On my computer at work, I use to have a sticker with some words that have served me well over the past 22 years in television news: "Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand." Those words were written by Dutch Philosopher Baruch Spinoza who wrote them more than 400 years ago. He also wrote this: “The highest activity a human being can attain is learning for understanding, because to understand is to be free."
These are changing times in which we live and if you are going to live in these times, you must be able to change. That is especially true for television. Diane Mermigas wrote on BNET earlier this month that if TV stations are going to survive, they are going to have to reinvent local news. Mermigas quite accurately points out that "local TV stations depend heavily on their news operations, which typically account for about half their revenues. As a result, they're also highly vulnerable to the death spiral that's overtaken newspapers as news migrates to the web."
The traditionally model of television is changing. I have talked about that many times in past blogs and my advice was this: embrace the change for it is not going to go away. People are reluctant to change and often fear change. There was once a time in this country when people said a 24-hour TV network that only does news would never be accepted. They said the same thing about a TV channel that ran weather 24-7. Yet, CNN and The Weather Channel are now the first place people turn when they need to know. John C. Maxwell, in his book Good Thinking For A Change, says this: "Changing your beliefs changes your expectations; changing your expectations changes your attitude, changing your attitude changes your behavior, changing your behavior changes your performance, and changing your performance changes your outcome."
KRBC is changing and is now going in a different direction and I won't be making the trip with them. Some might think I'd be sad about that, but I'm not.
Thirty-three years ago, I walked into the radio newsroom at KRBC and began doing something I love: the news. I have always loved doing the news and I am grateful to those I have worked for over the years for allowing me to do what I love. I guess I got "bitten by the bug" when I was a teenager delivering the Washington Post. But it was also stimulated by the places I where I grew up. I was living in Montgomery, Alabama when Rosa Parks refused to give-up her seat on a city bus, igniting the Civil Rights Movement in this country. I was in Washington, D.C. when Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his "I Have A Dream" speech. I lived the anxiety and fear of the Cuban Missile Crisis and stood on the freezing bridge leading into Arlington National Cemetery as the body of President Kennedy rolled by, carried on a horse-drawn casson. Surrounded by so-much history, how could I not love "the news"? It has been a dream come true: a dream born in the hallways at Walter Reed Army Medical Center one a Saturday morning. There to get a haircut, I got lost and found myself standing outside the hospital radio station. A teletype machine was sitting behind a large window, actively hammering out the news, one letter at a time. I was astounded by the realization that I was watching history being written as I stood there.
In 1987, KRBC radio got out of the news business and I moved over to TV.
You know, closing one chapter of your life and beginning another is a lot like those moments, when you are scurrying around as you head out the door, wondering if you have forgotten anything? So let me just say this: For the past 22 years, it has been my honor to come into your homes and to share with you the events of the day in our community. I hope I have been an objective voice, but admittedly, there have been some tremendous peaks and valleys that you were not allowed to see. I hope in that time, I have not overstayed my welcome or behaved in anyway other than as an invited guest.
It is time now for a change and my sincerest wish is for you to find happiness in your life and for KRBC to reach the heights to which I know it is capable of. They have some great ideas and some even greater days ahead of them.
In the film, "Apollo 13", there is that scene where the crippled space capsule is getting ready to begin its perilous re-entry and Tom Hank's turns to his crewmates and says, "Gentlemen, it has been an honor to fly with you."
It has been an honor for me.
Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Friday, September 11, 2009
Reflections on Patriot's Day
Well, here we are on Patriot’s Day, September 11, 2009; eight years after terrorists launched a series of attacks against free, peace-loving people and the very core of their beliefs. People ask me from time to time what was the greatest story I ever covered and invariably I tell them it was 9-11.
My most vivid memories of that date come from a 60-minute videotape I have locked away in my desk at work. It’s an old feed tape we use to use for collecting news stories, but on September 11th, 2001 I used it to grab every piece of video I could from the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Crash of Flight 93. On that tape are images of that day (many of which have not been seen since it happened), but what are most striking to me are the words spoken: the audio tracks. You can hear the shock and disbelief in the voices, but there is something else; a profound sadness for those who have just lost their lives.
I come from a generation of baby-boomers. We weren’t even born when Pearl Harbor was attacked. We didn’t gather around radios to be stirred into action by President Roosevelt’s “Day of Infamy” speech. In fact, I wondered what historians would remember about President Bush’s remarks to the nation on September 11, 2001. The strange thing is that most people can’t remember what he said. Here is part of his remarks from an address to a grief-stricken nation that night:
“Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes or in their offices -- secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers. Moms and dads. Friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.
The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong. A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve. America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.”
I don’t watch my tape very often. It’s like a home movie that contains some very tragic images. It brings me to tears sometimes. I reminds of things I don’t want to remember, but at the same time, don’t want to forget. TV crews covering the attacks turning the power of the media into tools of compassion as they splashed the photos and posters of those unaccounted for across the television screens of the world, firefighters racing to the scene - firefighters who did their duty and tried to save the lives of others while putting their own lives at risk, crowd filling the streets, waving flags in support – holding candles in makeshift memorials to the dead. At Buckingham Palace, the band played “The National Anthem” instead of “God Save the Queen” and the closing shot that night from the networks was of the Manhattan skyline with smoke still pouring from the scene as rain began to fall.
Not all the images were from Ground Zero. There is the story about passengers on a plane that was diverted to Labrador and how people who lived there fed them and gave them shelter after all the planes were ordered from the air.
In my closet at home, I have an old tattered American Flag: weathered and worn. I guess it is the closest thing to a family icon that I own. I have it stored in a box with a slip of paper explaining that the flag was put up immediately after September 11 and flew everyday until it became too worn to fly anymore. It’s also a reminder that there was a time in the days after September 11th when you couldn’t find an American Flag in this country. People bought nearly everyone they could and flew them.
So, here we are eight years later. It’s a funny thing, but the words that serve me best these days I remembered from my high school Civics class; written by another American Patriot more than 200 years ago. His name was Thomas Paine and this is what he wrote on December 23rd, 1776 in The Crisis:
“These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value.”
I gave a copy of those words to a young man headed to Iraq a few years ago…to lift his spirits when times seemed their darkest, just as they had in the days after September 11th.
God bless America.
My most vivid memories of that date come from a 60-minute videotape I have locked away in my desk at work. It’s an old feed tape we use to use for collecting news stories, but on September 11th, 2001 I used it to grab every piece of video I could from the attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Crash of Flight 93. On that tape are images of that day (many of which have not been seen since it happened), but what are most striking to me are the words spoken: the audio tracks. You can hear the shock and disbelief in the voices, but there is something else; a profound sadness for those who have just lost their lives.
I come from a generation of baby-boomers. We weren’t even born when Pearl Harbor was attacked. We didn’t gather around radios to be stirred into action by President Roosevelt’s “Day of Infamy” speech. In fact, I wondered what historians would remember about President Bush’s remarks to the nation on September 11, 2001. The strange thing is that most people can’t remember what he said. Here is part of his remarks from an address to a grief-stricken nation that night:
“Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes or in their offices -- secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers. Moms and dads. Friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.
The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong. A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve. America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.”
I don’t watch my tape very often. It’s like a home movie that contains some very tragic images. It brings me to tears sometimes. I reminds of things I don’t want to remember, but at the same time, don’t want to forget. TV crews covering the attacks turning the power of the media into tools of compassion as they splashed the photos and posters of those unaccounted for across the television screens of the world, firefighters racing to the scene - firefighters who did their duty and tried to save the lives of others while putting their own lives at risk, crowd filling the streets, waving flags in support – holding candles in makeshift memorials to the dead. At Buckingham Palace, the band played “The National Anthem” instead of “God Save the Queen” and the closing shot that night from the networks was of the Manhattan skyline with smoke still pouring from the scene as rain began to fall.
Not all the images were from Ground Zero. There is the story about passengers on a plane that was diverted to Labrador and how people who lived there fed them and gave them shelter after all the planes were ordered from the air.
In my closet at home, I have an old tattered American Flag: weathered and worn. I guess it is the closest thing to a family icon that I own. I have it stored in a box with a slip of paper explaining that the flag was put up immediately after September 11 and flew everyday until it became too worn to fly anymore. It’s also a reminder that there was a time in the days after September 11th when you couldn’t find an American Flag in this country. People bought nearly everyone they could and flew them.
So, here we are eight years later. It’s a funny thing, but the words that serve me best these days I remembered from my high school Civics class; written by another American Patriot more than 200 years ago. His name was Thomas Paine and this is what he wrote on December 23rd, 1776 in The Crisis:
“These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value.”
I gave a copy of those words to a young man headed to Iraq a few years ago…to lift his spirits when times seemed their darkest, just as they had in the days after September 11th.
God bless America.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Dish It to Downing: Defending Your Right to Know
It was one of those defining moments. It happened between an elected official and a reporter. At the heart of the discussion: the public's right to know. It centered around construction of a new county jail.
Here’s what happened: Elected officials wanted an opportunity to let the jail's designer and the sheriff talk openly about the jail. So, they set up a meeting which elected officials would attend and listen to the discussion, but at which no business would be transacted and no decisions made - two things the law strictly forbids. It was only later that word got out about the private session which some contended was not properly posted because it wasn't posted at all.
It brought a somewhat pointed discussion between the reporter and the official that went something like this: “I think you violated the Open Meetings Act. It was an official meeting in which a quorum was present without posting notice of that meeting or what you were going to discuss.”
“We weren’t discussing anything,” the official answered. “We were listening. We wanted to give the principal parties the opportunity to openly discuss their concerns about the new jail. As I read and interpret the law, it says that we cannot meet to transact business or make a decision without giving public notice. We did neither. We only wanted them to feel free to speak frankly without the fear that it would wind up on the evening newscast or the front page of the newspaper.”
“Then, they really weren’t ‘openly’ discussing it, were they?” the reporter argued. “They were discussing the expenditure of more than a million dollars of taxpayer money in a private meeting, out of the presence of taxpayers.”
“But no decisions were made and we were not part of the discussion," the official insisted.
“Says you,” retorted the agitated report. “I don’t know whether you were part of the discussion or made any decisions or not, do I? I just have to take your word for it. If you did violated the law, who stands to lose more than you by admitting it? I find it hard to believe that none of you discussed what was talked about today…or will discuss it further in the future. As for making a decision, I certainly believe that at some point what was talked about will manifest itself in some decision. I may be wrong, but I don’t think so. And the only defense that you will have will be if there was an impartial party in there representing the public.”
It was a spirited discussion and in the end, nothing was ultimately resolved. I take that back. I understand that both acknowledged the need for officials to be able to conduct business as they were elected to do, but at the same time to make sure the "public" is protected from potential abuses. It wasn't the first such confrontation and was a catalyst for the Ombudsman program. An ombudsman sits in closed meetings and makes sure the laws are upheld, but who is forbidden to disclose what is talked about except to the proper authorities.
On September 24th, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott will defend the Texas Open Meetings Act against those who want to do public business behind closed doors. The suit is filed by two former members of the city council in Alpine, Avinash Rangra and Anna Monclova. According to prosecutors, Rangra sent emails to a quorum of city council members discussing official business. He was charged with conducting an illegal, closed meeting. The charges were later dropped, but Rangra and Monclova subsequently challenged the Texas Open Meetings Act in federal court, claiming it violates their guarantees under the First Amendment of the Constitution. The federal court initially rejected the argument, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later sent the case back to the lower court claiming it should be reviewed under a stricter standard of review. In his brief filed this week, this is what Attorney General Greg Abbott said:
“Elected officials work for the people. They do not have a First Amendment right against the very people they serve. They suffer no actionable First Amendment injury from being required to conduct public business in public, rather than in secret, to the exclusion of the voters who elected them to office in the first place. In short, open meeting laws expand, not suppress communication. Such laws do not limit public discourse – they broaden it. Open government is precisely what the First Amendment envisions, not condemns. Like virtually every open meeting law across the country … the Texas Open Meetings Act is based on a simple premise: Because the decisions of governmental bodies are made not on behalf of the members themselves, but on behalf of the people they serve, the people have the right to view the decision-making process.”
You know, for the record, there is no such thing as your "right" to know. It is sort of hinted at in that portion of the Bill of Rights that talks about government not making laws abridging your freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, but there really is "right to know what is going on". And that seems okay for a lot of people.
Sometime it seems like we turn our heads and look the other way when we should be standing up and being counted. I think the Attorney General makes a great case for defending us from the abuses of ourselves. I guess ultimately the court will decide.
Downing Bolls
Here’s what happened: Elected officials wanted an opportunity to let the jail's designer and the sheriff talk openly about the jail. So, they set up a meeting which elected officials would attend and listen to the discussion, but at which no business would be transacted and no decisions made - two things the law strictly forbids. It was only later that word got out about the private session which some contended was not properly posted because it wasn't posted at all.
It brought a somewhat pointed discussion between the reporter and the official that went something like this: “I think you violated the Open Meetings Act. It was an official meeting in which a quorum was present without posting notice of that meeting or what you were going to discuss.”
“We weren’t discussing anything,” the official answered. “We were listening. We wanted to give the principal parties the opportunity to openly discuss their concerns about the new jail. As I read and interpret the law, it says that we cannot meet to transact business or make a decision without giving public notice. We did neither. We only wanted them to feel free to speak frankly without the fear that it would wind up on the evening newscast or the front page of the newspaper.”
“Then, they really weren’t ‘openly’ discussing it, were they?” the reporter argued. “They were discussing the expenditure of more than a million dollars of taxpayer money in a private meeting, out of the presence of taxpayers.”
“But no decisions were made and we were not part of the discussion," the official insisted.
“Says you,” retorted the agitated report. “I don’t know whether you were part of the discussion or made any decisions or not, do I? I just have to take your word for it. If you did violated the law, who stands to lose more than you by admitting it? I find it hard to believe that none of you discussed what was talked about today…or will discuss it further in the future. As for making a decision, I certainly believe that at some point what was talked about will manifest itself in some decision. I may be wrong, but I don’t think so. And the only defense that you will have will be if there was an impartial party in there representing the public.”
It was a spirited discussion and in the end, nothing was ultimately resolved. I take that back. I understand that both acknowledged the need for officials to be able to conduct business as they were elected to do, but at the same time to make sure the "public" is protected from potential abuses. It wasn't the first such confrontation and was a catalyst for the Ombudsman program. An ombudsman sits in closed meetings and makes sure the laws are upheld, but who is forbidden to disclose what is talked about except to the proper authorities.
On September 24th, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott will defend the Texas Open Meetings Act against those who want to do public business behind closed doors. The suit is filed by two former members of the city council in Alpine, Avinash Rangra and Anna Monclova. According to prosecutors, Rangra sent emails to a quorum of city council members discussing official business. He was charged with conducting an illegal, closed meeting. The charges were later dropped, but Rangra and Monclova subsequently challenged the Texas Open Meetings Act in federal court, claiming it violates their guarantees under the First Amendment of the Constitution. The federal court initially rejected the argument, but the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals later sent the case back to the lower court claiming it should be reviewed under a stricter standard of review. In his brief filed this week, this is what Attorney General Greg Abbott said:
“Elected officials work for the people. They do not have a First Amendment right against the very people they serve. They suffer no actionable First Amendment injury from being required to conduct public business in public, rather than in secret, to the exclusion of the voters who elected them to office in the first place. In short, open meeting laws expand, not suppress communication. Such laws do not limit public discourse – they broaden it. Open government is precisely what the First Amendment envisions, not condemns. Like virtually every open meeting law across the country … the Texas Open Meetings Act is based on a simple premise: Because the decisions of governmental bodies are made not on behalf of the members themselves, but on behalf of the people they serve, the people have the right to view the decision-making process.”
You know, for the record, there is no such thing as your "right" to know. It is sort of hinted at in that portion of the Bill of Rights that talks about government not making laws abridging your freedom of speech and the freedom of the press, but there really is "right to know what is going on". And that seems okay for a lot of people.
Sometime it seems like we turn our heads and look the other way when we should be standing up and being counted. I think the Attorney General makes a great case for defending us from the abuses of ourselves. I guess ultimately the court will decide.
Downing Bolls
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
New Media: A Wake Up Call
We are becoming an “online” society.
You look at where the news is going these days and it’s obviously headed to the internet, where you can instantly access it. In fact, we are invited to instantly comment on the story or participate in some form of opinion survey or online poll. Not everyone wants your opinion, however. The internet is the latest platform for the criminal element and that want nothing more than to take what you have. We better wake up and recognize that fact before we all suffer some form of irreparable damage.
I got an email Sunday from Customer Relations with Bell Canada, Canada’s largest communications company. It was short and simple: “Dear costumer,” it began, “This e-mail was sent by Bell Canada to notify you that we have temporarily prevented access to your account. We have reasons to believe that your account may have been accessed by someone else. Please verify your details by following the link below…”
Wow, looks important. But I suspected a scam and did some checking (without clicking on the link, by the way) and sure enough found that it was an identity theft scam. Here is the first clue that something is wrong here: the word “costumer” is misspelled. It should be “customer”; not “costumer”. A "costumer" is someone who makes costumes. Then, there was that other thing: “Bell Canada”. I don’t know anybody in Canada and I certainly don’t have any sort of account with them. One can easily see, however, how someone might go ahead and click on the link just to find out what this is all about. Unfortunately, in doing so, you may already be allowing a hacker to cut into your personal information.
