Winds of Washington & Wall Street

Now everything's a little upside down, as a matter of fact the wheels have stopped,
What's good is bad, what's bad is good, you'll find out when you reach the top
You're on the bottom.

from Idiot Wind, by Bob Dylan

So, Republican President George W. Bush asks Congress for a bailout plan. His Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, makes the case. Just weeks before the presidential election, John McCain “suspends” his campaign, but after the plan is revised, supports the bill that goes to the House floor. Barack Obama doesn’t like the plan but backs it, too, after he’s assured that certain conditions are met. Then the bill fails. Forgive my reiteration of the obvious, but this is so bizarre, writing it out and seeing it on the screen serve as a reality check.

During news cycles, the historic dimension of what is happening can be obscured by the volatile nature of breaking news. The scale of this financial system failure and the inability of President Bush to get his own party’s House members on board, bode ill for the rest of us. And presidential politics adds an unprecedented dimension to this strange brew. Mostly, though, we have a leadership vacuum based on Pres. Bush’s record of failure and the public's distrust. Attempts by Sen. McCain to assert leadership become counter productive because of the obviousness of the political nature of these gestures. Sen. Obama’s approach, though more rational and reasoned, fails, also, to drive the political winds in non-idiotic direction. So we are stuck with House members, all up for re-election in a few weeks, too afraid to make a move that might be perceived back home as the wrong vote.

What it will take, in the next few days, is an uncommon and extraordinary approach, a difficult task rendered even more challenging by the timing of the election. But if there is greatness lurking anywhere in the halls of the Capitol, now is the time for men and women of both parties to rise above their own self interest, and political orthodoxies, and act in ways that will keep the economy moving forward. Wouldn’t it be refreshing for John McCain and Barack Obama to join together--really together--in asking Congress to act in the best interest of the country? They are not that far apart. If they won’t, maybe it’s time for one of those George H.W. Bush/Bill Clinton TV spots urging us to work together. Inaction is not an option.

Signs of the Times

For starters, I’m a city guy. Sarah Palin’s convention speech comments, about small towns and their values, quoting a known anti-Semite though not by name, probably played well with some of the “base” that the McCain candidacy desperately needs. The problem for them is that most of the country lives in or near cities and depends on metropolitan America to fuel the economy and the culture. This is in no way meant to denigrate or disrespect the values that Gov. Palin meant to extol. The problem is, however, that to make the most of our future and thrive in the world of 2008, we need to understand our cities and how they have changed and evolved since our presidential (and vice presidential) candidates were born.


Because I spend a lot of time in New York City, not just in Manhattan but out in Queens where I grew up, I’m struck by how things have changed since I moved west, back in 1979. If you don’t know NYC, Queens is where working people live. They are transit workers, cops, firemen, teachers, laborers, among them new immigrants, lots of new immigrants, who are trying to make it in America.

For the TV news folks reading this, these new immigrants represent a part of your viewing population that is usually under served and also not well represented inside the newsrooms.

My new camera in hand, I took some pictures of my old neighborhood, in the Rego Park/Forest Hills area of Queens. The first two pictures on this page are a block apart on 63rd Drive, near Queens Boulevard. The Irish, Italian, Eastern European Jews and non Jews, Germans and other early to mid 20th Century immigrants, have been replaced by Asian, Russian, and Hispanic newcomers, eager to make it in their new homeland.

One TV station general manager I know recognized the power of this group of new viewers, their intelligence and potential. He encouraged us to understand and work for the strugglers and strivers in our community. Another GM I know, confessed, when I asked him about it during an interview, that in NYC, he had no native Russian speaker on his news staff.

