Wouldn't it be wonderful if the term "investigative journalist" was no longer an oxymoron?
Let's just imagine for a moment a world where journalists really had the integrity to report the news, interview all relevant sources, and give the public full disclosure without adding their own perjoratives. Just think how it would benefit all of us if, say 60 Minutes, did the following stories:
"Did President Bush Lie to get us into the Iraq war?": A story that actually interviews the Dem's making the charge and asks them 'tough' questions like, "What evidence do you have to show us that the president lied, what specific lies did he tell, and how do they invalidate the decision that was made to remove Saddam Hussein?" Then examine the actual facts to find out if there is any evidence to support the claim.
"Are the Swift Boat Veterans Lying about John Kerry?": A story that interviews all of those in the Swift Vets group about their specific observations and experiences with Kerry in VietNam, a review of all available documentation from the time, and interviews with Kerry himself.
"Did President Bush Steal the 2000 Election?": A story about the Florida recount(s), the court challenges, the eventual outcome, what specific voters were "disenfranchised" and how, and the results of the unofficial recounts done by news organizations after the fact.
"Haliburton - Proof of Corruption?": A story that examines once and for all Haliburton's contracts and Iraq involvement, and whether any evidence exists to support Dem claims it's corruption.
"Kerry - consistent or flip-flopper?": Examine John Kerry's Senate voting record and public statements and air answers to everyone's questions about what he really believes.
"Farenheit 911 - Documentary or Fiction?": An honest analysis of Michael Moore's movie that actually breaks down what's truth, lies, and propaganda.
and my favorite topic: "Media Bias": A story about the three broadcast network news organizations, the cable news channels, the political leanings of their reporters, and how often biased reports are aired and whether those reports lean to the left or right.
For a truly balanced and objective treatment of these and many other stories, I know I'd watch, and I'll bet lots of other Americans would as well. Given the truth on these and related important topics, I wonder how it would affect the outcome of the upcoming election? I have a pretty good guess.
Wednesday, September 22, 2004
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Anybody trust the news now?
Wow, has Dan Rather gone completely off the deep end?
He rushes to get stuff on the air that seems to suggest Dubya shirked his duties in the Guard, then everyone who looks at the documents says they're not only forgeries, but bad ones. He won't give up, digging up so-called "experts" to back him up, then those same "experts" start complaining that he misled them to get what he wanted them to say.
I'm reading Bernie Goldberg's book about Dan and media bias, and it's chilling. Sure, Bernie's got a bit of an axe to grind, but who wouldn't under the circumstances? He simply wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal that pointed out a particularly egregious example of biased reporting at CBS, and pretty much lost his job and was black-balled for it. Amazing.
So, I'm thinking that we have to question everything, no matter what so-called "news" organizations are feeding us. Is anybody out there really fair and balanced? I don't get Fox News at home, but it's been amazing in the times I've been able to see it how much it contrasts with the other network news shows.
Once I saw a story about the Iraq war on CBS, then watched coverage of the same events on Fox. It was the same event, but the presentation of the story was completely different between the two reports. CBS basically seemed to be trying to suggest that US Soldiers caused the problem (I think it was another bombing in Fallujah) by their careless killing of innocent civilians. The take away from Fox was that a relatively small group of terrorists was making life miserable for Iraqi citizens, who actually support the efforts of American troops to root out the terrorist elements.
So, CBS wants us to see "Iraqi Insurgents" or "Iraqi Resistance" against evil American invaders, while Fox is showing us terrorists who are doing everything in their power to obstruct the creation of a free Iraq.
We can't go to Iraq ourselves to find out the truth, so we have to rely on journalists to tell us what's happening there. Unfortunately, CBS and their friends at NBC and ABC have muddied the waters so much that we can no longer trust anything they tell us. That's an extremely serious problem that will bring down our society if something is not done about it immediately. Their propaganda can lead only to an uninformed populace, which leads to tyranny and totalitarianism.
I'm very concerned, and hope others are as well.
He rushes to get stuff on the air that seems to suggest Dubya shirked his duties in the Guard, then everyone who looks at the documents says they're not only forgeries, but bad ones. He won't give up, digging up so-called "experts" to back him up, then those same "experts" start complaining that he misled them to get what he wanted them to say.