I came across this story dated February of 2008. “Bell Canada has become the latest company to fall victim to the growing problem of personal information theft. On Tuesday, the company reported that the personal information of more than 3.4 million customers in Ontario and Quebec had been recovered from the home of a Montreal man. The case highlights a growing problem for businesses, as thieves continue to target large corporations for the personal information stored in their databases. The information could be sold to marketing firms, or used to commit identity theft.”
The story goes on to report that studies released in 2007 by the Ponemon Institute, a research organization specializing in privacy and security, show more than 85 per cent of businesses in the U.S. are estimated to have experienced some sort of data breach within the past two years, and more than 49 per cent of all data breaches come from lost or stolen laptop computers or USB memory cards.
Bell was at a loss to explain how the man in the Montreal case obtained the information found on a computer seized from his home — about 170,000 unlisted and unlisted phone numbers, names and a description of all the Bell services a person subscribes to. Maybe people just gave it to him.
It’s time for consumers to wake up and start being a little smarter about their online use. Here at KRBC, we have a rule: if you personally don’t know who and email is from, don’t open it. If it doesn’t have a “subject” entry, don’t open it. In no circumstance should you download anything that you are suspicious of. Oh, and one final note: if companies have a problem with your account, they will notify you by registered mail, not email.
It’s time to wake up and wise up.
You look at where the news is going these days and it’s obviously headed to the internet, where you can instantly access it. In fact, we are invited to instantly comment on the story or participate in some form of opinion survey or online poll. Not everyone wants your opinion, however. The internet is the latest platform for the criminal element and that want nothing more than to take what you have. We better wake up and recognize that fact before we all suffer some form of irreparable damage.
I got an email Sunday from Customer Relations with Bell Canada, Canada’s largest communications company. It was short and simple: “Dear costumer,” it began, “This e-mail was sent by Bell Canada to notify you that we have temporarily prevented access to your account. We have reasons to believe that your account may have been accessed by someone else. Please verify your details by following the link below…”
Wow, looks important. But I suspected a scam and did some checking (without clicking on the link, by the way) and sure enough found that it was an identity theft scam. Here is the first clue that something is wrong here: the word “costumer” is misspelled. It should be “customer”; not “costumer”. A "costumer" is someone who makes costumes. Then, there was that other thing: “Bell Canada”. I don’t know anybody in Canada and I certainly don’t have any sort of account with them. One can easily see, however, how someone might go ahead and click on the link just to find out what this is all about. Unfortunately, in doing so, you may already be allowing a hacker to cut into your personal information.
I came across this story dated February of 2008. “Bell Canada has become the latest company to fall victim to the growing problem of personal information theft. On Tuesday, the company reported that the personal information of more than 3.4 million customers in Ontario and Quebec had been recovered from the home of a Montreal man. The case highlights a growing problem for businesses, as thieves continue to target large corporations for the personal information stored in their databases. The information could be sold to marketing firms, or used to commit identity theft.”
The story goes on to report that studies released in 2007 by the Ponemon Institute, a research organization specializing in privacy and security, show more than 85 per cent of businesses in the U.S. are estimated to have experienced some sort of data breach within the past two years, and more than 49 per cent of all data breaches come from lost or stolen laptop computers or USB memory cards.
Bell was at a loss to explain how the man in the Montreal case obtained the information found on a computer seized from his home — about 170,000 unlisted and unlisted phone numbers, names and a description of all the Bell services a person subscribes to. Maybe people just gave it to him.
It’s time for consumers to wake up and start being a little smarter about their online use. Here at KRBC, we have a rule: if you personally don’t know who and email is from, don’t open it. If it doesn’t have a “subject” entry, don’t open it. In no circumstance should you download anything that you are suspicious of. Oh, and one final note: if companies have a problem with your account, they will notify you by registered mail, not email.
It’s time to wake up and wise up.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Dish It to Downing: There Are Always Consequences
A viewer contacted me the other day about a new state law that takes effect on September first than bans the use of cells phones and other electronic devices in school zones.
I told him that I knew a lot of local cities were looking at such bans and that the Texas Legislature had passed a bill addressing the problem, but I hadn’t heard if it had been signed into law by the governor. Obviously, it had and with little or no media coverage.
Here is what it does: it bans the use of cell phones and other electronic communication devices in school zones during times those school zones are active. It doesn’t ban their use outside of those times. Nor does it block the driver from using them when the car is stopped. You just can't be driving and talking at the same time. That means that from about 7:15 to 8:30 each morning and from about 2:15 to 3:30 in the afternoon, you can’t be on your cell phone, I-phone, blackberry, or any other communication device talking, testing, playing games, or anything else when you are driving through a school zone.
He asked me what I thought of that law and after giving it some thought it occurred to me that it’s a law that is probably needed, unfortunately, to protect us from ourselves.
It amazes me that people think driving is some kind of constitutionally guaranteed right in this country. It’s not. It’s a privilege and like all privileges, it can be taken away if you show you can’t handle the freedom of having it. That was one of the first things I learned as a child and even more so as a teenager. It’s all about actions and consequences, responsibility and irresponsibility. Unlike being grounded for a month, though, we are seeing increasing signs that people just don’t think before they act. I have to tell you, most of the people I see on cell phones while they are driving are adults: not teenagers, and adults should know better. My daughter is all grown-up now and has a night job. She calls me each night, usually on the way home from work, and I nearly always lovingly scold her about her talking on a cell phone while she is driving. It was the first lesson I ever gave her in learning to drive and a rule she knows by heart because she had to repeat it to me so many times. Here’s the rule: THIS IS A MOTOR VEHICLE AND IT CAN BRING YOU LOTS OF FREEDOM AND ENJOYMENT. IT CAN ALSO KILL YOU – OR SOMEONE ELSE -- WHEN IT IS NOT USED PROPERLY. When you are driving, you are responsible for the safe operation of your caR and the safety of everyone that is in it. Driving safely is your job and it is your only job. It is more important than applying make-up, talking on a cell phone, talking with other passengers, tuning the radio, changing CDs, or thinking about anything other than safety.
Okay, maybe that was a little harsh for the first lesson, but it is more of a lesson than most people have apparently gotten.
I was painfully reminded of that earlier this week when a man riding on the hood of a pick-up truck lost his balance, fell forward, and was run over and killed. It was a senseless loss of life and an accident that could have – and should have - been prevented. He was 37-years old and should have known better. The driver of the truck was 48-year old and will probably stand trial for intoxicated manslaughter. He certainly should have known better. This accident didn’t happen on some deserted dirt road. It took place on one of Abilene’s busiest streets and at night when visibility of marginal at best. The victim became the 10th traffic fatality of the year here in Abilene and the 7th in an accident involving alcohol. With more than 300 drunk driving arrests already this year, Abilene is well on its way to setting a new record for DWI arrests.
Here’s the thing: police will be the first to tell you that there are not more drunk drivers out there; the police are just doing a better job of catching them and getting them off the road. It’s about time, too. Several years ago a drunk behind the wheel of a pick-up truck lost control of his vehicle, crossed a raised median and slammed into the front of KRBC. Had that happened during working hours, it would have killed the person sitting at her desk doing her job. So, like the new law or not, it's probably necessary, although I'm really perplexed as to why. It seems so simple: when you drive through a working school zone, hang up the phone, turn off the I-phone (or at least put the call on hold), stop “texting” and pay attention to your driving. People are taking chances these days with little thought of the consequences. But understand: there are consequences. There always are.
Downing Bolls
I told him that I knew a lot of local cities were looking at such bans and that the Texas Legislature had passed a bill addressing the problem, but I hadn’t heard if it had been signed into law by the governor. Obviously, it had and with little or no media coverage.
Here is what it does: it bans the use of cell phones and other electronic communication devices in school zones during times those school zones are active. It doesn’t ban their use outside of those times. Nor does it block the driver from using them when the car is stopped. You just can't be driving and talking at the same time. That means that from about 7:15 to 8:30 each morning and from about 2:15 to 3:30 in the afternoon, you can’t be on your cell phone, I-phone, blackberry, or any other communication device talking, testing, playing games, or anything else when you are driving through a school zone.
He asked me what I thought of that law and after giving it some thought it occurred to me that it’s a law that is probably needed, unfortunately, to protect us from ourselves.
It amazes me that people think driving is some kind of constitutionally guaranteed right in this country. It’s not. It’s a privilege and like all privileges, it can be taken away if you show you can’t handle the freedom of having it. That was one of the first things I learned as a child and even more so as a teenager. It’s all about actions and consequences, responsibility and irresponsibility. Unlike being grounded for a month, though, we are seeing increasing signs that people just don’t think before they act. I have to tell you, most of the people I see on cell phones while they are driving are adults: not teenagers, and adults should know better. My daughter is all grown-up now and has a night job. She calls me each night, usually on the way home from work, and I nearly always lovingly scold her about her talking on a cell phone while she is driving. It was the first lesson I ever gave her in learning to drive and a rule she knows by heart because she had to repeat it to me so many times. Here’s the rule: THIS IS A MOTOR VEHICLE AND IT CAN BRING YOU LOTS OF FREEDOM AND ENJOYMENT. IT CAN ALSO KILL YOU – OR SOMEONE ELSE -- WHEN IT IS NOT USED PROPERLY. When you are driving, you are responsible for the safe operation of your caR and the safety of everyone that is in it. Driving safely is your job and it is your only job. It is more important than applying make-up, talking on a cell phone, talking with other passengers, tuning the radio, changing CDs, or thinking about anything other than safety.
Okay, maybe that was a little harsh for the first lesson, but it is more of a lesson than most people have apparently gotten.
I was painfully reminded of that earlier this week when a man riding on the hood of a pick-up truck lost his balance, fell forward, and was run over and killed. It was a senseless loss of life and an accident that could have – and should have - been prevented. He was 37-years old and should have known better. The driver of the truck was 48-year old and will probably stand trial for intoxicated manslaughter. He certainly should have known better. This accident didn’t happen on some deserted dirt road. It took place on one of Abilene’s busiest streets and at night when visibility of marginal at best. The victim became the 10th traffic fatality of the year here in Abilene and the 7th in an accident involving alcohol. With more than 300 drunk driving arrests already this year, Abilene is well on its way to setting a new record for DWI arrests.
Here’s the thing: police will be the first to tell you that there are not more drunk drivers out there; the police are just doing a better job of catching them and getting them off the road. It’s about time, too. Several years ago a drunk behind the wheel of a pick-up truck lost control of his vehicle, crossed a raised median and slammed into the front of KRBC. Had that happened during working hours, it would have killed the person sitting at her desk doing her job. So, like the new law or not, it's probably necessary, although I'm really perplexed as to why. It seems so simple: when you drive through a working school zone, hang up the phone, turn off the I-phone (or at least put the call on hold), stop “texting” and pay attention to your driving. People are taking chances these days with little thought of the consequences. But understand: there are consequences. There always are.
Downing Bolls
Friday, July 31, 2009
Hanging On To A TV Collectible
My wife antiques and I am constantly amazed at the things she brings home. A few years ago she brought home a great old console TV set. It probably sat in someone’s den back in the 1950s and 60s. She took it to a TV repairman and he made a few adjustments to the picture tube and the set was good as new.
For a 1950s-era television set, that is.
We had a lot of fun with it because it was an accurate reflection of what use to pass for TV in this country. One forgets how spoiled we have become until you watch a set that we needed a rabbit ears antenna with “tin foil” stretched across it to get acceptable reception.
The great thing about this TV is that it is a classic, but it’s not very practical anymore. Since the conversion to digital broadcasting, it doesn’t even get a picture anymore. I guess you could hook a DVD player up to it and play old TV reruns, but that’s about it. Maybe old sets like that are destined to wind up in a museum someplace because the value of them will be so high in the future. Most people have thrown away their old analog sets or recycled them, opting instead to buy a new digital set that allows them to see programs in High Definition. Still, I know a lot of people who simply purchased converter boxes using those discount coupons.
Today, July 31st, 2009, was a milestone in the evolutionary saga of television. Today was the last day to use those discount coupons to buy converter boxes. The FCC tells us that of the 63.4-million coupons sent out, only 33-million have been redeemed. The government said 49,000 requests were received on Tuesday of this week by people still hoping to beat the deadline. So, if you still have your coupons hang onto them. Someday, they may be worth something to a TV collector, much the way people now collect POW bracelets and old drive-in speakers.
As for the Digital changeover itself, many people are discovering the biggest single factor affecting your TV reception is location. Thousands of Americans have lost television reception completely, simply because of where they live. I got an email this week from a longtime KRBC viewer who, for the first time in 15 years, was unable to see the station after converting to digital TV. He used to have to use a 20-foot antenna to get us, but even that doesn’t help anymore. The sad fact is that he may just be out of our range now because our digital pattern is not the same as our analog pattern was. I feel really bad about that because I think he wasn’t told the whole story about this digital conversion. The industry spent a lot of time selling the public on the benefits and somehow neglected to mention that some people would lose TV coverage in the process. In the end, digital was an “all or nothing” process…and as some are now finding out, it has been a frustrating and expensive process, too.
Downing Bolls
For a 1950s-era television set, that is.
We had a lot of fun with it because it was an accurate reflection of what use to pass for TV in this country. One forgets how spoiled we have become until you watch a set that we needed a rabbit ears antenna with “tin foil” stretched across it to get acceptable reception.
The great thing about this TV is that it is a classic, but it’s not very practical anymore. Since the conversion to digital broadcasting, it doesn’t even get a picture anymore. I guess you could hook a DVD player up to it and play old TV reruns, but that’s about it. Maybe old sets like that are destined to wind up in a museum someplace because the value of them will be so high in the future. Most people have thrown away their old analog sets or recycled them, opting instead to buy a new digital set that allows them to see programs in High Definition. Still, I know a lot of people who simply purchased converter boxes using those discount coupons.
Today, July 31st, 2009, was a milestone in the evolutionary saga of television. Today was the last day to use those discount coupons to buy converter boxes. The FCC tells us that of the 63.4-million coupons sent out, only 33-million have been redeemed. The government said 49,000 requests were received on Tuesday of this week by people still hoping to beat the deadline. So, if you still have your coupons hang onto them. Someday, they may be worth something to a TV collector, much the way people now collect POW bracelets and old drive-in speakers.
As for the Digital changeover itself, many people are discovering the biggest single factor affecting your TV reception is location. Thousands of Americans have lost television reception completely, simply because of where they live. I got an email this week from a longtime KRBC viewer who, for the first time in 15 years, was unable to see the station after converting to digital TV. He used to have to use a 20-foot antenna to get us, but even that doesn’t help anymore. The sad fact is that he may just be out of our range now because our digital pattern is not the same as our analog pattern was. I feel really bad about that because I think he wasn’t told the whole story about this digital conversion. The industry spent a lot of time selling the public on the benefits and somehow neglected to mention that some people would lose TV coverage in the process. In the end, digital was an “all or nothing” process…and as some are now finding out, it has been a frustrating and expensive process, too.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Lessons Passed Down By My Elders
Goodnight, Mr. Cronkite ... Wherever you are.
I got a call over the weekend from a newspaper reporter at the Abilene Reporter News. He was doing a reaction story about Walter Cronkite’s death and wanted to get some thoughts from local TV News anchors. In reflecting back on Cronkite’s life and death, I couldn’t help but remember the times in which he lived, for I think that they to played a part in who Mr. Cronkite was. In the field of behavioral study, there is a formula that goes like this: B=P+E -- Behavior is shaped by two factors: personality traits and environment.
No doubt that Walter Cronkite was an icon in the field of news. But, if Walter Cronkite became an icon, it may be a just as much a reflection on the times in which he lived as his personal style or presenting the news. The world has changed a lot since the Great Depression of the 1930s and the tide of history took a great many newsmen riding along on its coat tails. They grew up seeing first-hand world-changing events. They covered the Cold War, the Vietnam Conflict, the Assassination of President Kennedy, the Civil Rights struggle, the landing on the moon. How much the world changed in their lifetime, and yet Walter Cronkite was there to give those events some meaning in the larger context of our daily lives.
Now, I'm not goiung to compare myself to Walter Cronkite in any way. In fact, about the only similarity between myself and Walter Cronkite (and it is a very minute comparison) is that we both were lucky enough to have come up through the ranks. I didn't start in TV. I began my lifelong association with journalism literally from th ground up. I was a newspaper delivery boy. Remembering those times has brought me a lot of pleasure this past weekend.
I spent my formative years in Montgomery, Alabama. Those were the years of Rosa Parks, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, and “separate, but equal”. Everyone was talking about this charismatic Baptist minister named Martin Luther King. I attended an all white public school, but was too young to understand “why” it was all white. In 1960, we moved to Washington, D.C. I got my first “news” job when I was just 13 years old. I delivered the Washington Post, every morning – rain or shine – in the Washington suburb of Silver Spring, Maryland. I would always have one or two papers left over, so on my way back home each morning, I’d read the paper as I walked along, my “paper” bag draped across my shoulders. That is where I learned about current events and I think it was there where I first was bitten by the “news” bug. I began reading about history and being fascinated by how it all came together.
I saved enough money from my paper route to buy my first movie camera – a little 8mm Revere. I couldn’t routinely afford film for it, but once – when I did have film in it, I passed by a fire and ran up and started filming it. I still have the camera. The film of the fire is long gone.
When Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, my parents took me down to the Lincoln Memorial the night before to see all the camera podiums set-up. I remember looking at all of those people climbing the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the stifling heat of that summer night, realizing that it was the eve of some great event, wondering what would happen and what the world would say about it all.
