paid on the war debt, macroeconomic costs from higher oil prices, and social costs not paid by the government, including the loss of productive capacity of those killed or wounded and quality of life impairments.

Care to guess what their estimate is of the total cost to the U.S. for the unnecessary war in Iraq? Here's a hint: The name of their book is The Three Trillion Dollar War.

Here are two small facts to put this horrible debacle into perspective:

• The US federal government spent $108m last year on research into autism, a condition affecting one in 150 children. We spend that in 4½ hours in Iraq.
  
  
• The Joint Economic Committee of Congress says the war has so far cost a US family of four $16,900, a bill that could rise to $37,000 by 2017.

Hey, don't blame me. I didn't vote for the Busy/Cheney/Rumsfield disaster!

You can read more about the cost of the war on FT.com.

Tent Cities of the New Homeless in Los Angeles

I haven't seen this carried by the major media in the US, but here is a sobering report from BBC about tent cities that are springing up in L.A. People who lost their homes are beginning to live in tents and RVs, creating shantytowns and living on part-time jobs and handouts.

Clean up your wiener poopie or else

Posted without comment...

How bad to newspapers have it?

I was recently speaking to someone over the age of 70, and I told them I didn't expect paper newspapers to exist in 10 years. (Well, maybe there'll be a place for specialty papers and a few nationals, but certainly not daily newspapers in every city across the country.) She thought I was crazy (but then, she also doesn't own a computer, so she and I may not have the same perspective.)

A new WeMedia/Zogby Interactive poll demonstrates how much trouble newspapers are in. According to the survey, 55% of those age 18 to 29 say they get most of their news and information online, compared to 7% of this age group that gets most of their news from newspapers. If there's a surprise here, it's that so many people under 30 still consider newspapers their primary source of news.

But newspapers' troubles were even more evident in the 65 and older demographic: 35% of this group said their main source of news was online compared to 17% who list newspapers as their top source of news and information. By a 2-to-1 margin, seniors are turning to the Internet for their news compared to newspapers.

I think that's pretty telling. If newspapers can't even hold seniors and younger people are almost entirely disconnected from newspapers, what can the future be for daily printed news?

Anchorman vs. Reporter

It's a little tough to figure out and requires a great deal of intuition to see it, but I'm guessing the anchorman and the reporter don't like each other much. The embarrassment starts a little over a minute into this video.

glumbert - Anchor vs Reporter

The passing of a photographic era

Progress tramples older technologies. Usually this passes unnoticed, but sometimes we get the opportunity to pause at the grave.

Polaroid had already halted the production of instant cameras, but this week it announced it was closing the last of the manufacturing plants that make instant film.

Why wait for instant film to develop when you can see your shots instantly on a digital camera? Still, I'll miss shaking those instant prints to hurry their development (an action which apparently accomplished nothing but everyone still did.) Just think, Outkast's song "Hey Ya!" is just four years old and already it's as old and musty as "Surrey with the Fringe on Top."

I think Polaroid's and Kodak's fates are a great lesson for every big business: Don't lose sight of the business you're in!

I remember branding guru Al Reis once saying something along the lines of that Kodak's brand was about memories while Fuji was just about film. He was right, but Kodak forgot about it themselves. At some point they thought they were in the film business and not the memory business, so they missed what might've been a huge advantage in the infant digital photography market. They're still trying to catch up.

It's an important lesson: Companies can easily forget that their success and failure rests not on their ability to make or distribute physical things but instead on providing a solution, furnishing genuine experiences, and/or creating a meaningful and emotional connection in their customers.

Shake that thought around a while and see what develops.

Way to get to Hell #1: Suing your way to the afterlife

I won't pretend to understand how or if people go one place or another after death, but if there is a Hell, I am pretty sure Tomas Delgado of Spain will find himself there.

I am not sure which of the ten commandments or seven deadly sins this falls under, but Tomas is suing the family of a dead 17-year-old bicyclist for the damage done to his car in the accident that killed the youth. Both parties were at fault--the young man was cycling alone at night without reflective clothing or a helmet and Tomas was driving at excessive speed. As a result of the accident, the cyclist was killed but the really tragic thing, according to Tomas, is that his Audi A8 sustained 20,000-Euros worth of damage.

I understand the kid should've been riding safely, but what kind of cold and callous person sues the family of a dead child to recover the damages done in the accident that killed him?

Dumbest thing I've heard in a long time

I read a comment in a news story and found the level of ignorance so appalling that I had to share.

Three young people, ages 21 to 23, were tragically killed in a car crash in Denver. They had been drinking and were speeding at around 100 MPH when they hit a pole, splitting the car in two.

The sister of the presumed driver was quoted in the Rocky Mountain News: "The thing that really makes me feel much better about this is they died doing what they loved to do — they were drinking, they were going fast and they were together. It gives me comfort, it does, to know those three things."

Did I miss a memo? At some point, did unquestioning acceptance of aberrant behavior supplant love and concern as the primary expectation of family members?