I'm reading Bernie Goldberg's book about Dan and media bias, and it's chilling. Sure, Bernie's got a bit of an axe to grind, but who wouldn't under the circumstances? He simply wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal that pointed out a particularly egregious example of biased reporting at CBS, and pretty much lost his job and was black-balled for it. Amazing.
So, I'm thinking that we have to question everything, no matter what so-called "news" organizations are feeding us. Is anybody out there really fair and balanced? I don't get Fox News at home, but it's been amazing in the times I've been able to see it how much it contrasts with the other network news shows.
Once I saw a story about the Iraq war on CBS, then watched coverage of the same events on Fox. It was the same event, but the presentation of the story was completely different between the two reports. CBS basically seemed to be trying to suggest that US Soldiers caused the problem (I think it was another bombing in Fallujah) by their careless killing of innocent civilians. The take away from Fox was that a relatively small group of terrorists was making life miserable for Iraqi citizens, who actually support the efforts of American troops to root out the terrorist elements.
So, CBS wants us to see "Iraqi Insurgents" or "Iraqi Resistance" against evil American invaders, while Fox is showing us terrorists who are doing everything in their power to obstruct the creation of a free Iraq.
We can't go to Iraq ourselves to find out the truth, so we have to rely on journalists to tell us what's happening there. Unfortunately, CBS and their friends at NBC and ABC have muddied the waters so much that we can no longer trust anything they tell us. That's an extremely serious problem that will bring down our society if something is not done about it immediately. Their propaganda can lead only to an uninformed populace, which leads to tyranny and totalitarianism.
I'm very concerned, and hope others are as well.
Friday, September 10, 2004
September 11th - Remembering
On September 11th three years ago, I got up early and hopped into a rental car to make the drive to Chicago for a client meeting, to be followed by an internal company meeting out in Lisle. Somewhere on the north side of Indianapolis, the first report came through the radio about an airplane that seemed to have crashed into a World Trade Center tower.
As I continued driving the story continued to unfold, including a chilling interview with a man on a cellphone within sight of the towers, who in near hysteria described seeing a second airplane crashing into the other tower. Then we heard about the plane crashing into the pentagon, followed by all kinds of speculation and unconfirmed rumors about other planes in the skies that may or may not be targeting other buildings. Everyone knows the rest of the story, heard on the car radio as I approached the Windy City.
I arrived in Chicago, where the local radio stations were broadcasting advice for people to leave the tall buildings in the city in case they were targeted as well. My meeting was scheduled in one of those big buildings, and I tried to call my colleagues, but was unable to reach them. So, I called our office in the suburb of Lisle, and reached my boss, who suggested I skip the meeting and come into the office.
It was an interesting contrast that while all this was going on that day, the newly hired VP, who was in town to meet with his management team, went on with business as usual and seemed unaffected by the events of the day. He even went forward that very day with the termination of my direct supervisor, who just before had told me to reschedule the client meeting and come on in.
Anyway, after completing a day of meetings that would be stressful enough, given the reorganizing and job uncertainty, not to mention losing the supervisor that had been a great mentor, I was sort of emotionally numb.
Jerry, a co-worker from Louisville who had flown into Chicago, now had no way to get home since all flights were suspended indefinitely. So I brought him as far as Columbus in my rental car, then he hired a taxi to take him the rest of the way. It was interesting that when we stopped for gas, I think around Lafayette, they were just cleaning up lots of cones and barricades at the station. We asked the guy what all that was for, and he explained that there had been a pretty serious run on the station that day from people who were filling up on gas, and the lines had been long.
What a day, the likes of which I hope we do not see again.
As I continued driving the story continued to unfold, including a chilling interview with a man on a cellphone within sight of the towers, who in near hysteria described seeing a second airplane crashing into the other tower. Then we heard about the plane crashing into the pentagon, followed by all kinds of speculation and unconfirmed rumors about other planes in the skies that may or may not be targeting other buildings. Everyone knows the rest of the story, heard on the car radio as I approached the Windy City.
I arrived in Chicago, where the local radio stations were broadcasting advice for people to leave the tall buildings in the city in case they were targeted as well. My meeting was scheduled in one of those big buildings, and I tried to call my colleagues, but was unable to reach them. So, I called our office in the suburb of Lisle, and reached my boss, who suggested I skip the meeting and come into the office.