Over the years, I have been blessed to have worked with some of the best in the buiness. They aren't names that you'd readily recognize, but they were champions to me. Those great reporters told great stories and shared those stories with young, fresh-faced kids just getting into the business. One of the best pieces of advice I ever got from a newsman was from an intoxicated former TV news photographer one night in a bar. He said, “Let me tell you something. Nobody cares what you think. Your job is to keep your mouth shut and your ears open.” He was absolutely right and that advice has served me well over the years.
Most people don’t know this but Walter Cronkite actually re-learned his speech patterns. He understood that for a TV audience, he had to read slower, and he taught himself to do that. You see, the story BEHIND the story is often much better than the story itself. That is what I think about when I think of Walter Cronkite...the story BEHIND the story. “Class” is the word that comes to mind wheh I think of Walter Cronkite. He was never bigger than the story he covered and never forgot that entering America’s living room each evening was not a “right”, but a privilege. You are a guest and don’t ever forget that.
Goodnight Walter and thanks for everything.
Downing Bolls
I got a call over the weekend from a newspaper reporter at the Abilene Reporter News. He was doing a reaction story about Walter Cronkite’s death and wanted to get some thoughts from local TV News anchors. In reflecting back on Cronkite’s life and death, I couldn’t help but remember the times in which he lived, for I think that they to played a part in who Mr. Cronkite was. In the field of behavioral study, there is a formula that goes like this: B=P+E -- Behavior is shaped by two factors: personality traits and environment.
No doubt that Walter Cronkite was an icon in the field of news. But, if Walter Cronkite became an icon, it may be a just as much a reflection on the times in which he lived as his personal style or presenting the news. The world has changed a lot since the Great Depression of the 1930s and the tide of history took a great many newsmen riding along on its coat tails. They grew up seeing first-hand world-changing events. They covered the Cold War, the Vietnam Conflict, the Assassination of President Kennedy, the Civil Rights struggle, the landing on the moon. How much the world changed in their lifetime, and yet Walter Cronkite was there to give those events some meaning in the larger context of our daily lives.
Now, I'm not goiung to compare myself to Walter Cronkite in any way. In fact, about the only similarity between myself and Walter Cronkite (and it is a very minute comparison) is that we both were lucky enough to have come up through the ranks. I didn't start in TV. I began my lifelong association with journalism literally from th ground up. I was a newspaper delivery boy. Remembering those times has brought me a lot of pleasure this past weekend.
I spent my formative years in Montgomery, Alabama. Those were the years of Rosa Parks, the Montgomery Bus Boycott, and “separate, but equal”. Everyone was talking about this charismatic Baptist minister named Martin Luther King. I attended an all white public school, but was too young to understand “why” it was all white. In 1960, we moved to Washington, D.C. I got my first “news” job when I was just 13 years old. I delivered the Washington Post, every morning – rain or shine – in the Washington suburb of Silver Spring, Maryland. I would always have one or two papers left over, so on my way back home each morning, I’d read the paper as I walked along, my “paper” bag draped across my shoulders. That is where I learned about current events and I think it was there where I first was bitten by the “news” bug. I began reading about history and being fascinated by how it all came together.
I saved enough money from my paper route to buy my first movie camera – a little 8mm Revere. I couldn’t routinely afford film for it, but once – when I did have film in it, I passed by a fire and ran up and started filming it. I still have the camera. The film of the fire is long gone.
When Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, my parents took me down to the Lincoln Memorial the night before to see all the camera podiums set-up. I remember looking at all of those people climbing the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in the stifling heat of that summer night, realizing that it was the eve of some great event, wondering what would happen and what the world would say about it all.
Over the years, I have been blessed to have worked with some of the best in the buiness. They aren't names that you'd readily recognize, but they were champions to me. Those great reporters told great stories and shared those stories with young, fresh-faced kids just getting into the business. One of the best pieces of advice I ever got from a newsman was from an intoxicated former TV news photographer one night in a bar. He said, “Let me tell you something. Nobody cares what you think. Your job is to keep your mouth shut and your ears open.” He was absolutely right and that advice has served me well over the years.
Most people don’t know this but Walter Cronkite actually re-learned his speech patterns. He understood that for a TV audience, he had to read slower, and he taught himself to do that. You see, the story BEHIND the story is often much better than the story itself. That is what I think about when I think of Walter Cronkite...the story BEHIND the story. “Class” is the word that comes to mind wheh I think of Walter Cronkite. He was never bigger than the story he covered and never forgot that entering America’s living room each evening was not a “right”, but a privilege. You are a guest and don’t ever forget that.
Goodnight Walter and thanks for everything.
Downing Bolls
Friday, July 17, 2009
Learning From the Past: What They Knew 116 Years Ago
Dish It to Downing
I came across an Abilene newspaper from 1893 the other day. Abilene only had one paper back then; the Abilene Reporter, and it came out in the afternoon.
Now, what made this interesting was reading the front page. You’ve got to remember that Abilene was just 12 years old then and it had growing pains. The railroad had come through and the only thing lacking in the “Future Great City of Texas” was a “great future”.
The editor of the paper, though, did something pretty cool. First, he had reporters out collecting the latest “happenings” in our town. They didn’t write a lengthy story, just a sentence or two about the latest little tidbits of news. “Jimmy Smith is back from visiting his sister in Syracuse and shared a railroad car with some survivors of the big floods in Mississippi. They say the death toll has been great and it will be a logtime before the State returns to its southern greatness.” That kind of stuff. It wasn’t just local either. It was the kind of material that people would sit on their porch and talk about in the evening. Second, and perhaps even more important, the paper kept a running tally of the needs of our city: electric lights, paved streets, better plumbing, etc. One column said “WHAT WE HAVE”: the other said “WHAT WE NEED”. You should remember that lots of little towns up and down the railroad were having the same problems growing that we were. But, even if we already had a furniture store, the paper was sharp enough to understand that a second furniture store impacted the tax base and meant competition and competition not only help the city grow, but was beneficial to the consumer, as well.
These people were visionaries and I couldn’t help but think about them as I watched the story about the push for a new Career Tech High School in Abilene.
On July 13th, a group of Abilene businessmen and community leaders began soliciting signatures for a letter to be presented to the school board. Some members of this group have served on school district committees studying the need for a Career Tech High School. Just over a year ago voters rejected the idea for this kind of facility. Career Tech supporters believe the voters rejected it because it was part of a larger bond package. They want the board to put this one, single issue before voters in November.
I learned a long time ago in this business not to second guess the will of voters. They may have had all kinds of reasons for their vote, but they did vote and in this country the majority wins.
What follows here is neither an endorsement of the project nor a criticism. But this much I do know:
- Abilene is a great place to raise kids.
- And, it’s a great place to retire.
It’s what happens between those events that we need to be concerned about, I think. About the time kids get out of high school, they move off to attend college in some other town or leave Abilene altogether to get a job where there is better pay and better opportunities. The only kids who stay here are those who seem to think they have no future. Meanwhile, those who move away are benefitting someone else during their most productive and creative years.
I guess what concerns me is that it seems okay to most people. That’s the way we like it here - “friendly”. We even have a name for it: the “friendly frontier”. It’s laidback, pastoral, peaceful. It’s “where the deer and the antelope play”. For the record, “Home On the Range” was written about Kansas, not Texas! We have spent a lot of time hung-up over “branding” and it seems to have taken it’s toll. I think that if you went back and talked to those people who settled this part of the country, they’d tell you that the frontier was anything, but “friendly”. Living here meant overcoming a lot of adversity, but they were able to do it with the help of their friends, working together. For most of the people who settled here, THIS WAS THE END OF THE LINE. The drive and desire to seek a better life and the determination to make it happen had to take place right here.
I wonder what they would say to us in these tough economic times we live in today. Perhaps, “It’s okay to be “friendly”, but don’t forget that sometimes you have to kick a little back side. So, let’s dust ourselves off and get back in there and start pitching again.
These are times that demand innovation and creativity. If we can’t do that, we are doomed to continue a pattern that sadly has become our legacy. I think our future and our children are worth fighting for – don’t you?
Those are my thoughts… what are yours?
Downing Bolls
I came across an Abilene newspaper from 1893 the other day. Abilene only had one paper back then; the Abilene Reporter, and it came out in the afternoon.
Now, what made this interesting was reading the front page. You’ve got to remember that Abilene was just 12 years old then and it had growing pains. The railroad had come through and the only thing lacking in the “Future Great City of Texas” was a “great future”.
The editor of the paper, though, did something pretty cool. First, he had reporters out collecting the latest “happenings” in our town. They didn’t write a lengthy story, just a sentence or two about the latest little tidbits of news. “Jimmy Smith is back from visiting his sister in Syracuse and shared a railroad car with some survivors of the big floods in Mississippi. They say the death toll has been great and it will be a logtime before the State returns to its southern greatness.” That kind of stuff. It wasn’t just local either. It was the kind of material that people would sit on their porch and talk about in the evening. Second, and perhaps even more important, the paper kept a running tally of the needs of our city: electric lights, paved streets, better plumbing, etc. One column said “WHAT WE HAVE”: the other said “WHAT WE NEED”. You should remember that lots of little towns up and down the railroad were having the same problems growing that we were. But, even if we already had a furniture store, the paper was sharp enough to understand that a second furniture store impacted the tax base and meant competition and competition not only help the city grow, but was beneficial to the consumer, as well.
These people were visionaries and I couldn’t help but think about them as I watched the story about the push for a new Career Tech High School in Abilene.
On July 13th, a group of Abilene businessmen and community leaders began soliciting signatures for a letter to be presented to the school board. Some members of this group have served on school district committees studying the need for a Career Tech High School. Just over a year ago voters rejected the idea for this kind of facility. Career Tech supporters believe the voters rejected it because it was part of a larger bond package. They want the board to put this one, single issue before voters in November.
I learned a long time ago in this business not to second guess the will of voters. They may have had all kinds of reasons for their vote, but they did vote and in this country the majority wins.
What follows here is neither an endorsement of the project nor a criticism. But this much I do know:
- Abilene is a great place to raise kids.
- And, it’s a great place to retire.
It’s what happens between those events that we need to be concerned about, I think. About the time kids get out of high school, they move off to attend college in some other town or leave Abilene altogether to get a job where there is better pay and better opportunities. The only kids who stay here are those who seem to think they have no future. Meanwhile, those who move away are benefitting someone else during their most productive and creative years.
I guess what concerns me is that it seems okay to most people. That’s the way we like it here - “friendly”. We even have a name for it: the “friendly frontier”. It’s laidback, pastoral, peaceful. It’s “where the deer and the antelope play”. For the record, “Home On the Range” was written about Kansas, not Texas! We have spent a lot of time hung-up over “branding” and it seems to have taken it’s toll. I think that if you went back and talked to those people who settled this part of the country, they’d tell you that the frontier was anything, but “friendly”. Living here meant overcoming a lot of adversity, but they were able to do it with the help of their friends, working together. For most of the people who settled here, THIS WAS THE END OF THE LINE. The drive and desire to seek a better life and the determination to make it happen had to take place right here.
I wonder what they would say to us in these tough economic times we live in today. Perhaps, “It’s okay to be “friendly”, but don’t forget that sometimes you have to kick a little back side. So, let’s dust ourselves off and get back in there and start pitching again.
These are times that demand innovation and creativity. If we can’t do that, we are doomed to continue a pattern that sadly has become our legacy. I think our future and our children are worth fighting for – don’t you?
Those are my thoughts… what are yours?
Downing Bolls
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Michael Jackson: Cutting Through the Hype
Okay, I admit it.
I watched Michael Jackson’s Memorial Service on Tuesday.
I wasn’t originally going to do that because it was just getting to be too much. I mean, we love "celebrity" in this country and because we do, we can’t get enough of knowing every intimate detail there is. And so it was with Michael Jackson’s death. Now, four days after his service, I'm starting the get that creapy feeling I did when Anna Nicole Smith’s died. The media learned something very important back then: the public can't get enough. In fact, the bigger the celebrity, the bigger the audience and people won’t be happy until we know every intimate details there is.
In the end, I suspect we will wind up feeling just a little bit guilty. Someone will write a book, someone will make a lot of money telling their "exclusive" story on TV, and we will quench our insatiable desire to know all the “dirt”. People will blame the media for going too far, without ever acknowledging their own role in creating the environment for that to happen to begin with.
Sometimes, though, you just have to cut through the hype.
In watching Tuesday’s coverage, I was struck by two things. First, the commentator’s repeated use of the word “exploit”. “How will his survivors exploit his legacy?” they kept asking. There’s just something terrible sounding about that, but in truth that’s what it is. Who will gain by this man’s death and how? He has an estate to leave behind and it must be maximized to provide support for those who are left behind in the wake of his death: his children. Second, when you cut through all of the hype, you find a memorial service that was befitting a man who, in the final analysis, tried to make the world a better place by his being here. He made people happy, he tried to use the money he made to benefit those who were less fortunate, he knew how his world worked and used it to his advantage. He overcame a lot of adversity to do all of that. I learned Tuesday that a lot of what I thought about Michael Jackson was just wrong and whether we acknowledge it or not, Michael did positively affect the world in which he lived. In the end, the positives far outweigh the negatives.
The service started with sadness at the parting of this man and thanking God for his being here to begin with. It ended in a celebration of his life. But, nothing touched me like the images of his daughter, Paris, tearfully saying how much she loved and missed her father. In the final moments of this memorial, we were reminded that in its purist form, that Michael love his family and they loved him and that love was no different from that we hope our families have for us. It prompted me to look back on all the opportunities I had in my own life to make memories with my own children but didn’t because I was too busy worrying about the future and making a living. I’m staring at the man in the mirror and have just begun the second half of my life. I learned some thing from the first half that I don’t intend to repeat the second time around. I am moved to make a difference in my world … one hour – one day – one opportunity at a time.
Thanks, Michael.
I watched Michael Jackson’s Memorial Service on Tuesday.
I wasn’t originally going to do that because it was just getting to be too much. I mean, we love "celebrity" in this country and because we do, we can’t get enough of knowing every intimate detail there is. And so it was with Michael Jackson’s death. Now, four days after his service, I'm starting the get that creapy feeling I did when Anna Nicole Smith’s died. The media learned something very important back then: the public can't get enough. In fact, the bigger the celebrity, the bigger the audience and people won’t be happy until we know every intimate details there is.
In the end, I suspect we will wind up feeling just a little bit guilty. Someone will write a book, someone will make a lot of money telling their "exclusive" story on TV, and we will quench our insatiable desire to know all the “dirt”. People will blame the media for going too far, without ever acknowledging their own role in creating the environment for that to happen to begin with.
Sometimes, though, you just have to cut through the hype.
In watching Tuesday’s coverage, I was struck by two things. First, the commentator’s repeated use of the word “exploit”. “How will his survivors exploit his legacy?” they kept asking. There’s just something terrible sounding about that, but in truth that’s what it is. Who will gain by this man’s death and how? He has an estate to leave behind and it must be maximized to provide support for those who are left behind in the wake of his death: his children. Second, when you cut through all of the hype, you find a memorial service that was befitting a man who, in the final analysis, tried to make the world a better place by his being here. He made people happy, he tried to use the money he made to benefit those who were less fortunate, he knew how his world worked and used it to his advantage. He overcame a lot of adversity to do all of that. I learned Tuesday that a lot of what I thought about Michael Jackson was just wrong and whether we acknowledge it or not, Michael did positively affect the world in which he lived. In the end, the positives far outweigh the negatives.
The service started with sadness at the parting of this man and thanking God for his being here to begin with. It ended in a celebration of his life. But, nothing touched me like the images of his daughter, Paris, tearfully saying how much she loved and missed her father. In the final moments of this memorial, we were reminded that in its purist form, that Michael love his family and they loved him and that love was no different from that we hope our families have for us. It prompted me to look back on all the opportunities I had in my own life to make memories with my own children but didn’t because I was too busy worrying about the future and making a living. I’m staring at the man in the mirror and have just begun the second half of my life. I learned some thing from the first half that I don’t intend to repeat the second time around. I am moved to make a difference in my world … one hour – one day – one opportunity at a time.
Thanks, Michael.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Dish It to Downing: Lighthouses In A Foggy World
People who know me well know that I am a “passionate” person. Not so much in the romantic sense but rather in my commitment to the things that matter to me. I have a strong sense of what is right and what is wrong. That makes it sort of hard to get along in a world where almost anything goes these days. This is the July 4th weekend and I think it’s important to spend a moment talking about two things I am very passionate about: our country and the First Amendment.
One of my favorite films is “Meet John Doe”, perhaps because a central theme is the power of the press. A businessman with some lofty goals has purchased a large metropolitan newspaper. Nearly all of the staff are being called in and laid off, including a columnist. She is told that she must complete her last column, so she concocts a story about receiving a letter from a man who calls himself John Doe. Doe is disenchanted with the state of the country and decides to protest by jumping off the roof of City Hall on Christmas Eve. The story captures the public’s attention only it’s a complete fabrication. So, the paper calls on “John Doe” to come in to talk about his plans. Every deadbeat in town shows up claiming to be John Doe. The columnist picks a down-on-his-luck former baseball player and the paper, under the direction of its publisher D.B. Norton, use the power of the media to build an entire movement around John Doe. Norton’s ultimate goal however is political power for which he will use the John Doe Movement.
