Myth Taken Politics

Huh? Are you daft?

Although it is easy to be upset about the Bush administration's actions against a free press (see last post), it is so disappointing to see what passes for journalism on network news. Tim Russert interviewed Sen. John Kerry on Meet the Press today. Or rather both Tim Russert and John Kerry were in the same studio during the taping of Meet the Press. After a series of unrevealing questions and answers, Tim Russert with prop in hand (a government form for Kerry to sign) proceeded to attempt a "gotcha" against Kerry. Kerry, cool under pressure from these intense, I mean, timid, uninteresting and pointless questions, responded with, in part, "We delivered weapons to the Khmer Rouge on the coastline of Cambodia." WOW. Sen. John Kerry helped, on behalf of the U.S. government, the Khmer Rouge, a  genocidal and despicable outfit that slaughtered millions. What a revelation!

Tim Russert, not quite quick enough to catch that potent point, lapsed into a continuation of the "gotcha" enterprise. I went back over the boring show's transcript to see if I missed something. Nope. Let me know if you know of any serious journalism taking place on network, heck, cable news either. Freedom of the press does not mean much if those who own the presses don't use the freedom.

Freedom?

Freedom of the press: Bush administration attacks Al Jazeera and succeeds in getting Qatar government to interfere with Al Jazeera. Jan. 30, 2005 NYTimes
Freedom of the press: Bush administration pays Armstrong Williams to shill administration policies.
Freedom of the press: Bush holds a so-called town hall meeting on Social Security, but refuses to include actual concerned citizens.
Freedom of the press: Bush administration keeps tight-lipped as journalists in Russia are killed.
Freedom of the press: Secretary Rice declaring Iraqi elections went "better than expected."  When she declared the danger of Iraq, the nuclear threat, the connections with terrorists, the need to intervene militarily without good reason. Always eager to give press information, true or not, that supports the administration actions and becoming defensive upon even the most direct questions.   Lying continuously to the press does not mean freedom of press.

But in that this administration is also against democracy when it gets in their way, and is against human rights as evidenced in the despicable legalization of torture, It just means that the administration feels free to lie to the press, interfere with the press, to disparage the press, to create fake news, to create disinformation campaigns. I am waiting for the supposedly free press to fight back and claim their rights. 

Fiddling While Home Burns

According to Congressman Barney Frank, "The administration doesn't really have anyone they trust enough to send here [Davos, Switzerland at the World Economic Forum]." Closer to the truth is that the administration does not have anyone that rest of the world can trust. The big commotion in Davos is that the dollar is sinking faster than the Titanic. And like what was said of the Titanic, the administration is pushing the myth that the U.S. economy is unsinkable. This myth is making it easier for the administration to push policies that are ruining the U.S. economy.

The rest of the world is looking for relief from the coming storm, pushing their own economies to work harder to make up for the enormous drain that is the current U.S. economy. As China sops up the enormous debts that we produce, we form their big market. But China won't need us forever, and they are competing for oil and other natural resources we need to survive (note to the wise: China is courting Venezuela and Canada for future oil prospects). And the other countries can look to the Euro for a stable currency to replace the dollar eventually.

So while the administration makes up WMD and Social Security crises, they are fiddling with the underpinnings of the U.S. market. They refuse to take any action to prevent the looming disaster, they don't acknowledge the market economy, they waste hundreds of billions on foreign excursions, unnecessary weapon systems (unless this is a crafty plan for holding off our lenders), and planning huge giveaways to the wealthy.

Wake up America! Don't let them lull us to sleep as we drift closer to the icebergs. Start rowing in the right direction.

Is it advertising if they don't tell you?

If an advertisement fails in a forest of other ads, does it make noise? As we enter this new age of surreptitious product placement and TIVO fast forwarding and sophisticated ad effectiveness metering (necessary for determining ad rates), some serious issues should be raised.

• First is how will the product placement interfere with the creative process. Some may feel that the creative process is so impaired due to the ratings race that it is already ruined. I feel, you ain't seen nothing yet.
• Second is the nature of commercial speech versus protected first amendment speech, and how the two might be regulated. I feel strongly that commercial speech must be strictly regulated, for example, to keep false advertising to from being promulgated. Imagine trying to regulate a network writers on how they might bring up medicine in a medical drama. Although current regulations may rule that out now, it is scary to think about the potential.
• Third, should networks be forced to notify all ads, especially product placements. Or should there be a clear oversight by the FTC, FCC and other agencies?