It was an interesting contrast that while all this was going on that day, the newly hired VP, who was in town to meet with his management team, went on with business as usual and seemed unaffected by the events of the day. He even went forward that very day with the termination of my direct supervisor, who just before had told me to reschedule the client meeting and come on in.
Anyway, after completing a day of meetings that would be stressful enough, given the reorganizing and job uncertainty, not to mention losing the supervisor that had been a great mentor, I was sort of emotionally numb.
Jerry, a co-worker from Louisville who had flown into Chicago, now had no way to get home since all flights were suspended indefinitely. So I brought him as far as Columbus in my rental car, then he hired a taxi to take him the rest of the way. It was interesting that when we stopped for gas, I think around Lafayette, they were just cleaning up lots of cones and barricades at the station. We asked the guy what all that was for, and he explained that there had been a pretty serious run on the station that day from people who were filling up on gas, and the lines had been long.
What a day, the likes of which I hope we do not see again.
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
Saving Marriage
Given the controversy over gay marriage, I was thinking it was time to take the steps long overdue to help save the whole institution. Unfortunately, it seems to me that too many people get married sort of like teenagers "go steady". It's viewed as a commitment for the moment, but the whole lifetime aspect is not taken very seriously.
How can we fix this?
1. Reform divorce laws: No-fault divorces - what an incredibly stupid idea. Somebody's always at fault, and often there's an innocent spouse that gets destroyed in the process. Here's what should happen:
a. If one partner is dumping the other in favor of a new partner, they're free to leave with nothing. OK, they can take whatever they may have brought into the marriage and their personal effects, but that's it. The other spouse has no responsibility for spousal support and gets to keep the major marital assets.
b. Child custody decisions should favor the innocent party as well, regardless of whether that's the father or mother, as long as that party is capable of caring for the child(ren).
c. Make "irreconcilable differences" a very difficult process for divorce. Require spouses who wish to divorce on this vague reason enroll in mandatory counseling and agree to make every effort to reconcile, with a 1-year waiting period before the divorce is finally granted.
d. Physical abuse might be subject to the same consequences as (a.) above, but must be proven rather than just alleged by a vindictive spouse. Of course, physical abuse must dictate that the non-abusive partner gain custody of children.
e. Eliminate "emotional abuse". This would need an extremely heavy burden of proof, since any unhappy spouse would be likely to try using this argument.
2. Add premarital counseling to the requirement for obtaining a marriage license in every state. This could be tough to do, especially in Nevada where quickie weddings are a profitable industry, but is certain to make a great contribution to stronger marriages.
The counseling that is already taking place in churches could be supplemented by community or even commercial counseling programs, which will help prepare couples for marriage or possibly help them discover incompatibility before it's too late.
My summary point is that we need to get back to the traditional definition of marriage and teach people to understand and live that relationship. Then maybe it will become clearer to those who support the hijacking of the sacrament of marriage by homosexuals what the real definition has always been.
How can we fix this?
1. Reform divorce laws: No-fault divorces - what an incredibly stupid idea. Somebody's always at fault, and often there's an innocent spouse that gets destroyed in the process. Here's what should happen:
a. If one partner is dumping the other in favor of a new partner, they're free to leave with nothing. OK, they can take whatever they may have brought into the marriage and their personal effects, but that's it. The other spouse has no responsibility for spousal support and gets to keep the major marital assets.
b. Child custody decisions should favor the innocent party as well, regardless of whether that's the father or mother, as long as that party is capable of caring for the child(ren).
c. Make "irreconcilable differences" a very difficult process for divorce. Require spouses who wish to divorce on this vague reason enroll in mandatory counseling and agree to make every effort to reconcile, with a 1-year waiting period before the divorce is finally granted.
d. Physical abuse might be subject to the same consequences as (a.) above, but must be proven rather than just alleged by a vindictive spouse. Of course, physical abuse must dictate that the non-abusive partner gain custody of children.
e. Eliminate "emotional abuse". This would need an extremely heavy burden of proof, since any unhappy spouse would be likely to try using this argument.
2. Add premarital counseling to the requirement for obtaining a marriage license in every state. This could be tough to do, especially in Nevada where quickie weddings are a profitable industry, but is certain to make a great contribution to stronger marriages.