In San Diego, where I have lived for 19 years, there are neighborhoods throughout the city where Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese, and other Asian languages are widely spoken and part of the local culture. The picture on the left is from San Diego's City Heights neighborhood. New York and San Diego are typical of many North American cities in that way. Just about any big city is home to native languages other than English. Friends I know in Toronto, Canada, proudly proclaim how that city welcomes newcomers from around the world. When Rudy Giuliani was mayor of New York, he made it clear that he would gladly accept the immigrants other cities didn’t want. Of course, that was before Rudy ran for president. It was also before he denounced Barack Obama for supposedly thinking that Gov. Palin's hometown was not "cosmopolitan" enough. For those of you missing the irony of the ex-mayor of NYC ascribing big city elitism to Obama, I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might like to buy.

In this era of global economies and flat world enterprise, we are fortunate to attract the world’s ambitious and hopeful citizens who recognize the opportunity to contribute and thrive in the USA.

For those hard line opponents of immigration, perhaps you ought to reflect on the reasons we still attract men and women eager for a better life. Sometimes the only way to enter is illegally, probably not the first choice for those seeking work in the USA. Yet we do little to make the path to legal immigration more accessible. Our future and greatness as a country depend on continuing to be the best place in the world to be a refuge for

“...your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."

Those words, by Emma Lazarus, enshrined on the Statue of Liberty, resonate more eloquently, for me, than the Westbrook Pegler homage to small towns, quoted by Sarah Palin.

We need our small towns and our big cities. We are one country, big enough and strong enough, for all to enjoy the benefits of the American dream.

A Time to Jump In

During the 30 or so years that I worked in news, my personal policy was to be uninvolved in all political campaigns, no signs, no contributions, nothing supporting any candidate or ballot proposition. For most of my colleagues this practice was pretty typical and actually required by many news organizations. Now that I'm on my own it's time to jump back in. I say "back in" because twice before I've been a campaigner. When I was nine years old my mother took me to the local Democratic Club in Queens, and I handed out literature supporting JFK. In the 1970s, during a short break in my news career, I helped a friend with his state assembly campaign in Northern California.

So why now? For one thing, I don't work for a news organization or report the news; so I can. But more important is the importance of this particular election. As I've stated, fairly often in this blog, IrvsEyeView is not a political commentary; it is about culture and communication. Obviously, politics and those areas crossover in different ways. The most important reason I have decided to actively support a candidate in this election is that we have experienced a dramatic and profound shift in our national priorities during the last eight years. 9/11 was part of the picture but not the most important driver.

After a long news career you begin to get a sense about stories you cover and which stories have "legs". In the short term that means how long will it be a story. But in a more meaningful sense, it means the story will become a part of history, one that matters. It is safe to say that all presidential elections affect, and are integral to, history. This one, though, is the biggest in my lifetime.

With that in mind I spent the last weekend training to help lead local volunteer efforts for Barack Obama. I offer this information for two reasons. First, I've always believed in full disclosure. Most of you who read this blog probably figured out that I'm an Obama supporter. The second reason is to encourage all of you to get involved, even if you support candidates or ideas that are different from my own. Stand up for your beliefs by dedicating your time or your money. To paraphrase the Bible, we cannot stand idly by while blood is being spilled. Of course, the most important political act is voting and encouraging others to vote.

A FINAL WORD FOR MY FRIENDS IN THE NEWS BUSINESS

When journalists do their jobs well, they provide a service so valuable that it is protected by the Constitution. Messengers have often been confused with their message. We know, too, that candidates and advocates target the media with accusations of bias and favoritism. If you work in news, keep doing an honest job that focuses on the issues that are important. Personalities are integral to election decisions and strongly drive the way voters vote. So it's inevitable and vitally relevant that we learn about the individuals seeking our votes; who they are is a legitimate part of the story.

Journalists, today, don't only compete with other journalists across a range of media from print, to TV and radio, and the power of the web. Today, the news men and women who we should look to for truth telling, are competing against the powerful messages of political advertising, that often stretch the truth to the point of being untrue. Good journalism includes critically evaluating political advertising. Many politicians delight in criticizing the media. Sometimes those complaints are well-founded but often they are misdirected or a cynical political tactic. Ultimately, the voters have to decide who to vote for based on an array of messages that create impressions, in the context of our own experience and situations. For those of us who value ethical journalism, we are counting on good reporting that will help guide us through the competing images, personalities, issues, and rhetoric, that drive our choices at this critical point in history.