One of my favorite scenes unfolds in a bar as the newspaper editor, Mr. Connell, tells John the truth about Norton and his plans for John Doe. Connell is one of those old newspaper stereotypes that smokes too much, drinks too much, and views nearly everything with an ounce of suspicion. In the scene, Connell is sitting in a bar, drinking to forget his troubles, when John walks in. The following conversation takes place:
“You're a nice guy, John. I like you. You're gentle. I like gentle people. Me? I'm hard—hard and tough. I got no use for hard people. Gotta be gentle to suit me. Like you, for instance. Yep, I'm hard. But you want to know something? I've got a weakness. You'd never guess that, would you? Well, I have. Want to know what it is? The Star Spangled Banner. Screwy, huh? Well, maybe it is. But play the "Star Spangled Banner"—and I'm a sucker for it. It always gets me right here— (Thumps his chest) You know what I mean? Yessir. I'm a sucker for this country. I'm a sucker for the Star Spangled Banner—and I'm a sucker for this country. I like what we got here! I like it! A guy can say what he wants—and do what he wants—without having a bayonet shoved through his belly. And we don't want anybody coming around changing it, do we? No, sir. And when they do I get mad! I get b-boiling mad. And right now, John, I'm sizzling! I get mad for a lot of other guys besides myself—I get mad for a guy named Washington! And a guy named Jefferson—and Lincoln. Lighthouses, John! Lighthouses in a foggy world!”
“Lighthouses in a foggy world”.
What a great analogy.
You know, of all the characters in the movie “Meet John Doe” I find that I most connect with Mr. Connell. I’ve been doing reporting the news so long that I have built up a thick skin, yet I find most offensive those who would use the public right to know to their own advantage. I learned the “greed model” long ago – to always look at things with a bit of suspicion, asking “what’s in it for them?”
My phone rang last Friday just after our six o’clock news. A guy wanted to “Dish it” to me about the coverage of Michael Jackson’s death. I could tell be his tone that he had a complaint.
“I hope you don’t take this wrong,” he said prefacing his remarks. “I’m not a racist or anything, but I think y’all have gone overboard on this Michael Jackson stuff.”
“Yes, sir?” I answered, acknowledging I understood his comment.
“It’s just been non-stop coverage and I just think that and Farrah Fawcett is just too much,” he said. Then, he got to the meat of his complaint.
“Young Americans are fighting and dying everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan and you don’t even mention that. I just think someone should. Don’t you?”
So, this is my answer to that question: Michael Jackson was a celebrity and, for whatever reason, we love “celebrity” in this country. Some might even argue that we worship it. I think as journalists we have an obligation to cover the story and if the story is that Michael Jackson is bigger in death than he was in life, then we report that. But, remembering the greed model, we must be mindful of our own role in that happening.
Last night, after the 10 o’clock news was over and everyone had left the station, I sat down in front of a monitor in the newsroom and watched every story that had been fed the past week on Iraq and Afghanistan. That phone caller was right. Young Americans ARE fighting and dying everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan and we didn’t even mention that.
I think someone should.
“What’s in it for them – and us?”
Lighthouses in a foggy world.
One of my favorite films is “Meet John Doe”, perhaps because a central theme is the power of the press. A businessman with some lofty goals has purchased a large metropolitan newspaper. Nearly all of the staff are being called in and laid off, including a columnist. She is told that she must complete her last column, so she concocts a story about receiving a letter from a man who calls himself John Doe. Doe is disenchanted with the state of the country and decides to protest by jumping off the roof of City Hall on Christmas Eve. The story captures the public’s attention only it’s a complete fabrication. So, the paper calls on “John Doe” to come in to talk about his plans. Every deadbeat in town shows up claiming to be John Doe. The columnist picks a down-on-his-luck former baseball player and the paper, under the direction of its publisher D.B. Norton, use the power of the media to build an entire movement around John Doe. Norton’s ultimate goal however is political power for which he will use the John Doe Movement.
One of my favorite scenes unfolds in a bar as the newspaper editor, Mr. Connell, tells John the truth about Norton and his plans for John Doe. Connell is one of those old newspaper stereotypes that smokes too much, drinks too much, and views nearly everything with an ounce of suspicion. In the scene, Connell is sitting in a bar, drinking to forget his troubles, when John walks in. The following conversation takes place:
“You're a nice guy, John. I like you. You're gentle. I like gentle people. Me? I'm hard—hard and tough. I got no use for hard people. Gotta be gentle to suit me. Like you, for instance. Yep, I'm hard. But you want to know something? I've got a weakness. You'd never guess that, would you? Well, I have. Want to know what it is? The Star Spangled Banner. Screwy, huh? Well, maybe it is. But play the "Star Spangled Banner"—and I'm a sucker for it. It always gets me right here— (Thumps his chest) You know what I mean? Yessir. I'm a sucker for this country. I'm a sucker for the Star Spangled Banner—and I'm a sucker for this country. I like what we got here! I like it! A guy can say what he wants—and do what he wants—without having a bayonet shoved through his belly. And we don't want anybody coming around changing it, do we? No, sir. And when they do I get mad! I get b-boiling mad. And right now, John, I'm sizzling! I get mad for a lot of other guys besides myself—I get mad for a guy named Washington! And a guy named Jefferson—and Lincoln. Lighthouses, John! Lighthouses in a foggy world!”
“Lighthouses in a foggy world”.
What a great analogy.
You know, of all the characters in the movie “Meet John Doe” I find that I most connect with Mr. Connell. I’ve been doing reporting the news so long that I have built up a thick skin, yet I find most offensive those who would use the public right to know to their own advantage. I learned the “greed model” long ago – to always look at things with a bit of suspicion, asking “what’s in it for them?”
My phone rang last Friday just after our six o’clock news. A guy wanted to “Dish it” to me about the coverage of Michael Jackson’s death. I could tell be his tone that he had a complaint.
“I hope you don’t take this wrong,” he said prefacing his remarks. “I’m not a racist or anything, but I think y’all have gone overboard on this Michael Jackson stuff.”
“Yes, sir?” I answered, acknowledging I understood his comment.
“It’s just been non-stop coverage and I just think that and Farrah Fawcett is just too much,” he said. Then, he got to the meat of his complaint.
“Young Americans are fighting and dying everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan and you don’t even mention that. I just think someone should. Don’t you?”
So, this is my answer to that question: Michael Jackson was a celebrity and, for whatever reason, we love “celebrity” in this country. Some might even argue that we worship it. I think as journalists we have an obligation to cover the story and if the story is that Michael Jackson is bigger in death than he was in life, then we report that. But, remembering the greed model, we must be mindful of our own role in that happening.
Last night, after the 10 o’clock news was over and everyone had left the station, I sat down in front of a monitor in the newsroom and watched every story that had been fed the past week on Iraq and Afghanistan. That phone caller was right. Young Americans ARE fighting and dying everyday in Iraq and Afghanistan and we didn’t even mention that.
I think someone should.
“What’s in it for them – and us?”
Lighthouses in a foggy world.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
True Citizen Journalism: A New Paradigm in News Coverage
It has been called, “The Day Television Grew Up”. It was November 22, 1963 and midday soap operas were interrupted with terrible news: President Kennedy had been assassinated. For the next four days, we gathered around our television sets as the networks ran non-stop coverage of the assassination. Before that weekend, Americans watched a few hours of TV a night. After the assassination, the TV set became a permanent part of the family.
I couldn’t help but think about this past weekend as I watched the video coming in from the protests in Iran. What has so many upset is that there appear to be voting irregularities calling the results of the election into question. But telling the story hasn’t been the work of professional journalists. The Iranian Regime took steps weeks ago to cut the flow if pictures and information to the outside world. What they have accomplished in reality is the eye-opening truth that cell phones, PDAs, and laptops have turned private citizens into the eyes and ears of the world.
It only makes sense. The news business has always been about informing people. Technology has taken it now to a whole, new level. From the streets of Iran, we are seeing images of the battle for democracy – not shot by some professional cameraman, but by individual citizens using a cell phone.
If tyrants -- and really, governments everywhere -- learn nothing else from this, let them understand this: It’s all about “truth” and “transparency”. Clamping the power of censorship on the media no longer guarantees the story won’t be told. I keep wondering when the government of Iran will cut access to the internet, but in reality they can’t. There are too many businesses that need it to survive. Think about it: thousands of ordinary citizens, armed with cell phones and video cameras, telling the story.
You know, we should never forget that the most dramatic images of the Kennedy assassination were not shot by a professional journalist, but an ordinary citizen named Abraham Zerpruder, carrying an 8mm home movie camera. Perhaps not too surprizingly, the most dramatic images from Iran, have been captured for history by the 21st Century equivilent of that camera.
In the Los Angeles Times, Jeffrey Cole, director of the Center for the Digital Future at the USC Annenberg School for Communication, is quoted as saying: "What the Iranian leadership didn't seem to understand, as they went through the traditional methods of censorship, is that everybody is now a reporter." Make no mistake, those sending the pictures do have an agenda, just as the government that is trying to stop them does. Even the news media airing the pictures argueably have an agenda. But the important thing to remember here is that the information itself can't be stopped.
The whole world really is watching.
Downing Bolls
I couldn’t help but think about this past weekend as I watched the video coming in from the protests in Iran. What has so many upset is that there appear to be voting irregularities calling the results of the election into question. But telling the story hasn’t been the work of professional journalists. The Iranian Regime took steps weeks ago to cut the flow if pictures and information to the outside world. What they have accomplished in reality is the eye-opening truth that cell phones, PDAs, and laptops have turned private citizens into the eyes and ears of the world.
It only makes sense. The news business has always been about informing people. Technology has taken it now to a whole, new level. From the streets of Iran, we are seeing images of the battle for democracy – not shot by some professional cameraman, but by individual citizens using a cell phone.
If tyrants -- and really, governments everywhere -- learn nothing else from this, let them understand this: It’s all about “truth” and “transparency”. Clamping the power of censorship on the media no longer guarantees the story won’t be told. I keep wondering when the government of Iran will cut access to the internet, but in reality they can’t. There are too many businesses that need it to survive. Think about it: thousands of ordinary citizens, armed with cell phones and video cameras, telling the story.
You know, we should never forget that the most dramatic images of the Kennedy assassination were not shot by a professional journalist, but an ordinary citizen named Abraham Zerpruder, carrying an 8mm home movie camera. Perhaps not too surprizingly, the most dramatic images from Iran, have been captured for history by the 21st Century equivilent of that camera.
In the Los Angeles Times, Jeffrey Cole, director of the Center for the Digital Future at the USC Annenberg School for Communication, is quoted as saying: "What the Iranian leadership didn't seem to understand, as they went through the traditional methods of censorship, is that everybody is now a reporter." Make no mistake, those sending the pictures do have an agenda, just as the government that is trying to stop them does. Even the news media airing the pictures argueably have an agenda. But the important thing to remember here is that the information itself can't be stopped.
The whole world really is watching.
Downing Bolls
Monday, June 15, 2009
The DTV Switch: Mostly a Smooth Move
Well, there is good news to report. The great DTV switch happened without much fanfare, or fallout. The technology publication Information Week reports in its online edition today that the great majority of television-watching Americans weren’t affected by the change to digital broadcasting. Why? Because they receive their signals from cable and satellite providers.
The FCC reports receiving about 300,000 calls on Friday about a third of them dealing with problems getting the converter box to work. Of course, that also means that two-thirds of the calls dealt with some other complaint. About six million people were not ready for the switch and were left without TV.
Before broadcasters start slapping themselves on the back for a job well done, however, perhaps it would be a good idea to go back and read Paul Farhi’s piece in Sunday’s The Washington Post. Farhi reminds us that there is still more to do. “TV stations and their broadcast network partners lobbied Congress to award them new channels free of charge. Then, they asked lawmakers for permission to use their second channels to create digital broadcasts, which could be used for all sorts of services. Asked last week for a list of the interactive services that newly digital TV stations will be providing in their communities, the National Association of Broadcaster said it couldn't name any.” In the grand scheme of things, says Farhi, TV stations are using their digital powers right now to simply broadcast more of the same thing they have been broadcasting all along, albeit with better sound and picture quality.
With all of the local furor recently over interruptions of TV shows to broadcast severe weather information, I can certainly envision a time, perhaps not too far away, when viewers could be sent to a secondary channel for continuing weather coverage. Stations could also put extended coverage of local breaking news events on that channel.
I know that broadcasters right now are sort of sitting back and catching their breath. The changeover has not been without its problems, just as any undertaking of this kind is. It is my hope, however, that catching our breath doesn’t develop into an extended period of foot-dragging. We have this new technology at our fingertips. The real question is: what will we do with it?
Those are my thoughts. What are yours?
Downing Bolls
The FCC reports receiving about 300,000 calls on Friday about a third of them dealing with problems getting the converter box to work. Of course, that also means that two-thirds of the calls dealt with some other complaint. About six million people were not ready for the switch and were left without TV.
Before broadcasters start slapping themselves on the back for a job well done, however, perhaps it would be a good idea to go back and read Paul Farhi’s piece in Sunday’s The Washington Post. Farhi reminds us that there is still more to do. “TV stations and their broadcast network partners lobbied Congress to award them new channels free of charge. Then, they asked lawmakers for permission to use their second channels to create digital broadcasts, which could be used for all sorts of services. Asked last week for a list of the interactive services that newly digital TV stations will be providing in their communities, the National Association of Broadcaster said it couldn't name any.” In the grand scheme of things, says Farhi, TV stations are using their digital powers right now to simply broadcast more of the same thing they have been broadcasting all along, albeit with better sound and picture quality.
With all of the local furor recently over interruptions of TV shows to broadcast severe weather information, I can certainly envision a time, perhaps not too far away, when viewers could be sent to a secondary channel for continuing weather coverage. Stations could also put extended coverage of local breaking news events on that channel.
I know that broadcasters right now are sort of sitting back and catching their breath. The changeover has not been without its problems, just as any undertaking of this kind is. It is my hope, however, that catching our breath doesn’t develop into an extended period of foot-dragging. We have this new technology at our fingertips. The real question is: what will we do with it?
Those are my thoughts. What are yours?
Downing Bolls
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Dish It to Downing: When You See "The Light"
Epiphany – “a sudden, intuitive perception of or insight into the reality or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by some simple, homely, or commonplace occurrence or experience”. (Webster’s Dictionary)
I had an epiphany last week and it has to do with “Dish It to Downing”. I spend a lot of time trying to explain to people “why” we do what we do or why something looked the way it did on TV. Often, it appears like I am trying to defend our actions by attacking the comments of the viewer. I can assure you that never was my intent and if it came off that way, I owe you an apology. So, if you have ever written to make a comment and I offended you with my answer, I am sorry. You see, during that brief moment of revelation and enlightenment, I realized that most of the time, the viewer is absolutely right.
Take weather cut-ins for example: I recently defended the repeated program interruptions by our meteorologists. I still feel that getting the information out there is important, but it occurred to me that what angers people so much about the interruptions is their frequency and the way we do them. We get on and put the radar up on the screen and spend the next five minutes talking about an event that hasn’t happened yet as if it is a sure thing. Ask any storm chaser worth his stuff and they will tell you that there are no guarantees when it comes to tornadoes forming. In fact, they are so rare that we have a little joke: the best way to keep a tornado from touching down is scan it with a Doppler radar! Tornadoes are what they have always been - a freak occurance of nature.
Since the way we gather information has completely changed (thanks to technology); maybe the way we present the weather should change, too. In an effort to give the viewer as much advance warning as possible, we have inadvertently increased the length and number of program interruptions. It’s like the old days of TV when people use to sit and watch the test pattern for hours, only now they are sitting there looking at a radar screen, watching a storm that may not even be hitting the ground. We are forcing people to become weather zombies instead of informed viewers. I believe the TV viewer has a point -- Maybe we do need to sit down and try to come up with a better, less obtrusive way to alert the public about weather events that are developing, but haven’t happened yet. Maybe a beeper signal on the screen with an alert message that reads: “Developing Tornado: Doppler radar indicating a developing tornado six miles west of Hamlin. Take cover now.” The only way that is going to happen is for those of us in the TV business to start sitting down with those of you who use our services and try to see things from your perspective, instead of getting defensive about what you are saying. I think any intelligent person would be the first to say that sometimes we need to cut-in and stay on. But, not every time. We need to ask our viewers what they think is appropriate advance warning; then listen to what they have to say – not tell them “how” it’s going to be.
I don’t guess we’ll ever know until we try. Who knows, it might just be an epiphany.
Downing Bolls
I had an epiphany last week and it has to do with “Dish It to Downing”. I spend a lot of time trying to explain to people “why” we do what we do or why something looked the way it did on TV. Often, it appears like I am trying to defend our actions by attacking the comments of the viewer. I can assure you that never was my intent and if it came off that way, I owe you an apology. So, if you have ever written to make a comment and I offended you with my answer, I am sorry. You see, during that brief moment of revelation and enlightenment, I realized that most of the time, the viewer is absolutely right.
Take weather cut-ins for example: I recently defended the repeated program interruptions by our meteorologists. I still feel that getting the information out there is important, but it occurred to me that what angers people so much about the interruptions is their frequency and the way we do them. We get on and put the radar up on the screen and spend the next five minutes talking about an event that hasn’t happened yet as if it is a sure thing. Ask any storm chaser worth his stuff and they will tell you that there are no guarantees when it comes to tornadoes forming. In fact, they are so rare that we have a little joke: the best way to keep a tornado from touching down is scan it with a Doppler radar! Tornadoes are what they have always been - a freak occurance of nature.