And unto one he gave five talents

Here is a spectacularly inspirational article that is well worth your time. "An age-old lesson comes alive for Ohioans" from the Wisconsin State Journal tells the story of Rev. Hamilton Coe Throckmorton of Chagrin Falls, OH. He decided to test a bible parable by handing out $50 to each of his 1700 congregation members. Their goal was to use one of their talents to double the money and return it to the church in seven weeks.

The story is marvelous, as people found talents they never knew they had and were stuck with inspiration and new experiences well beyond the pithy sum of $50. I won't tell you how it ends--you'll just have to find out for yourself.

Click hear to read the article.

CNN.com sucks

I once before took CNN.com to task for allowing their home page to be devalued by the tasteless ads they accept. I felt the debt consolidation ads featuring dancing presidents and dancing aliens were childish, unprofessional, and inappropriate for a serious news site like CNN. (They'd be perfect on FoxNews.com, however.)

Today CNN sunk to a new low. They feature an ad that doesn't appear to be an ad. Right above the CNN TV links is a large video window that says, "Creepy gas station | Watch Now." The only thing that labels this an ad is some 6-point font that is light gray on a white background. No person looking at it would think it's an ad--there's no advertising copy and no headline.

If an advertiser tried to place an add on CNN that appeared to be fake news, the network would reject it. But CNN continues to take ads that seem more appropriate for the Drudge Report than for the home page of the most respected news source in the world. Of course, if they keep taking these same sorts of ads, they won't need to worry about being very respected any longer, will they?

Reason #1 Why I Hate Local TV News

It's been years since I've watched the local TV news for anything other than updates on an election, a storm, or some sports highlights. I have long since gotten tired of "news" programs that begin with the phrase, "And we begin tonight with some breaking news..." That "news" is invariably of a murder of someone not famous in a neighborhood I tend to avoid.

The fact a murder happens in a tough neighborhood within a big city isn't really news at all, but it does give the station the chance to open their program with breathless dread, thus feeding the public's paranoia and need for... more news!

When is the last time you saw a news program open with good news? I don't mean sappy stuff like a kids' spelling bee or a someone volunteering at a soup kitchen, but real good news? Take, for example, the dropping fatality rate from auto accidents. In 2006, the fatality rate (related to both population and miles driven) was at its lowest rate in 12 years! This decrease equates to 1,400 fewer people dying on our roads in 2006 compared to 1994. Did you see your local news program leading off with this story?

Not only doesn't local TV news avoid telling you positive things happening in the world, they also exaggerate the negative. Surveys demonstrate that Americans fear being victimized far more than reflects reality. And today I found an interesting stat that puts this into perspective.

According to the New York Times, New York City is on track to have fewer homicides this year by far than in any year since reliable Police Department statistics became available in 1963. And, they've analyzed half the murders and found that fewer than 35 people were killed by strangers. If that trend holds up, fewer than 100 homicide victims in New York City this year will have been strangers to their assailants. And that's in a city of 8.2 million!

So, even though your trusted TV anchorpeople lead off each and every nightly program with tales of mayhem and murder, you have just a one in 82,000 chance of being killed by a stranger (at least in New York, and my guess is that this would be relatively similar in other cities across the country.) In other words you are around 13 times more likely to be killed in an auto accident than be murdered by a stranger! You are five times more likely to be killed in a fall then to be murdered by a stranger! And you are only slightly more likely to be murdered by a stranger than to be killed by fire or smoke inhalation!

So, I'll keep my TV off when it comes to news time and will seek out the news I want--without all the manufactured doom and dread--online!

Mellow Thursday: Mercy Mercy Me

Why Mellow Thursday? The week has a head of steam, and you're probably rushing to the weekend. Time to sit back and enjoy a bit of mellow music to clear your head.

One of my favorite songs of all time: Marvin Gaye's "Mercy Mercy Me" (subtitled "The Ecology.")

If I can mix a bit of pertinent reality with our environmental mellow music, please read this frightening article on CNN. A random family participated in a study to test for chemicals in their bodies. They approached the tests with curiosity but were horrified to learn their two children--just 18 months and five years old--have chemical exposure levels up to seven times those of their parents! The year-and-a-half-old child had two to three times the level of flame retardants in his body that's been known to cause thyroid dysfunction in lab rats.

We're so surrounded by unproven chemicals that the bodies of our children are absorbing substances at an alarming rate. Most worrying is that the long-term consequences of such exposure is unknown. Says one scientist at the Center for Children's Health and the Environment at the Mount Sinai Medical Center, "We are the humans in a dangerous and unnatural experiment in the United States, and I think it's unconscionable."

Air Conditioned Clothes

On paper, it probably sounded great. In reality, the only people who'd wear the new air conditioned shirt would be those who don't mind looking like Violet Beauregarde on her way to the Juicing Room in Willie Wonka's factory. It's gives a whole new meaning to the term "Puffy Shirt."

Plus, it lies. The "air conditioned shirt" isn't. it actually has two fans that circulate air, so while it may keep one a little cooler, it certainly isn't air conditioning.

Read more on the Daily Mail site.