Conventions, Then, Now, and When

Welcome to those of you reading IrvsEyeView for the first time, because of the link in ShopTalk. For those of you who don’t know about ShopTalk, it’s a newsletter that chronicles the goings on in TV news. You can read it at TVSpy.com or sign up for email delivery. Formerly known as Rumorville USA, Shoptalk has been around since the early 1980s. The current editor is Tom Petner, a creative media executive and good guy. Thanks for the link, Tom!

Today’s blog comes to you from the airspace between Seattle and San Diego. We should be back in time to hear Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech. The media’s distraction with McCain’s unusual choice should slow down in the days ahead, as the novelty wears off concerning a relative unknown running for vice president, with a special needs infant son, and an unmarried pregnant teenage daughter. The media’s interest in Gov. Palin's family is appropriate but requires respectful restraint. However, if it becomes an excuse to avoid the real issues—and differences between the candidates and how they will govern—the media will have earned a failing grade.

Having watched most of the DNC and bits and pieces, so far, of the RNC, I have to wonder what coverage of the political conventions will look like, four years from now. As mentioned last week, after a very short time watching cable news coverage, I switched to C-Span. Others I know watched streaming web feeds. Almost everybody I know, who has an interest in politics or the media, has been critical of the coverage. Is the coverage really that bad? I’m afraid the answer is a qualified yes. With the limitations on time, and the focus on headline speeches, there is really no sense of being there and sharing in the ambience of the event. Instead we get a highly produced speech or two, and the predictable commentary about what it means. As mentioned previously, the local coverage I’ve seen has added real value for the viewer. Capturing the sense of our own community’s place in the national story gives perspective to the bigger picture.

I attended both the Republican and Democratic conventions in 1976, and a few more since then. The energy and excitement of being at a political convention is real and exhilarating. Certainly we should report critically and responsibly on the politics and issues. That’s not in question. But we should also capture the environment and ambiance of being in the big hall, or in Obama’s case the football stadium, during the major moments of these uniquely American quadrennial celebrations. I will never forget standing next to a fellow journalist, a reporter from Australia, during Jimmy Carter’s acceptance speech at Madison Square Garden in 1976. He turned to me and said, “we don’t have anything like this where I come from. This is fantastic”.

Watching C-Span last Thursday, with the Sheryl Crow performance building to a number of preliminary speeches and then Barack Obama’s acceptance, I got a sense of the special character of the American political convention. My hope is that as we report on future conventions, four years from now, and beyond, we continue the tradition of conveying the celebratory along with the politically significant.

A Vote for C-Span

A "brutish, slow-witted beast", is how comedian Jon Stewart describes the 24 hour cable news networks. And after attempting to watch coverage of the Democratic National Convention on all of them, I have to agree. This is nothing new. A very savvy media executive I know—my friend and former boss, Neil Derrough--observed back in the mid 1990s that “feeding the beast” of the 24 hour cable networks, will bring down the quality of journalism, across the board.

The broadcast network news operations have suffered, too. The loss of Tim Russert, Peter Jennings, and even Dan Rather (still alive but not on CBS this week), have diminished the strength of coverage substantially and noticeably. But, in all fairness, I may not be an honest judge of the coverage because, after the first night, I switched to C-Span. For a hard core political junkie, it’s the best option out there for watching the conventions. You get to see what’s going on without the editorial decisions of network—cable and broadcast—producers deciding what is important and what is not.

In many ways, local news is the better choice if you’re interested in “coverage”. At least you get a sense of what it means to the people from your state or city who are at the conventions. How the national campaigns relate to your own world is a reason to watch, listen, or read, local news coverage.