Since the way we gather information has completely changed (thanks to technology); maybe the way we present the weather should change, too. In an effort to give the viewer as much advance warning as possible, we have inadvertently increased the length and number of program interruptions. It’s like the old days of TV when people use to sit and watch the test pattern for hours, only now they are sitting there looking at a radar screen, watching a storm that may not even be hitting the ground. We are forcing people to become weather zombies instead of informed viewers. I believe the TV viewer has a point -- Maybe we do need to sit down and try to come up with a better, less obtrusive way to alert the public about weather events that are developing, but haven’t happened yet. Maybe a beeper signal on the screen with an alert message that reads: “Developing Tornado: Doppler radar indicating a developing tornado six miles west of Hamlin. Take cover now.” The only way that is going to happen is for those of us in the TV business to start sitting down with those of you who use our services and try to see things from your perspective, instead of getting defensive about what you are saying. I think any intelligent person would be the first to say that sometimes we need to cut-in and stay on. But, not every time. We need to ask our viewers what they think is appropriate advance warning; then listen to what they have to say – not tell them “how” it’s going to be.
I don’t guess we’ll ever know until we try. Who knows, it might just be an epiphany.
Downing Bolls
Friday, May 29, 2009
Dish It to Downing: Shouldn't Somebody Tell You Before You Get Hit By a Truck
The following conversation recently took place over a cup of coffee:
Jim: “Downing, why do you guys keep cutting into my favorite TV shows for those weather bulletins. I hate it when you guys do that. Usually, you’re talking about a storm that’s dozens of miles away and no threat to Abilene. You always do it in my favorite show. They just stay on the air incessantly, like there’s some kind of contest to see who can stay on longer. When they do go back to the program, it usually is just about the time the commercial plays or the show ends.”
Downing: Yes, I know how you feel. We get lots of calls when that happens and they are not friendly callers. They are mad.
Jim: And, they always seem to drone on and on, repeating the same old information. Give me a break!
Downing: I hear you! You know, we’ve been trying for years to come up with a better way to warn you when bad weather is coming. We’ve put crawls across the bottom of the screen – viewers complain. We’ve tried to put a miniature radar screen in the corner and viewers complain. We just can’t seem to do anything right. Do you have any ideas?
Jim: Well, the least you could do is wait until the commercials to interrupt. – unless it was a real emergency.
Downing: Wait a minute? Are you inferring that we break in when there isn’t an emergency? Oh, I’ll admit it looks like that sometimes, but severe weather is very unpredictable. Commercial breaks in TV shows happen about every eight minutes. Are you saying that we should wait eight minutes before informing the public about an approaching tornado?
Jim: No, if there is a tornado coming, you should break-in immediately. I just think you guys overkill the situation because you tell us a tornado is forming, but it never materializes. I just resent you guys acting like every storm is the “storm of the century”.
Downing: So, you only want to be told about tornadoes, right? What about thunderstorms?
Jim: We have thunderstorms all the time and they almost always just bring rain and cause street flooding.
Downing: But that flooding is the leading cause of weather-related fatalities. And those thunderstorms can pack a real punch; lightning, hail, high winds…
Jim: You got a comeback for everything, don’t you?
Downing: Not really, I just want you to understand that we have tried lots of things to keep our viewers safe. You know, we’ve got about 16 counties to cover and just because it isn’t threatening you doesn’t mean it isn’t affecting someone else. You know, we now have something we never had in weather forecasting: advance warning. We have the technology to let you know about ten minutes before a tornado is going to hit you. But that doesn’t do any good if we sit on the information. It would be like seeing a truck barreling down on you and saying nothing to warn you. It puts the forecaster in the position of playing God. “Do I break into programming and warn them or take a gamble that nothing will happen?” If anything is coming, I want to know about it as soon as possible.
Jim: So what you’re saying is I can expect you guys to do it the same old way, right? Fine, I’ll just change channels. There are plenty of other choices out there, you know?
Downing: You’re right, there are. Which of them are going to break-in and tell you about the grapefruit-size hail about to demolish your car?
Jim: I just want you guys to be more responsible in your broadcasting. Don’t break-in unless you absolutely have to and when you do, get on and get off so my favorite show won’t be interrupted. If you don’t, people are going to stop watching you.
Downing: Until the skies cloud up and raindrops start falling. Remember, Noah tried to warn his neighbors… You know, if the cut-ins are THAT disruptive, maybe we should have a city-wide referendum about whether to break into programs. Let the people decide?
Jim: I could live with that!
Downing: Are you sure? Are you REALLY sure?
Jim: “Downing, why do you guys keep cutting into my favorite TV shows for those weather bulletins. I hate it when you guys do that. Usually, you’re talking about a storm that’s dozens of miles away and no threat to Abilene. You always do it in my favorite show. They just stay on the air incessantly, like there’s some kind of contest to see who can stay on longer. When they do go back to the program, it usually is just about the time the commercial plays or the show ends.”
Downing: Yes, I know how you feel. We get lots of calls when that happens and they are not friendly callers. They are mad.
Jim: And, they always seem to drone on and on, repeating the same old information. Give me a break!
Downing: I hear you! You know, we’ve been trying for years to come up with a better way to warn you when bad weather is coming. We’ve put crawls across the bottom of the screen – viewers complain. We’ve tried to put a miniature radar screen in the corner and viewers complain. We just can’t seem to do anything right. Do you have any ideas?
Jim: Well, the least you could do is wait until the commercials to interrupt. – unless it was a real emergency.
Downing: Wait a minute? Are you inferring that we break in when there isn’t an emergency? Oh, I’ll admit it looks like that sometimes, but severe weather is very unpredictable. Commercial breaks in TV shows happen about every eight minutes. Are you saying that we should wait eight minutes before informing the public about an approaching tornado?
Jim: No, if there is a tornado coming, you should break-in immediately. I just think you guys overkill the situation because you tell us a tornado is forming, but it never materializes. I just resent you guys acting like every storm is the “storm of the century”.
Downing: So, you only want to be told about tornadoes, right? What about thunderstorms?
Jim: We have thunderstorms all the time and they almost always just bring rain and cause street flooding.
Downing: But that flooding is the leading cause of weather-related fatalities. And those thunderstorms can pack a real punch; lightning, hail, high winds…
Jim: You got a comeback for everything, don’t you?
Downing: Not really, I just want you to understand that we have tried lots of things to keep our viewers safe. You know, we’ve got about 16 counties to cover and just because it isn’t threatening you doesn’t mean it isn’t affecting someone else. You know, we now have something we never had in weather forecasting: advance warning. We have the technology to let you know about ten minutes before a tornado is going to hit you. But that doesn’t do any good if we sit on the information. It would be like seeing a truck barreling down on you and saying nothing to warn you. It puts the forecaster in the position of playing God. “Do I break into programming and warn them or take a gamble that nothing will happen?” If anything is coming, I want to know about it as soon as possible.
Jim: So what you’re saying is I can expect you guys to do it the same old way, right? Fine, I’ll just change channels. There are plenty of other choices out there, you know?
Downing: You’re right, there are. Which of them are going to break-in and tell you about the grapefruit-size hail about to demolish your car?
Jim: I just want you guys to be more responsible in your broadcasting. Don’t break-in unless you absolutely have to and when you do, get on and get off so my favorite show won’t be interrupted. If you don’t, people are going to stop watching you.
Downing: Until the skies cloud up and raindrops start falling. Remember, Noah tried to warn his neighbors… You know, if the cut-ins are THAT disruptive, maybe we should have a city-wide referendum about whether to break into programs. Let the people decide?
Jim: I could live with that!
Downing: Are you sure? Are you REALLY sure?
Friday, May 22, 2009
Ah, the Joys of Going Digital
Okay, we’ve had a few “bumps” along the road to converting to a totally new broadcast technology. It’s frustrating and embarrassing, but the problem is exacerbated by viewers and government officials that don’t really understand what all is involved. It’s not like you run down to the Digital TV Station store and pick-up a few spare parts. You see, there are no spare parts, yet. When something breaks, it takes time to fix it: parts need to be ordered, installation takes time. It’s funny, I keep finding myself reverting back to that old announcement TV stations would make: “We are temporarily experiencing technical problems. Please stand by. The problem is NOT in your set.” You know what, if TV hasn’t always had to deal with a “ghost in the machinery”, we wouldn’t have ever had to make that announcement.
Still, the changeover has come with a bittersweet edge to it. For those of us who have been doing this a long time (33 years for me), moving from analog to digital marked a whole new chapter in our station’s story and a chance to look back fondly on the way it use to be. So, in this age of 24/7 television, let me share with you the way it was “once upon a time”.
In the beginning, there was “the moratorium”. The idea for television had been around since the 1880s – that’s a fact. The great battle that occurred though was how to make it actually happen. It works on the same principle as animation: a series of pictures flash before your eyes, each one changing slightly, creating the appearance of motion. The battle was over whether that would happen mechanically (like it does on film) or electronically (as it eventually did with television). You see, your TV picture (at least in the analog days) was constantly changing, but it happened so far that your eye couldn’t adjust to it. If you’ve ever tried to take a picture of a TV screen, you can see the change. Usually a black bar is running across the picture – that’s the new image coming across your screen.
Anyway, television as a medium had its big debut at the 1939 World’s Fair, but guess what happened? World War II came along and all the attention (and raw materials) went to the war effort. It wasn’t until 1945 that the TV industry really ramped up. In fact, so many TV stations were going on the air that it was creating a problem as their signals overlapped. I’m told that it looked kind of like trying to watch TV through Venetian blinds.
So, the FCC stopped issuing licenses, putting a moratorium in place until it could get things sorted out. By 1953, that had happened. Abilene was assigned two frequencies: Channel 9 on VHF (Very High Frequency) and Channel 33 on UHF (Ultra High Frequency). Since most TV’s were equipped to carry VHF, getting Channel 9 was important.
For the record, it was the Abilene Reporter News that secured the first TV license for Abilene. The call letters, KRBC, stand for “Reporter Broadcasting Company”. But in a move I still don’t quite understand, the newspaper’s owners decided they didn’t want to get into TV and sold the license to a young car salesman named Dale Ackers. KRBC stayed in the Ackers family for years (until after Dale’s death, when his sons sold it off).
It would take volumes to tell the KRBC TV story, but trust me – it’s a good one. I love some of the old stories best. Like the one about the antenna coming to town. It was brought in on a train car and then paraded through town for all to see. A parade! It was taken out to the transmitter site at Cedar Gap and all the broadcasting was done from there. But to get there, you usually had to meet someone in town and be escorted out because getting to the location meant having to drive up some steep and rough terrain. I’ve been to the transmitter site twice in my career. It’s not for the faint of heart. It’s one reason the station was moved to South 14th (although back then, we were sitting on the edge of town – almost out of town, actually).
Back in those days, you had to sign on your transmitter early and since the broadcast day didn’t start until 5:30 in the afternoon, the only thing to see was that stupid “Indian chief” test pattern. The only sound was that one-thousand cycle tone that ran incessantly. People would sit for hours watching it, fascinated by the technology and what it would eventually bring into their home.
First kids show on KRBC? Crusader Rabbit – Five minutes long.
Typical broadcast day? Five in the afternoon to 10:15 at night. That all changed when KRBC became an NBC affiliate months later.
The one commercial you’d NEVER see on KRBC? A beer ad. For close to 30 years, KRBC upheld it community commitment by refusing to run beer advertising on TV. They’d just preempt it and run another commercial over it. You could do that, back then.
May favorite memories? You know, I have always loved two things about TV – sign on and sign off. Sign on happens when they finally through the switch, turning off the tone and test pattern and actually start broadcasting programming. It usually began with just a picture of the TV station and this golden-throated announcer saying, “KRBC Television now begins its broadcast day.” That would be followed by a lot of technical information you really didn’t understand. It was just the excitement of watching the sleeping giant come to life. You know what the first thing that giant did? Played the National Anthem. The Star-Spangled Banner was also the last thing you’d see at sign-off. That same announcers voice would come on and say, “KRBC Television now concludes its broadcast day.” The same technical stuff would be read – you know, stuff like “KRBC broadcasts on Channel 9 in Abilene, Texas with an effective radiated power of eight-trillion gigawatts …” Since the station was now on the air until just after midnight, the announcer would always close by saying, “From the entire staff and management of KRBC, Good night and good morning. And now, our National Anthem.”
You know, I miss that reminder that I live in perhaps the greatest country in the world at perhaps the greatest time in history and I have just been put to rest by perhaps my closest friend: my favorite TV channel.
Somewhere out in space those great old tv signals are still bouncing around somewhere, perhaps having the same effect on a boy far different from me, but maybe, not that different at all.
Downing Bolls
Still, the changeover has come with a bittersweet edge to it. For those of us who have been doing this a long time (33 years for me), moving from analog to digital marked a whole new chapter in our station’s story and a chance to look back fondly on the way it use to be. So, in this age of 24/7 television, let me share with you the way it was “once upon a time”.
In the beginning, there was “the moratorium”. The idea for television had been around since the 1880s – that’s a fact. The great battle that occurred though was how to make it actually happen. It works on the same principle as animation: a series of pictures flash before your eyes, each one changing slightly, creating the appearance of motion. The battle was over whether that would happen mechanically (like it does on film) or electronically (as it eventually did with television). You see, your TV picture (at least in the analog days) was constantly changing, but it happened so far that your eye couldn’t adjust to it. If you’ve ever tried to take a picture of a TV screen, you can see the change. Usually a black bar is running across the picture – that’s the new image coming across your screen.
Anyway, television as a medium had its big debut at the 1939 World’s Fair, but guess what happened? World War II came along and all the attention (and raw materials) went to the war effort. It wasn’t until 1945 that the TV industry really ramped up. In fact, so many TV stations were going on the air that it was creating a problem as their signals overlapped. I’m told that it looked kind of like trying to watch TV through Venetian blinds.
So, the FCC stopped issuing licenses, putting a moratorium in place until it could get things sorted out. By 1953, that had happened. Abilene was assigned two frequencies: Channel 9 on VHF (Very High Frequency) and Channel 33 on UHF (Ultra High Frequency). Since most TV’s were equipped to carry VHF, getting Channel 9 was important.
For the record, it was the Abilene Reporter News that secured the first TV license for Abilene. The call letters, KRBC, stand for “Reporter Broadcasting Company”. But in a move I still don’t quite understand, the newspaper’s owners decided they didn’t want to get into TV and sold the license to a young car salesman named Dale Ackers. KRBC stayed in the Ackers family for years (until after Dale’s death, when his sons sold it off).
It would take volumes to tell the KRBC TV story, but trust me – it’s a good one. I love some of the old stories best. Like the one about the antenna coming to town. It was brought in on a train car and then paraded through town for all to see. A parade! It was taken out to the transmitter site at Cedar Gap and all the broadcasting was done from there. But to get there, you usually had to meet someone in town and be escorted out because getting to the location meant having to drive up some steep and rough terrain. I’ve been to the transmitter site twice in my career. It’s not for the faint of heart. It’s one reason the station was moved to South 14th (although back then, we were sitting on the edge of town – almost out of town, actually).
Back in those days, you had to sign on your transmitter early and since the broadcast day didn’t start until 5:30 in the afternoon, the only thing to see was that stupid “Indian chief” test pattern. The only sound was that one-thousand cycle tone that ran incessantly. People would sit for hours watching it, fascinated by the technology and what it would eventually bring into their home.
First kids show on KRBC? Crusader Rabbit – Five minutes long.
Typical broadcast day? Five in the afternoon to 10:15 at night. That all changed when KRBC became an NBC affiliate months later.
The one commercial you’d NEVER see on KRBC? A beer ad. For close to 30 years, KRBC upheld it community commitment by refusing to run beer advertising on TV. They’d just preempt it and run another commercial over it. You could do that, back then.
May favorite memories? You know, I have always loved two things about TV – sign on and sign off. Sign on happens when they finally through the switch, turning off the tone and test pattern and actually start broadcasting programming. It usually began with just a picture of the TV station and this golden-throated announcer saying, “KRBC Television now begins its broadcast day.” That would be followed by a lot of technical information you really didn’t understand. It was just the excitement of watching the sleeping giant come to life. You know what the first thing that giant did? Played the National Anthem. The Star-Spangled Banner was also the last thing you’d see at sign-off. That same announcers voice would come on and say, “KRBC Television now concludes its broadcast day.” The same technical stuff would be read – you know, stuff like “KRBC broadcasts on Channel 9 in Abilene, Texas with an effective radiated power of eight-trillion gigawatts …” Since the station was now on the air until just after midnight, the announcer would always close by saying, “From the entire staff and management of KRBC, Good night and good morning. And now, our National Anthem.”
You know, I miss that reminder that I live in perhaps the greatest country in the world at perhaps the greatest time in history and I have just been put to rest by perhaps my closest friend: my favorite TV channel.
Somewhere out in space those great old tv signals are still bouncing around somewhere, perhaps having the same effect on a boy far different from me, but maybe, not that different at all.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Losing Control: What Technology Is Doing To Our Social Skills
You know, people never cease to amaze me -- even after 30 years of doing this job. But there seems to be a growing anger and animosity among TV viewers these days.
Case in point, last Friday night: it had been a long and hot week. Everyone was kicking back Friday evening to watch a little television. Our meteorologist Nance’ Burgin was keeping an eye on a couple of storms moving southeast just outside the eastern counties in our viewing area. Just before six o’clock, those storms took a turn to the South-Southwest and things began to rapidly develop from there.
At about 6:50 or so, the first severe weather bulletins went out and as we always do when severe weather threatens, we cut into our regularly-scheduled program to update viewers in the path of the storm. But this was no ordinary storm. It was rapidly growing in intensity. We got a call from a viewer in Rising Star reporting golf ball-to-baseball-size hail. Within moments it had increased in size to softball to grapefruit. Torrential rains and high straight line winds were also being reported. Weather people will tell you that the size of the hail is a good indicator of just how severe a storm is: the larger the hail, the more dangerous the storm (and it doesn’t have to be that big!).