The counseling that is already taking place in churches could be supplemented by community or even commercial counseling programs, which will help prepare couples for marriage or possibly help them discover incompatibility before it's too late.
My summary point is that we need to get back to the traditional definition of marriage and teach people to understand and live that relationship. Then maybe it will become clearer to those who support the hijacking of the sacrament of marriage by homosexuals what the real definition has always been.
Monday, September 06, 2004
Labor Day thoughts - Here's to everyone who works for a living
Labor Day is that one-day holiday that marks the end of summer vacation, the start of school, and time for businesses to get busy.
It's always seemed to me that everybody kind of kicks back in the summer as a rule. Of course, the workplace keeps going along through summer, but seemingly at a slower pace. Now that I'm building a business of my own, it seems like the beginning of September has marked a definite increase in activity and interest in tackling those new computer projects that weren't there over the summer.
If the day comes that my business joins the big time, I hope I remember all of those years spent as a wage slave. Times have changed, but if ever given the chance, I hope I can influence in some way a change back to some basic principles:
1. Workers should be able to count on their job being there as long as they're showing up, doing good work, and helping the company stay profitable and successful.
2. Employers must foster that long-lost principle with their employees, called loyalty. Loyalty is a two-way street, and must be returned to those workers who display it toward their employers.
3. Employees should never be treated as faceless "Human Resources". Every individual has specific talents and abilities that should be tapped to make the company successful.
4. There is a direct correlation between employee and company performance. Instead of paying the obscene bonuses to top management and ignoring the front-line workers, company successes should be shared by all. The same goes for downward trends - if you ask the workers to sacrifice, management should sacrifice as well, but all promised appropriate rewards with the hard times are overcome.
5. Fairness means never loading excessive unpaid overtime on a low-level supervisor just to save money on overtime or adding staff to the department. It also means supporting employees in ways that help them succeed, and tailoring compensation to give incentives for them to achieve specific results.
6. Playing politics must be forbidden. Anyone trying to elevate their status within the company by undermining or criticizing others will be immediately reprimanded, and if it continues, terminated. Everyone in the organization must be committed to the same goals, and all focus must be on solving problems rather than assessing blame.
In summary, I commit that my organization, no matter how large or small, will always value employees and encourage them to treat the company as if it were their own. A goal for what I hope to be a strong, successful company is that all those who work here wholeheartedly refer to this as the best place they've ever worked.
It's always seemed to me that everybody kind of kicks back in the summer as a rule. Of course, the workplace keeps going along through summer, but seemingly at a slower pace. Now that I'm building a business of my own, it seems like the beginning of September has marked a definite increase in activity and interest in tackling those new computer projects that weren't there over the summer.
If the day comes that my business joins the big time, I hope I remember all of those years spent as a wage slave. Times have changed, but if ever given the chance, I hope I can influence in some way a change back to some basic principles:
1. Workers should be able to count on their job being there as long as they're showing up, doing good work, and helping the company stay profitable and successful.
2. Employers must foster that long-lost principle with their employees, called loyalty. Loyalty is a two-way street, and must be returned to those workers who display it toward their employers.
3. Employees should never be treated as faceless "Human Resources". Every individual has specific talents and abilities that should be tapped to make the company successful.
4. There is a direct correlation between employee and company performance. Instead of paying the obscene bonuses to top management and ignoring the front-line workers, company successes should be shared by all. The same goes for downward trends - if you ask the workers to sacrifice, management should sacrifice as well, but all promised appropriate rewards with the hard times are overcome.
5. Fairness means never loading excessive unpaid overtime on a low-level supervisor just to save money on overtime or adding staff to the department. It also means supporting employees in ways that help them succeed, and tailoring compensation to give incentives for them to achieve specific results.
6. Playing politics must be forbidden. Anyone trying to elevate their status within the company by undermining or criticizing others will be immediately reprimanded, and if it continues, terminated. Everyone in the organization must be committed to the same goals, and all focus must be on solving problems rather than assessing blame.
In summary, I commit that my organization, no matter how large or small, will always value employees and encourage them to treat the company as if it were their own. A goal for what I hope to be a strong, successful company is that all those who work here wholeheartedly refer to this as the best place they've ever worked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)