As the media moves into a broadband Internet existence with sophisticated media players, I think we should not march unknowingly into this new world. Stop, think and then act!

Myth of the Government versus Innovation and Growth

I find it hard to argue with people who posit theories as economic facts. Fortunately, today in the New York Times, Jeff Madrick dispelled a commonly argued myth that government involvement can not be helpful to our economic system. The problem with the myth is that it produces poor social policies that will hurt many people. It seems clear that a diverse society and economic system allows for the most possibilities of growth, a free market of ideas so to speak. Jeff Madrick points out that the Heritage Foundation list of "freest"  nations only barely intersects with the list of the most competitive nations by the World Economic Forum. Today, the news was filled with references to liberty and freedom (inauguration). The calls of "freedom" and "liberty" being espoused by the right ring hollow for me when the right of our seniors to live in dignity is under attack, our neighbors are threatened by pre-emptive wars, and where our democratic government is attacked as an impediment to economic growth. Let's hear it for government funded and developed land grant university system, stability and dignity through Social Security and Medicare, Internet and World Wide Web, regulated spectrum that allows WiFi and cell phones.

Winging It

Watched West Wing last night (a source of escapism that makes living under the current regime a little easier). One issue raised on the show was how to take EITC (Earned Income Tax Credit) and make it politically powerful. The first lesson of the show was to understand that EITC is a non-informative, non-pronounceable, non-hip acronym. Second lesson was how to make a catch-phrase that would help protect it: Poor Tax. I am not sure how successful this gambit would be in the real world, but it helped to raise the issue of promoting policy by coming up catchy names that make propaganda easier.

One potent example that the Republicans use is the "Death Tax" instead of the boring former appellation, "Estate Tax." This succeeds as political propaganda, because it inflames people into believing that it is unfair and mean-spirited. Democrats lost this fight by explaining and explaining and explaining. I am not sure why they did not come up with an alternative name immediately that could have caught on and surpassed "Death Tax." My thought was "Spoiled Brat Tax," which is much more accurate (only affects heirs to the most wealthy, who not unfairly can be considered spoiled brats if they are against the estate tax-must-see the documentary Born Rich for a peek at the lives of the rich kids).

But the phrase should be both witty and simple and easy to get. For example, calling the Bush Administration plan to emasculate Social Security, Privation of Social Security, is lame. Calling it the plan to make it Social Insecurity is better.  Take a shot at coining your own terms. Best one gets a prize, being ignored by the Democrats who will lose this battle.

Ownership Society versus Democracy

We will all start hearing about the ownership society from those representing the biggest owners (Bush will make it a theme in his inauguration). This onslaught is part of a deceptive campaign to wrest control and assets from most people, and I will attempt to expain how the myth of the "ownership society" is itself is a dangerous objective. First it is important to note that "ownership society" is short for "individual ownership society." Second it should be clear that ownership implies control over property and that that property is described in absolute terms that denies the tenuousness nature of property. And much like a magician using indirection to fool us, the biggest owners will attempt to keep our eyes on meager payoffs, while they pick our collective pockets.

Confessions of a Torturer

In today's Washington Post, Anne Applebaum wrote a piece "The Torture Myth" which took a look at the argument of whether torture was an effective means of obtaining evidence. The answer was it seems unlikely. But that is only part of the myth. The bigger truth is much more dangerous. Torture is not about reaching the truth, but it is about causing pain to a person with a patina of an excuse. The commonly used argument/excuse is the ticking bomb torture exception. But torture is rarely or never about the desperation of its practitioners, but about creating terror in its helpless victims. The real ticking bomb is always the terror of who will be the next victim of a society that condones or conducts the form of terrorism called torture.

Embedded in Iraq

A War Against Truth. Written by a Canadian with a British passport for an American magazine, each aspect of he plays on from one end to the other to bring a story of the American invasion and devastation of the cradle of civilization. Infused with poetry, his own and recitations of dozens of others, he brings to light many more facts than I was aware of. Well documented and beautifully written and not available in the U.S. Order it from Chapters or get your local bookstore to order from Raincoast Books.

Framework for Understanding the Social Security Debate

Often lost in the debates are the fundamentals. At its most basic Social Security is a social contract between all of us that seniors won't be left to starve or lose all means of support. It was a major progression in civilization where our society recognized that we could afford to make this contract and we couldn't afford to devolve into barbarism. At its core the current debate is over whether to end this social contract. The so-called privatizing of social security will allow some seniors to be "losers" and will allow them to sink below our living standard.