This storm was erupting so quickly that Nance’ was having to do cut-ins every three or four minutes, interrupting TV shows as she did so. That got a lot of people angry and they called the station to express their displeasure. Did I say “displeasure”? Let’s call it what it was: “outrage”.
Now, for the record, please understand that we don’t like cutting into people’s television shows. When we do, they usually get very angry and say some pretty mean things to us. It’s okay -- we understand. And you know what: if it was a show I was interested in, I’d be angry, too. But this was more than just anger. As I said, it was “outrage”. Let me tell you something, when people are that mad, they don’t want to get into a discussion with you about it. They are ready to physically assault you!
What astounded me was the level of anger and how it was expressed. I think an unusual phenomenon is taking place in the world: we have been blogging and texting so long that our “dark side” is beginning to take over whenever we get mad. We get on the telephone and talk to people with the same “hateful” tone and language we express when we blog total strangers. When did we as a race of human beings stop being a “kinder, gentler” people? Maybe we never were and just tricked ourselves into believing that we were somehow better than people who only know how to hate. Maybe it's a bi-product of having to deal with machines all day, unable to interact with another human being. Friday night, it was like watching Jesus being condemned by the crowds shouting “Crucify him!” It was like watching a pack of snarling, attack dogs.
Of course, when these calls come in, the faceless people who make them never tell you who they are. When you’re anonymous you don’t have to worry about accountability for your actions. It’s an interesting behavior and one that social scientists should take a closer look at.
Downing Bolls
Case in point, last Friday night: it had been a long and hot week. Everyone was kicking back Friday evening to watch a little television. Our meteorologist Nance’ Burgin was keeping an eye on a couple of storms moving southeast just outside the eastern counties in our viewing area. Just before six o’clock, those storms took a turn to the South-Southwest and things began to rapidly develop from there.
At about 6:50 or so, the first severe weather bulletins went out and as we always do when severe weather threatens, we cut into our regularly-scheduled program to update viewers in the path of the storm. But this was no ordinary storm. It was rapidly growing in intensity. We got a call from a viewer in Rising Star reporting golf ball-to-baseball-size hail. Within moments it had increased in size to softball to grapefruit. Torrential rains and high straight line winds were also being reported. Weather people will tell you that the size of the hail is a good indicator of just how severe a storm is: the larger the hail, the more dangerous the storm (and it doesn’t have to be that big!).
This storm was erupting so quickly that Nance’ was having to do cut-ins every three or four minutes, interrupting TV shows as she did so. That got a lot of people angry and they called the station to express their displeasure. Did I say “displeasure”? Let’s call it what it was: “outrage”.
Now, for the record, please understand that we don’t like cutting into people’s television shows. When we do, they usually get very angry and say some pretty mean things to us. It’s okay -- we understand. And you know what: if it was a show I was interested in, I’d be angry, too. But this was more than just anger. As I said, it was “outrage”. Let me tell you something, when people are that mad, they don’t want to get into a discussion with you about it. They are ready to physically assault you!
What astounded me was the level of anger and how it was expressed. I think an unusual phenomenon is taking place in the world: we have been blogging and texting so long that our “dark side” is beginning to take over whenever we get mad. We get on the telephone and talk to people with the same “hateful” tone and language we express when we blog total strangers. When did we as a race of human beings stop being a “kinder, gentler” people? Maybe we never were and just tricked ourselves into believing that we were somehow better than people who only know how to hate. Maybe it's a bi-product of having to deal with machines all day, unable to interact with another human being. Friday night, it was like watching Jesus being condemned by the crowds shouting “Crucify him!” It was like watching a pack of snarling, attack dogs.
Of course, when these calls come in, the faceless people who make them never tell you who they are. When you’re anonymous you don’t have to worry about accountability for your actions. It’s an interesting behavior and one that social scientists should take a closer look at.
Downing Bolls
Friday, May 1, 2009
Talking About the Bug: Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf
For the first time since last October, we have been focused on something other than the economy, although that is still there. Now there is the Swine Flu outbreak and talk of a global pandemic.
I am blogging this as our community waits to hear back on the results of lab tests. Fourteen samples were collected from people displaying flu-like symptoms and we may know later today whether any of those are Swine Flu. My point is this, however: maybe we are over reacting a little bit at this point. Stores are running out of surgical facemasks and hand sanitizers. The hand sanitizer rush – okay, I can see that, but the facemask thing – that just seems like a little much at this point. We’re walking around looking like there’s a Sars outbreak. Too bad E-R isn’t on anymore; I can see a whole show built around the trauma center not having any surgical masks. You know, exposure to some germs is a good thing because it allows out bodies to build immunity to them. If we keep spreading lotion on our hands that kills 99 percent of all germs, I fear some much bigger health issues may be headed our way in the future.
Influenza is an interesting thing when you sit down and think about it. Remember two years ago when there was a shortage of flu vaccine and everyone was terrified? (It’s like earlier this year when people found out their DTV coupons weren’t good anymore.) Long lines encircled the civic center and people were turned away. I even heard rumors of flu shots being sold on the black market. It’s funny what a little fear will do to folks, isn’t it? This year, there was no flu vaccine shortage and you couldn’t give flu shots away. As I understand it, the flu is a respiratory illness and those at the greatest risk for catching it are the ones who need the shots most: healthcare workers, the elderly, the very young, and the chronically ill. If you are healthy and practice good hygiene, you should be able to handle this flu like you do the viruses that come around every flu season. If you want a shot, get a shot. Otherwise, wash your hands often, avoid contact with infected persons, don’t spread germs, and if you are sick, stay home. As sorry as I am to say it, it just boils down to this: We live in a world that is interconnected and if there is a flu pandemic, you’re probably going to get sick. It’s as simple as that. If we as a society want to keep that from happening, we will probably need to move Thanksgiving and Christmas to the summer months, when the threat of influenza is much smaller. The holidays must be a nightmare for public health officials and the evidence is certainly there that there is a connection. The peak period for flu is late January and early February, about the right time frame when you figure the gestation period, the holidays, and how long it takes the flu virus to morph into a new strain.
I got an email this week about our reporting of the Swine flu story. Here’s what it says:
“To the so call news fakers, are you that uneducated when it comes to come sense. Proverbs 6:16-19. You are telling people that they can't get the swine flu by eating pork. Do you not know that the virus is in the blood of these animals? Does not know the blood is going thru the entire body of these animals, then into the meat of these animals? You are fools in sheep clothing being lead to the slaughter. This is why the Holy Bible say not to eat swine you idiots. O, the savior did away with that law. I don't think so, he came to prove that you can do them all. Each man, woman and child can walk in his ways, he told us to do this, that the law is not burdensome to each one of us.
You probably won't even address what I have said here on the air, because your cowards.”
I’m no doctor, so, I turned to the Centers for Disease Control website (http://www.cdc.gov/hiniflu/key_facts.htm) for some answers. This is what they said: Swine influenza viruses are not transmitted by food. You can not get swine influenza from eating pork or pork products. Eating properly handled and cooked pork and pork products is safe. Cooking pork to an internal temperature of 160°F kills the swine flu virus as it does other bacteria and viruses.
Well gee, Mr. Wizard, if you can’t get it from eating pork, how does it spread? Influenza viruses can be directly transmitted from pigs to people and from people to pigs. Human infection with flu viruses from pigs are most likely to occur when people are in close proximity to infected pigs, such as in pig barns and livestock exhibits housing pigs at fairs. Human-to-human transmission of swine flu can also occur. This is thought to occur in the same way as seasonal flu occurs in people, which is mainly person-to-person transmission through coughing or sneezing of people infected with the influenza virus. People may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose. In other words, you can’t get Swine Flu by watching Babe, the pig; Blue Boy, the Hampshire boar in “State Fair”; Porky’s, or Lonesome Dove (at least Gus didn’t from his two pigs). However, attendance at 4H events might be off a little this year.
Back in 1976, I was a young budding reporter, just out of college and working as a disc jockey at an Abilene radio station. They didn’t have a regular news department, but they gave me a tape recorder and sent me out to interview Congressman Omar Burleson. For those who have never been to one of news conferences, the Congressman arrives and takes questions about things going on in Washington. There had been an outbreak of Swine Flu at Fort Dix, New Jersey and there were fears the whole country might be exposed, so a massive inoculation program was started. A lot of people remembered the catastrophic toll taken by the flu outbreak of 1918 (my grandfather drove an ambulance in Ranger where the flu struck oilfield workers in large numbers. About the only memory we have of that now is the annual holiday airing of “It’s A Wonderful Life” in which Mr. Gower gets the telegram that his son Robert has died of the flu). Millions of people worldwide died in the 1918 pandemic, so long lines formed at the local National Guard Armory where the Swine Flu shots were being given. There had been some adverse reactions to the vaccine, however, and that prompted some to question the program. I asked Congressman Burleson if he was planning to get his Swine Flu shot and he replied that he wasn’t: he didn’t see any reason to. “Congressman Vows Not to Take Shot” became the lead story on every newscast in Abilene that day and opened the door for me to get into news broadcasting.
As we wait to see just how bad this flu pandemic will be, let us be hopeful that the threat of a pandemic isn’t in reality a “panic”-demic. Let’s make sure that any response begins with a health dose of common sense.
Downing Bolls
I am blogging this as our community waits to hear back on the results of lab tests. Fourteen samples were collected from people displaying flu-like symptoms and we may know later today whether any of those are Swine Flu. My point is this, however: maybe we are over reacting a little bit at this point. Stores are running out of surgical facemasks and hand sanitizers. The hand sanitizer rush – okay, I can see that, but the facemask thing – that just seems like a little much at this point. We’re walking around looking like there’s a Sars outbreak. Too bad E-R isn’t on anymore; I can see a whole show built around the trauma center not having any surgical masks. You know, exposure to some germs is a good thing because it allows out bodies to build immunity to them. If we keep spreading lotion on our hands that kills 99 percent of all germs, I fear some much bigger health issues may be headed our way in the future.
Influenza is an interesting thing when you sit down and think about it. Remember two years ago when there was a shortage of flu vaccine and everyone was terrified? (It’s like earlier this year when people found out their DTV coupons weren’t good anymore.) Long lines encircled the civic center and people were turned away. I even heard rumors of flu shots being sold on the black market. It’s funny what a little fear will do to folks, isn’t it? This year, there was no flu vaccine shortage and you couldn’t give flu shots away. As I understand it, the flu is a respiratory illness and those at the greatest risk for catching it are the ones who need the shots most: healthcare workers, the elderly, the very young, and the chronically ill. If you are healthy and practice good hygiene, you should be able to handle this flu like you do the viruses that come around every flu season. If you want a shot, get a shot. Otherwise, wash your hands often, avoid contact with infected persons, don’t spread germs, and if you are sick, stay home. As sorry as I am to say it, it just boils down to this: We live in a world that is interconnected and if there is a flu pandemic, you’re probably going to get sick. It’s as simple as that. If we as a society want to keep that from happening, we will probably need to move Thanksgiving and Christmas to the summer months, when the threat of influenza is much smaller. The holidays must be a nightmare for public health officials and the evidence is certainly there that there is a connection. The peak period for flu is late January and early February, about the right time frame when you figure the gestation period, the holidays, and how long it takes the flu virus to morph into a new strain.
I got an email this week about our reporting of the Swine flu story. Here’s what it says:
“To the so call news fakers, are you that uneducated when it comes to come sense. Proverbs 6:16-19. You are telling people that they can't get the swine flu by eating pork. Do you not know that the virus is in the blood of these animals? Does not know the blood is going thru the entire body of these animals, then into the meat of these animals? You are fools in sheep clothing being lead to the slaughter. This is why the Holy Bible say not to eat swine you idiots. O, the savior did away with that law. I don't think so, he came to prove that you can do them all. Each man, woman and child can walk in his ways, he told us to do this, that the law is not burdensome to each one of us.
You probably won't even address what I have said here on the air, because your cowards.”
I’m no doctor, so, I turned to the Centers for Disease Control website (http://www.cdc.gov/hiniflu/key_facts.htm) for some answers. This is what they said: Swine influenza viruses are not transmitted by food. You can not get swine influenza from eating pork or pork products. Eating properly handled and cooked pork and pork products is safe. Cooking pork to an internal temperature of 160°F kills the swine flu virus as it does other bacteria and viruses.
Well gee, Mr. Wizard, if you can’t get it from eating pork, how does it spread? Influenza viruses can be directly transmitted from pigs to people and from people to pigs. Human infection with flu viruses from pigs are most likely to occur when people are in close proximity to infected pigs, such as in pig barns and livestock exhibits housing pigs at fairs. Human-to-human transmission of swine flu can also occur. This is thought to occur in the same way as seasonal flu occurs in people, which is mainly person-to-person transmission through coughing or sneezing of people infected with the influenza virus. People may become infected by touching something with flu viruses on it and then touching their mouth or nose. In other words, you can’t get Swine Flu by watching Babe, the pig; Blue Boy, the Hampshire boar in “State Fair”; Porky’s, or Lonesome Dove (at least Gus didn’t from his two pigs). However, attendance at 4H events might be off a little this year.
Back in 1976, I was a young budding reporter, just out of college and working as a disc jockey at an Abilene radio station. They didn’t have a regular news department, but they gave me a tape recorder and sent me out to interview Congressman Omar Burleson. For those who have never been to one of news conferences, the Congressman arrives and takes questions about things going on in Washington. There had been an outbreak of Swine Flu at Fort Dix, New Jersey and there were fears the whole country might be exposed, so a massive inoculation program was started. A lot of people remembered the catastrophic toll taken by the flu outbreak of 1918 (my grandfather drove an ambulance in Ranger where the flu struck oilfield workers in large numbers. About the only memory we have of that now is the annual holiday airing of “It’s A Wonderful Life” in which Mr. Gower gets the telegram that his son Robert has died of the flu). Millions of people worldwide died in the 1918 pandemic, so long lines formed at the local National Guard Armory where the Swine Flu shots were being given. There had been some adverse reactions to the vaccine, however, and that prompted some to question the program. I asked Congressman Burleson if he was planning to get his Swine Flu shot and he replied that he wasn’t: he didn’t see any reason to. “Congressman Vows Not to Take Shot” became the lead story on every newscast in Abilene that day and opened the door for me to get into news broadcasting.
As we wait to see just how bad this flu pandemic will be, let us be hopeful that the threat of a pandemic isn’t in reality a “panic”-demic. Let’s make sure that any response begins with a health dose of common sense.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Abilene Needs A Curfew For Adults
It was a sad story, as they all are. Abilene’s latest murder involved the death of a 19-year old man allegedly at the hand of a 16-year old boy. Details were sketchy, but apparently at happened at a north Abilene home in the early morning hours of Saturday, April 18th. There was a fight and a shooting.
That prompted an online poll this week on BigCountryHomePage.Com: “Would a teen curfew lower crime?” The results were a little one sided, as you might expect. Only 64 people responded, so it was far from a communbity mandate, but almost 80% said, "Yes, a curfew would keep teens out of trouble".
But wait just a minute here. While it’s true, crimes involving teens tend to get huge headlines, in my 33 years of covering news, the crimes committed by adults far outweigh those committed by kids. In 2007, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas released a report on prisons. Entitled Texas: Tougher than Ever, But are we Safer?, the report found that in 2005, Texas' non-violent prison population totaled 57,460 inmates, making ours the 6th largest prison system in the nation. One of the findings was that Texas spent five times as much on its prison system as it did on higher education (and couldn't figure out why it was having a problem with repeat offenders)– and taxpayers were picking up most of the cost of incarceration. Then, in March of 2007, the lid blew off conditions in juvenile lock-ups in Texas far worse than any adult jail in the state.
No, I think that if you really want to attack the problem of crime, let’s put the biggest offenders away: the adults. But more than that, let’s impose a curfew for the rest of them, whether they’ve done anything wrong or not. No adults on the streets after 11 at night. Violators will be arrested on sight and locked up. That should reduce the crime rate because the only adults out after 11 would be criminals, right?
So, how do you like the sound of that? Doesn’t sit too well, does it? Especially if you are being unfairly judged, based on the actions of a few individuals.
I know that a lot of cities in Texas have a teen curfew. Abilene is not one of them. You know, I have a real problem with this continuing cycle of “criminalizing” our kids. We don’t want them to smoke, so we make it a crime to do so. We want to protect them from skin cancer, so we pass a bill outlawing tanning beds if the user is younger than 16. Want to talk about skin cancer, how about this: I know of kids who spent their summer's in backyard or at the neighborhood pool, smothered in baby oil or cooking oil. Instead of keeping the tanning in a regulated environment, we just turn them loose to bake like a strip of bacon.
When I was growing up, my parents had a rule: I had to be home by 10. During the summer, I was allowed to sit on the front porch with my friends until 11, but I couldn’t leave the porch. Did our city have a curfew? I don’t know; it never came up. I had a curfew, though, and if I didn’t follow it, I didn’t go to jail. I didn’t go anywhere…for a month!
There are 292 cities in the country that restrict teenagers after hours. Most have a curfew in place from eleven at night until sunrise the next morning. My first real job was delivering the Washington Post everyday, rain or shine. It meant getting up early each morning, sometimes before five, so that adults could have their morning paper each day. I had to service my paper route and collect from my customers each month to pay for my papers. Sometimes, I got stiffed by them. It taught me a lot about people.
You know, maybe it’s time for parents to stop letting the government step in and do their jobs.
Would a teen curfew curb crime? Maybe, but an adult curfew would make an even bigger impact. In fact, here’s an idea: let’s ban everyone from being on the streets between 11 pm and sunrise. That’s a deterrent. It’s also got a name: martial law.
Downing Bolls
That prompted an online poll this week on BigCountryHomePage.Com: “Would a teen curfew lower crime?” The results were a little one sided, as you might expect. Only 64 people responded, so it was far from a communbity mandate, but almost 80% said, "Yes, a curfew would keep teens out of trouble".
But wait just a minute here. While it’s true, crimes involving teens tend to get huge headlines, in my 33 years of covering news, the crimes committed by adults far outweigh those committed by kids. In 2007, the American Civil Liberties Union of Texas released a report on prisons. Entitled Texas: Tougher than Ever, But are we Safer?, the report found that in 2005, Texas' non-violent prison population totaled 57,460 inmates, making ours the 6th largest prison system in the nation. One of the findings was that Texas spent five times as much on its prison system as it did on higher education (and couldn't figure out why it was having a problem with repeat offenders)– and taxpayers were picking up most of the cost of incarceration. Then, in March of 2007, the lid blew off conditions in juvenile lock-ups in Texas far worse than any adult jail in the state.
No, I think that if you really want to attack the problem of crime, let’s put the biggest offenders away: the adults. But more than that, let’s impose a curfew for the rest of them, whether they’ve done anything wrong or not. No adults on the streets after 11 at night. Violators will be arrested on sight and locked up. That should reduce the crime rate because the only adults out after 11 would be criminals, right?
So, how do you like the sound of that? Doesn’t sit too well, does it? Especially if you are being unfairly judged, based on the actions of a few individuals.
I know that a lot of cities in Texas have a teen curfew. Abilene is not one of them. You know, I have a real problem with this continuing cycle of “criminalizing” our kids. We don’t want them to smoke, so we make it a crime to do so. We want to protect them from skin cancer, so we pass a bill outlawing tanning beds if the user is younger than 16. Want to talk about skin cancer, how about this: I know of kids who spent their summer's in backyard or at the neighborhood pool, smothered in baby oil or cooking oil. Instead of keeping the tanning in a regulated environment, we just turn them loose to bake like a strip of bacon.
When I was growing up, my parents had a rule: I had to be home by 10. During the summer, I was allowed to sit on the front porch with my friends until 11, but I couldn’t leave the porch. Did our city have a curfew? I don’t know; it never came up. I had a curfew, though, and if I didn’t follow it, I didn’t go to jail. I didn’t go anywhere…for a month!
There are 292 cities in the country that restrict teenagers after hours. Most have a curfew in place from eleven at night until sunrise the next morning. My first real job was delivering the Washington Post everyday, rain or shine. It meant getting up early each morning, sometimes before five, so that adults could have their morning paper each day. I had to service my paper route and collect from my customers each month to pay for my papers. Sometimes, I got stiffed by them. It taught me a lot about people.
You know, maybe it’s time for parents to stop letting the government step in and do their jobs.
Would a teen curfew curb crime? Maybe, but an adult curfew would make an even bigger impact. In fact, here’s an idea: let’s ban everyone from being on the streets between 11 pm and sunrise. That’s a deterrent. It’s also got a name: martial law.
Downing Bolls
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Reports of My Death Are Greatly Exagerated
Don’t Believe Everything You Hear.
A few week’s ago we aired a story about car sales in Abilene. A local dealership was saying that sales figures this year were actually better than they had been last year, despite doom and gloom assessments of the economy. It brought to mind a book I recently read called, Mind Set! It’s written by John Naisbitt, the same guy who wrote the book, Megatrends. In Mind Set, Naisbitt discusses the new economic model and how the media presents a distorted picture of things because it doesn’t know how to report it. He specifically cited the sales of automobiles. We have seen a lot of stories about the dire straits the American auto industry is going through, but when you consider automobiles as a specific sector of the world economy, the news isn’t nearly as gloomy. To me, it points even more to the importance of localizing every news story you do because, in not doing so, we often paint a distorted picture of what’s really going on. It’s no wonder people don’t trust the media.
There was a story recently in the trade publication Media Week. A new study finds that when times are tough, people turn more often to local TV for news. Local TV? Wait a minute, isn’t the media suppose to be taking a real beating right now? The study, by Frank N. Magid Associates for Hearst-Argyle Television, found that 99 percent of respondents said they are turning to local TV news at least as much as or more frequently than in the past due to the troubled economy.
The study was conducted over two weeks in February in 24 markets served by Hearst-Argyle. including Boston, Baltimore, Orlando, Cincinnati, Sacramento, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee.
Sixteen percent of the 2,500 respondents said they are following local TV news "more." The only medium surpassing local TV was the Internet, cited by 17 percent of respondents. Newspapers, radio and print magazines trailed at 10 percent, 9 percent and 6 percent, respectively, but it was clear where people are turning these days to get their news.
The news was especially good for television advertising. Commercials airing on local TV news engage consumers more than other traditional media. When asked which types of ads respondents pay more attention to, 57 percent cited local TV versus 43 percent for magazines; 64 percent versus 36 percent for newspapers, 72 percent versus 28 percent for radio, 81 percent versus 19 percent for yellow pages, and 55 percent versus 45 percent for direct mail. They also found local TV ads more engaging than all forms of online ads, on average 85 percent for local TV versus 15 percent for online ads.
Local news also got the high scores for trustworthiness and recall and, as the most important source of community information, it rivaled newspapers..
Although the audience to early morning news is growing, most respondents (62 percent) said that late news is when they typically watch local news.
It is a great story and one that bears telling, especially these days.
A few week’s ago we aired a story about car sales in Abilene. A local dealership was saying that sales figures this year were actually better than they had been last year, despite doom and gloom assessments of the economy. It brought to mind a book I recently read called, Mind Set! It’s written by John Naisbitt, the same guy who wrote the book, Megatrends. In Mind Set, Naisbitt discusses the new economic model and how the media presents a distorted picture of things because it doesn’t know how to report it. He specifically cited the sales of automobiles. We have seen a lot of stories about the dire straits the American auto industry is going through, but when you consider automobiles as a specific sector of the world economy, the news isn’t nearly as gloomy. To me, it points even more to the importance of localizing every news story you do because, in not doing so, we often paint a distorted picture of what’s really going on. It’s no wonder people don’t trust the media.
There was a story recently in the trade publication Media Week. A new study finds that when times are tough, people turn more often to local TV for news. Local TV? Wait a minute, isn’t the media suppose to be taking a real beating right now? The study, by Frank N. Magid Associates for Hearst-Argyle Television, found that 99 percent of respondents said they are turning to local TV news at least as much as or more frequently than in the past due to the troubled economy.
The study was conducted over two weeks in February in 24 markets served by Hearst-Argyle. including Boston, Baltimore, Orlando, Cincinnati, Sacramento, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee.
Sixteen percent of the 2,500 respondents said they are following local TV news "more." The only medium surpassing local TV was the Internet, cited by 17 percent of respondents. Newspapers, radio and print magazines trailed at 10 percent, 9 percent and 6 percent, respectively, but it was clear where people are turning these days to get their news.
The news was especially good for television advertising. Commercials airing on local TV news engage consumers more than other traditional media. When asked which types of ads respondents pay more attention to, 57 percent cited local TV versus 43 percent for magazines; 64 percent versus 36 percent for newspapers, 72 percent versus 28 percent for radio, 81 percent versus 19 percent for yellow pages, and 55 percent versus 45 percent for direct mail. They also found local TV ads more engaging than all forms of online ads, on average 85 percent for local TV versus 15 percent for online ads.
Local news also got the high scores for trustworthiness and recall and, as the most important source of community information, it rivaled newspapers..
Although the audience to early morning news is growing, most respondents (62 percent) said that late news is when they typically watch local news.
It is a great story and one that bears telling, especially these days.
Friday, April 3, 2009
All In The Family: The "New" Business Model
It was one of those "double take" moments. You know the kind: when you have to pinch yourself to make sure it's really happening? It was during the last commercial break in the 10 o'clock News the other night. A promo pops up on the screen urging KRBC viewers to subscribe to a call back weather service offered by our sister station, KTAB. The same service that KRBC also offers.
Now maybe I should clear the air on a few things here. While KTAB is our sister station and we share our resources, we both still compete with one another for viewers.
So, how could such a thing have happened? Well, in this case it was a mistake so simple, it's hard to believe it's consequence could be so glaring. But, it also speaks to the changes going on in television right now. It was human error. Somewhere along the line, someone put the wrong commercial number into the computer system and the spot that should have run on KTAB, ran instead on KRBC, It happens -- We are, afterall, just human. I think my counterpart on the other station summed it up best as we joked about it after the show: "Thanks," he said, "we need all the cross promotion we can get." But with more and more "centralization" going on and more and more responsibility being placed on fewer and fewer people, things like this will be bound to happen more frequently.
Now, a comment about something in the news this week: the Fox Television Stations and E.W. Scripps have created a local news service for their stations in Detroit, Phoenix and Tampa. Starting this month, the service "will pool content-gathering resources at general market news events, allowing the stations to save on duplicate efforts" and Fox and Scripps are amenable to opening up the service to other media partners in the three markets.
The idea isn't new: The Abilene Reporter News (which, by the way is now owned by Scripps) and KTXS-TV have been doing it for years. The trade publication Broadcasting & Cable noted recently that these are challenging times we live in and and TV stations, once bitter competitors, "are increasingly in a sharing mood", at least in the boardrooms where the bucks meet the bottom lines. Maybe the "news" business is becoming more about "business" than about "news".
There was a time when this kind of "centralization" would have been scorned, but in a study submitted during the recent duopoly hearings, it was suggested that keeping stations from owning more than one station in a market was outdated thinking. In the Information Age, there are now scores of places the public can turn to "get the facts and opposing viewpoints". Everyone's interests are served.
Those are my thoughts: what are yours.
Downing Bolls
Now maybe I should clear the air on a few things here. While KTAB is our sister station and we share our resources, we both still compete with one another for viewers.
So, how could such a thing have happened? Well, in this case it was a mistake so simple, it's hard to believe it's consequence could be so glaring. But, it also speaks to the changes going on in television right now. It was human error. Somewhere along the line, someone put the wrong commercial number into the computer system and the spot that should have run on KTAB, ran instead on KRBC, It happens -- We are, afterall, just human. I think my counterpart on the other station summed it up best as we joked about it after the show: "Thanks," he said, "we need all the cross promotion we can get." But with more and more "centralization" going on and more and more responsibility being placed on fewer and fewer people, things like this will be bound to happen more frequently.
Now, a comment about something in the news this week: the Fox Television Stations and E.W. Scripps have created a local news service for their stations in Detroit, Phoenix and Tampa. Starting this month, the service "will pool content-gathering resources at general market news events, allowing the stations to save on duplicate efforts" and Fox and Scripps are amenable to opening up the service to other media partners in the three markets.
The idea isn't new: The Abilene Reporter News (which, by the way is now owned by Scripps) and KTXS-TV have been doing it for years. The trade publication Broadcasting & Cable noted recently that these are challenging times we live in and and TV stations, once bitter competitors, "are increasingly in a sharing mood", at least in the boardrooms where the bucks meet the bottom lines. Maybe the "news" business is becoming more about "business" than about "news".
There was a time when this kind of "centralization" would have been scorned, but in a study submitted during the recent duopoly hearings, it was suggested that keeping stations from owning more than one station in a market was outdated thinking. In the Information Age, there are now scores of places the public can turn to "get the facts and opposing viewpoints". Everyone's interests are served.
Those are my thoughts: what are yours.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Jekyll & Hyde: An Email From Your Alter-Ego
I like Jerry Lewis movies and my favorite is without question, The Nutty Professor. It is a take-off on the old Jekyll and Hyde theme -- combined with those old comic book ads for muscle-building. Remember them? The muscle man at the beach kicks sand in the guy’s face, but he’s too puny to do anything about it. So he bulks up and is ready the next time it happens?
In the film, Dr. Julius Kelp, a meek and mild college chemistry professor who is picked on by just about everyone from the college president to members of his class, uses chemistry to create a special elixir that allows his alter ego Buddy Love to come alive. Buddy is everything that Kelp is not. He’s hip and cool, but also very self-absorbed. He is focused only on his own wants without regard to who he might hurt in the process.
So, what does any of this have to do with “Dish-ing It to Downing”?
I recently received two anonymous letters.
I routinely get emails from people who don’t leave their name – letters that usually have a very hateful tone to them. This doesn’t particularly upset me. It’s an interesting phenomenon, but is it a sign of the times?
Last April, David Vaina wrote an online article called, “New Media Versus Old Media”. His summary: new media don’t follow the same ethics as traditional media. Just look at some of the hate mail (yes, it is hate mail) generated by our story on “The Real Housewives of Taylor County”. Some of it was just insulting and maybe it was because the authors didn’t have to put their real name on it. Parked in front of a computer screen, “Mr. Hyde” took over, saying what they wanted because there was no accountability or policing. It is, afterall, a free country and your right to say what you want is guaranteed by the Constitution right?
Not really. The Constitution keeps the government from making laws abridging your freedom of speech. Sometimes going on a "rant" can end-up villifying you just as much as the person you are attacking. Vaina says there are justifiable concerns about potentially negative ramifications as we transition from traditional journalism to “one shaped, at least in part, by a decentralized biosphere.” According to Vaina, advocates of this new form of journalism say that overtime the media landscape will be enriched, not degraded, by this public discourse. Admittedly though, it may take decades, not years, for that to happen. In the meantime, who weighs the damage done against the benefits to society?
Site managers for Technorati, a recognized authority on blogs and user-generated content, report that they are now tracking almost 113 million blogs and more than 1.6 million blog posts each day. I suspect one of the biggest problems with the internet is that it’s “different things to different people”. I know people who consider the internet a valuable source for information. I also know people who think it’s a big game and, using a pseudonym, you can do just about anything to anyone you want to. Consider this: research from the Pew Internet & American Life Project show 55 percent of bloggers write their online blogs under a ficticious name. The concern of many is that these bloggers will be more likely to publish false rumor because it’s harder to trace the mistake back to its source.
There are times when anonymity is justified. I think, however, most of the time you should have the courage of your convictions.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I really do care about what you think, but when it comes to emails and letters that have no redeeming value, I will do what I have always done with them: send them to the trash/recycle bin.
Downing Bolls
In the film, Dr. Julius Kelp, a meek and mild college chemistry professor who is picked on by just about everyone from the college president to members of his class, uses chemistry to create a special elixir that allows his alter ego Buddy Love to come alive. Buddy is everything that Kelp is not. He’s hip and cool, but also very self-absorbed. He is focused only on his own wants without regard to who he might hurt in the process.
So, what does any of this have to do with “Dish-ing It to Downing”?
I recently received two anonymous letters.
I routinely get emails from people who don’t leave their name – letters that usually have a very hateful tone to them. This doesn’t particularly upset me. It’s an interesting phenomenon, but is it a sign of the times?
Last April, David Vaina wrote an online article called, “New Media Versus Old Media”. His summary: new media don’t follow the same ethics as traditional media. Just look at some of the hate mail (yes, it is hate mail) generated by our story on “The Real Housewives of Taylor County”. Some of it was just insulting and maybe it was because the authors didn’t have to put their real name on it. Parked in front of a computer screen, “Mr. Hyde” took over, saying what they wanted because there was no accountability or policing. It is, afterall, a free country and your right to say what you want is guaranteed by the Constitution right?
Not really. The Constitution keeps the government from making laws abridging your freedom of speech. Sometimes going on a "rant" can end-up villifying you just as much as the person you are attacking. Vaina says there are justifiable concerns about potentially negative ramifications as we transition from traditional journalism to “one shaped, at least in part, by a decentralized biosphere.” According to Vaina, advocates of this new form of journalism say that overtime the media landscape will be enriched, not degraded, by this public discourse. Admittedly though, it may take decades, not years, for that to happen. In the meantime, who weighs the damage done against the benefits to society?
Site managers for Technorati, a recognized authority on blogs and user-generated content, report that they are now tracking almost 113 million blogs and more than 1.6 million blog posts each day. I suspect one of the biggest problems with the internet is that it’s “different things to different people”. I know people who consider the internet a valuable source for information. I also know people who think it’s a big game and, using a pseudonym, you can do just about anything to anyone you want to. Consider this: research from the Pew Internet & American Life Project show 55 percent of bloggers write their online blogs under a ficticious name. The concern of many is that these bloggers will be more likely to publish false rumor because it’s harder to trace the mistake back to its source.
There are times when anonymity is justified. I think, however, most of the time you should have the courage of your convictions.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I really do care about what you think, but when it comes to emails and letters that have no redeeming value, I will do what I have always done with them: send them to the trash/recycle bin.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, March 19, 2009
The $15 Challenge: Some Food For Thought
In this week’s “Dish It to Downing”, some thoughts about the just completed Money Savers Challenge. The challenge: feeding yourself on just $15 dollars a week. At first glance, it looks easy. Then, when you actually step into the grocery store and start shopping, you realize just how far fifteen dollars doesn’t go anymore.
I toyed with the idea of just buying a couple of bags of potato chips and a six-pack, but that pretty much ate up my fifteen bucks. So, in preparation for the event, I did my homework. A week before the challenge began; I visited the Abilene Public Library for a little research into how the rest of the world does it. I checked into two subjects: the Great Depression and The Third World.
From the Great Depression I learned that folks knew how to stretch what food they had. People didn’t have a lot, but many of them shared with others because they were either better off than the next guy or wanted him to think that. Pride counted for a lot back then. People had gardens, canned their food, and raised chickens. They also learned to live on a lot less.
From the third world, I learned the value of staples such as rice and beans.
From both I learned that to survive on fifteen dollars a week, you mustn’t let anything go to waste and you better get use to living on leftovers.
Now I’m a pretty resourceful guy, so I had my shopping list made up pretty early. This is what was on it:
1 Pkg of Frozen Mixed Vegetables
1 Loaf of Bread (not sliced)
1 Quart of Milk
1 Pkg of Stewing Meat
1 Box of Rice (not Minute Rice)
1 Can of Beans
1 Dozen Eggs
2 Whole Chickens
Grand total at the check-out stand: $14.85.
I came home and started planning out my menu. The whole plan for me was based on the idea that we have become a society of convenience. We eat fast food because it’s easier than staying home and cooking it. The downside of that is that most of us have forgotten how to cook. That convenience is something we pay dearly for, not just at fast food restaurants, but at the grocery store, too.
I decided to first attack the rice. A little of that goes a long way, but I wasn’t quite sure how long it would take to cook it, so I jumped right in.
Lesson One: Read the directions. Rice isn’t hard to cook, but you really have to pay attention to the directions. Also, be willing to settle for eating your mistakes the first couple of times.
Lesson Two: Frozen means frozen. It took four days for the whole chickens to thaw enough to cook, so I survive on fried egg sandwiches for dinner, a boiled egg for lunch, and an omelet for breakfast the first couple of days. That made the last two days a veritable feast with basked chicken, beans, and mixed vegetables.
Lesson Three: You can live on leftovers. This is where all that reading about the Depression came in handy. They use to do a lot of mixing and matching back then; you know, beans and rice, etc.
So, now comes the moment of truth: How did I do?
I survived and could survive if I had to, but it made me a lot more appreciative of what I have. On the first day, I had to give a speech to a group of Rotarians in Brownwood. It was a lunch engagement, so I ate as their guest. It would have been impolite not to do so. I don’t consider that a violation of the rules because that’s a normal part of my job. Second, on the very last day, my wife’s father passed away and the house became filled with mourners bearing gifts of food. I made up for it later, though, by going back on the challenge for one extra day. Those were the only times I hedged.
But I learned a few things, too. First, things are not so bad when you are in it with someone else. We found out that by coming together and sharing with one another, we had plenty of food and perhaps even more importantly, a variety of food. We also thought about using a business model being employed more and more these days in the workplace: the power of bulk buying. Instead of each of us duplicating what the other was getting, we considered comparing notes and working as a team to stretch our food dollar even farther. We didn’t do that because we just didn’t have time to test our theory about it. Maybe we will next time.
Finally, something very unusual happened. Just like in the Great Depression, we all began to watch out for each other and to share what we had with someone else who might not have as much. We didn’t throw anything away and nothing was wasted.
It was a great chance to look at all that we have to be thankful for in this country, compared to what most people in the world do not have. It was also a sad reminder of how much we take for granted. I was ashamed, but proud, too, of how well we did.
You know, I couldn’t help but think when the idea was first pitched that it’s not a good thing when your boss asks you if you can survive on just fifteen dollars a week for food; especially in these tough economic times. I’m glad we did it, though. I learned a lot about myself.
It reminded me of a "real world" hunger exercise I was involved in some years ago. Do you know what happens to you when you don't eat? Your blood sugar falls and you become very lethargic. After just a few days, you get to the point where you are just too weak to do anything about overcoming your own predicament. It was a real education in what we must do to attack hunger on global basis. Unfortunately, there are still far too many in the world who use food as a weapon.
Still, if you really want to be impressed, look at the people of the world who feed an entire family on a fraction of what we spent. We really are the land of plenty, but keep acting like we are the only ones in the world doing the suffering. It's time to wake up, America! You can't use food deprivation as an excuse anymore.
Downing Bolls
I toyed with the idea of just buying a couple of bags of potato chips and a six-pack, but that pretty much ate up my fifteen bucks. So, in preparation for the event, I did my homework. A week before the challenge began; I visited the Abilene Public Library for a little research into how the rest of the world does it. I checked into two subjects: the Great Depression and The Third World.
From the Great Depression I learned that folks knew how to stretch what food they had. People didn’t have a lot, but many of them shared with others because they were either better off than the next guy or wanted him to think that. Pride counted for a lot back then. People had gardens, canned their food, and raised chickens. They also learned to live on a lot less.
From the third world, I learned the value of staples such as rice and beans.
From both I learned that to survive on fifteen dollars a week, you mustn’t let anything go to waste and you better get use to living on leftovers.
Now I’m a pretty resourceful guy, so I had my shopping list made up pretty early. This is what was on it:
1 Pkg of Frozen Mixed Vegetables
1 Loaf of Bread (not sliced)
1 Quart of Milk
1 Pkg of Stewing Meat
1 Box of Rice (not Minute Rice)
1 Can of Beans
1 Dozen Eggs
2 Whole Chickens
Grand total at the check-out stand: $14.85.
I came home and started planning out my menu. The whole plan for me was based on the idea that we have become a society of convenience. We eat fast food because it’s easier than staying home and cooking it. The downside of that is that most of us have forgotten how to cook. That convenience is something we pay dearly for, not just at fast food restaurants, but at the grocery store, too.
I decided to first attack the rice. A little of that goes a long way, but I wasn’t quite sure how long it would take to cook it, so I jumped right in.
Lesson One: Read the directions. Rice isn’t hard to cook, but you really have to pay attention to the directions. Also, be willing to settle for eating your mistakes the first couple of times.
Lesson Two: Frozen means frozen. It took four days for the whole chickens to thaw enough to cook, so I survive on fried egg sandwiches for dinner, a boiled egg for lunch, and an omelet for breakfast the first couple of days. That made the last two days a veritable feast with basked chicken, beans, and mixed vegetables.
Lesson Three: You can live on leftovers. This is where all that reading about the Depression came in handy. They use to do a lot of mixing and matching back then; you know, beans and rice, etc.
So, now comes the moment of truth: How did I do?
I survived and could survive if I had to, but it made me a lot more appreciative of what I have. On the first day, I had to give a speech to a group of Rotarians in Brownwood. It was a lunch engagement, so I ate as their guest. It would have been impolite not to do so. I don’t consider that a violation of the rules because that’s a normal part of my job. Second, on the very last day, my wife’s father passed away and the house became filled with mourners bearing gifts of food. I made up for it later, though, by going back on the challenge for one extra day. Those were the only times I hedged.
But I learned a few things, too. First, things are not so bad when you are in it with someone else. We found out that by coming together and sharing with one another, we had plenty of food and perhaps even more importantly, a variety of food. We also thought about using a business model being employed more and more these days in the workplace: the power of bulk buying. Instead of each of us duplicating what the other was getting, we considered comparing notes and working as a team to stretch our food dollar even farther. We didn’t do that because we just didn’t have time to test our theory about it. Maybe we will next time.
Finally, something very unusual happened. Just like in the Great Depression, we all began to watch out for each other and to share what we had with someone else who might not have as much. We didn’t throw anything away and nothing was wasted.
It was a great chance to look at all that we have to be thankful for in this country, compared to what most people in the world do not have. It was also a sad reminder of how much we take for granted. I was ashamed, but proud, too, of how well we did.
You know, I couldn’t help but think when the idea was first pitched that it’s not a good thing when your boss asks you if you can survive on just fifteen dollars a week for food; especially in these tough economic times. I’m glad we did it, though. I learned a lot about myself.
It reminded me of a "real world" hunger exercise I was involved in some years ago. Do you know what happens to you when you don't eat? Your blood sugar falls and you become very lethargic. After just a few days, you get to the point where you are just too weak to do anything about overcoming your own predicament. It was a real education in what we must do to attack hunger on global basis. Unfortunately, there are still far too many in the world who use food as a weapon.
Still, if you really want to be impressed, look at the people of the world who feed an entire family on a fraction of what we spent. We really are the land of plenty, but keep acting like we are the only ones in the world doing the suffering. It's time to wake up, America! You can't use food deprivation as an excuse anymore.
Downing Bolls
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Is It News: Attacking the Messenger
I have been reporting the news for more than 30 years now and in that time; I’ve learned a few things. I have two clippings in my desk that have served me well over those years. The first is a “Calvin and Hobbes” cartoon. Calvin and Hobbes are the creation of cartoonist Bill Watterson. Calvin is a small boy and Hobbes is his stuffed Tiger, with whom he has imaginary adventures. In this particular cartoon, Calvin is yelling at his TV set: “You call this news?! This isn’t informative! This is a sound bite! This is entertainment! This is sensationalism! Fortunately, that’s all I have the patience for.”
The other clipping is from a 1940’s era Journalism textbook I found in an old book sale. In a chapter called, “What Is News”, I found the following summary:
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 extraordinary life = News
1 ordinary husband + 1 ordinary wife = 0
1 husband + 3 wives = News
1 bank cashier + 1 wife + 7 children = 0
1 bank cashier - $10,000 = News
1 chorus girl + 1 bank president + $10,000 = News
1 man + 1 auto + 1 gun + 1 quart = News
1 man + 1 wife + 1 row + 1 lawsuit = News
1 man + 1 achievement = News
1 woman + 1 adventure or achievement = News
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 79 years = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 100 years = News
It’s not exactly a textbook definition of “news” but I think it makes its point. It never seems to fail, though. Whenever someone sees a news story he doesn’t like, he always feels the necessity to attack the messenger and usually does so by questioning our news judgment. It’s not enough to say, “I didn’t like your story about _____.” It’s always some personal attack such as “You don’t know what news is” or “That kind of poor judgment about what is newsworthy is why I don't watch.” I have a pretty thick skin (you have to in this business), but I can’t help but feel that the many people have a pretty clouded view of what news really is -- and isn’t.
So, this week, I thought I’d turn to a fellow journalist Deborah Potter to explain things from where we sit. Deborah has more than 20 years in the business, including 16 as a network correspondent for CBS News and CNN. Here’s a portion of an article she wrote for the U.S. Department of State publication, Handbook of Independent Journalism.
“The answer to the question “What is news?” may seem obvious. News is what is new; it’s what’s happening. Look it up in the dictionary, and you’ll find news described as “a report of recent events or previously unknown information.” But most of the things that happen in the world every day don’t find their way into the newspaper or onto the air in a newscast.
So what makes a story newsworthy enough to be published or broadcast? The real answer is, it depends on a variety of factors. Generally speaking, news is information that is of broad interest to the intended audience, so what’s big news in Buenos Aires may not be news at all in Baku. Journalists decide what news to cover based on many of the following “news values”:
Timeliness
Did something happen recently or did we just learn about it? If so, that could make it newsworthy. The meaning of “recently” varies depending on the medium, of course. For a weekly news magazine, anything that happened since the previous edition the week before may be considered timely. For a 24-hour cable news channel, the timeliest news may be “breaking news,” or something that is happening this very minute and can be covered by a reporter live at the scene.
Impact
Are many people affected or just a few? Contamination in the water system that serves your town’s 20,000 people has impact because it affects your audience directly. A report that 10 children were killed from drinking polluted water at a summer camp in a distant city has impact too, because the audience is likely to have a strong emotional response to the story. The fact that a worker cut a utility line is not big news, unless it happens to cause a blackout across the city that lasts for several hours.
Proximity
Did something happen close to home, or did it involve people from here? A plane crash in Chad will make headlines in N'Djamena, but it’s unlikely to be front-page news in Chile unless the plane was carrying Chilean passengers.
Controversy
Are people in disagreement about this? It’s human nature to be interested in stories that involve conflict, tension, or public debate. People like to take sides, and see whose position will prevail. Conflict doesn’t always entail pitting one person’s views against another. Stories about doctors battling disease or citizens opposing an unjust law also involve conflict.
Prominence
Is a well-known person involved? Ordinary activities or mishaps can become news if they involve a prominent person like a prime minister or a film star. That plane crash in Chad would make headlines around the world if one of the passengers were a famous rock musician.
Currency
Are people here talking about this? A government meeting about bus safety might not draw much attention, unless it happens to be scheduled soon after a terrible bus accident. An incident at a football match may be in the news for several days because it’s the main topic of conversation in town.
Oddity
Is what happened unusual? As the saying goes, “If a dog bites a man, that is not news. But if a man bites a dog, it's news!” The extraordinary and the unexpected appeal to our natural human curiosity.
What makes news also depends on the makeup of the intended audience, not just where they live but who they are. Different groups of people have different lifestyles and concerns, which make them interested in different types of news. A radio news program targeted at younger listeners might include stories about music or sports stars that would not be featured in a business newspaper aimed at older, wealthier readers. A weekly magazine that covers medical news would report on the testing of an experimental drug because the doctors who read the publication presumably would be interested. But unless the drug is believed to cure a well-known disease, most general-interest local newspapers would ignore the story.”
On any given day, in any given newscast, we are trying to reach roughly 60,000 viewers; viewers whose tastes and interests are as varied as they are, and we have just half an hour to do that in. Admittedly, there will be occasions when we air stories that you don’t like or that you take exception to, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know our jobs.
Downing Bolls
The other clipping is from a 1940’s era Journalism textbook I found in an old book sale. In a chapter called, “What Is News”, I found the following summary:
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 extraordinary life = News
1 ordinary husband + 1 ordinary wife = 0
1 husband + 3 wives = News
1 bank cashier + 1 wife + 7 children = 0
1 bank cashier - $10,000 = News
1 chorus girl + 1 bank president + $10,000 = News
1 man + 1 auto + 1 gun + 1 quart = News
1 man + 1 wife + 1 row + 1 lawsuit = News
1 man + 1 achievement = News
1 woman + 1 adventure or achievement = News
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 79 years = 0
1 ordinary man + 1 ordinary life of 100 years = News
It’s not exactly a textbook definition of “news” but I think it makes its point. It never seems to fail, though. Whenever someone sees a news story he doesn’t like, he always feels the necessity to attack the messenger and usually does so by questioning our news judgment. It’s not enough to say, “I didn’t like your story about _____.” It’s always some personal attack such as “You don’t know what news is” or “That kind of poor judgment about what is newsworthy is why I don't watch.” I have a pretty thick skin (you have to in this business), but I can’t help but feel that the many people have a pretty clouded view of what news really is -- and isn’t.
So, this week, I thought I’d turn to a fellow journalist Deborah Potter to explain things from where we sit. Deborah has more than 20 years in the business, including 16 as a network correspondent for CBS News and CNN. Here’s a portion of an article she wrote for the U.S. Department of State publication, Handbook of Independent Journalism.
“The answer to the question “What is news?” may seem obvious. News is what is new; it’s what’s happening. Look it up in the dictionary, and you’ll find news described as “a report of recent events or previously unknown information.” But most of the things that happen in the world every day don’t find their way into the newspaper or onto the air in a newscast.
So what makes a story newsworthy enough to be published or broadcast? The real answer is, it depends on a variety of factors. Generally speaking, news is information that is of broad interest to the intended audience, so what’s big news in Buenos Aires may not be news at all in Baku. Journalists decide what news to cover based on many of the following “news values”:
Timeliness
Did something happen recently or did we just learn about it? If so, that could make it newsworthy. The meaning of “recently” varies depending on the medium, of course. For a weekly news magazine, anything that happened since the previous edition the week before may be considered timely. For a 24-hour cable news channel, the timeliest news may be “breaking news,” or something that is happening this very minute and can be covered by a reporter live at the scene.
Impact
Are many people affected or just a few? Contamination in the water system that serves your town’s 20,000 people has impact because it affects your audience directly. A report that 10 children were killed from drinking polluted water at a summer camp in a distant city has impact too, because the audience is likely to have a strong emotional response to the story. The fact that a worker cut a utility line is not big news, unless it happens to cause a blackout across the city that lasts for several hours.
Proximity
Did something happen close to home, or did it involve people from here? A plane crash in Chad will make headlines in N'Djamena, but it’s unlikely to be front-page news in Chile unless the plane was carrying Chilean passengers.
Controversy
Are people in disagreement about this? It’s human nature to be interested in stories that involve conflict, tension, or public debate. People like to take sides, and see whose position will prevail. Conflict doesn’t always entail pitting one person’s views against another. Stories about doctors battling disease or citizens opposing an unjust law also involve conflict.
Prominence
Is a well-known person involved? Ordinary activities or mishaps can become news if they involve a prominent person like a prime minister or a film star. That plane crash in Chad would make headlines around the world if one of the passengers were a famous rock musician.
Currency
Are people here talking about this? A government meeting about bus safety might not draw much attention, unless it happens to be scheduled soon after a terrible bus accident. An incident at a football match may be in the news for several days because it’s the main topic of conversation in town.
Oddity
Is what happened unusual? As the saying goes, “If a dog bites a man, that is not news. But if a man bites a dog, it's news!” The extraordinary and the unexpected appeal to our natural human curiosity.
What makes news also depends on the makeup of the intended audience, not just where they live but who they are. Different groups of people have different lifestyles and concerns, which make them interested in different types of news. A radio news program targeted at younger listeners might include stories about music or sports stars that would not be featured in a business newspaper aimed at older, wealthier readers. A weekly magazine that covers medical news would report on the testing of an experimental drug because the doctors who read the publication presumably would be interested. But unless the drug is believed to cure a well-known disease, most general-interest local newspapers would ignore the story.”
On any given day, in any given newscast, we are trying to reach roughly 60,000 viewers; viewers whose tastes and interests are as varied as they are, and we have just half an hour to do that in. Admittedly, there will be occasions when we air stories that you don’t like or that you take exception to, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know our jobs.
Downing Bolls
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)