As the DNC reaches its high point tonight, and the RNC gets ready to start, I’ll continue to check in on the networks. I’ll try PBS, too, which I have not watched so far this week. But in the end, I have the feeling I will keep coming back to C-Span.

Midnight Ramblings from EWR to SAN

Trying to understand your own life requires the ability to clearly analyze the information that explains who you are. The reasons you might subject yourself to such an analysis can range from trying to find a new job to choosing a life partner. The point is not to over think every decision. But leading an examined life, as Socrates tells us, is a fundamental piece of living itself. And as we grow older, the ability to see in new ways grows, or at least our perspective becomes wider and deeper.

Struggles can make us stronger or wound us. Even wounds can heal and become sources of strength. How we respond to life’s triumphs and obstacles can define us in profound and powerful ways. It’s taken me 57 years to really understand one of my favorite Dylan lines, “I was so much older then, I’m younger than that now”.

Sitting on an airplane, heading home after a week away, feels like a beginning. Physical motion fascinates. How we move, get from place to place, encompasses breathtaking technological triumph; but mostly, we take it for granted. Our world is a study in contrast. Like anything else in life, we can use technology for good or bad.

As we’ve been discussing in previous blogs, the current moment is a fertile time for creativity. In part, we’re driven by the inability of our longtime employers, television stations and networks, to find ways to use the new story telling tools for positive—and profitable—purpose. We intend to embrace those possibilities.

John and Barack's Great Adventure: Class or More of The Same

A young man I know, wise beyond his years, asked me for help with a political opinion piece, back in the dark days of January. This recent Harvard grad, now enrolled in medical school at Columbia, wanted to publish an essay about his picks for the Republican and Democratic primaries. He identified the two candidates he thought would best serve the country by running a different kind of campaign, based on issues leading to a meaningful election.

His observations and insight into why the two he had in mind would run a clean campaign were refreshing. Imagine real issues being discussed, he argued, and the personal attacks of the last two plus decades being replaced by reasoned discourse and Lincoln-Douglas style debates.

Although he submitted the piece to several newspapers and online sites for publication nobody picked it up. It turns out that he was more prescient than the professional political pundits who make their livings writing about presidential elections—at least as far as predicting the nominees. He got it right. The voters chose John McCain and Barack Obama, two men most likely to be headed for the high road, our young friend believed.

Now it seems, the candidates’ handlers are at it again, most notably McCain’s campaign boss, Steve Schmidt, a Karl Rove protégé. The sad spectacle of personal attacks will only succeed if we—the voters—let it succeed. As our young observer sensed, before any votes were cast, the public wants a different type of campaign, this time. In last week’s Newsweek (click here for the column), Jonathan Alter offers some insight into candidate McCain’s discomfort with the negative attack strategy, Schmidt is promoting. Obama has also been lured into negativity but not with such clumsy and uncomfortable effect.

We have a chance for something different. Don’t let the Karl Roves of the world rule the day. Demand that the candidates, who were chosen by us—the voters—resist the advice and conventional wisdom that says negative attacks will get them elected, but in reality will damage their own legacies and our futures. And if you’re one of our friends in the media, don’t be complicit. Demand real dialogue that will help us decide who best can lead.

Media Literate News Producers

The melding of marketing with newscasts is nothing new. As producers face shrinking budgets and limited resources, promoting commercial interests as legitimately newsworthy becomes increasingly common. The use of video news releases (VNR) and content provided by companies, and other third parties, grows. Often, producers include commercial content innocently, though they are typically naïve or negligent. Product placement has even made its way onto news sets, recently and probably not so innocently. As with most ethical issues in journalism, those who see the problem as black and white really miss the many shades of gray that are the present reality.

There’s a new television news operation in San Diego that started up one week ago. Evident to any critical viewer is the reliance on content provided by third parties. They’ve done stories on Smart Cars, various movies, and the 40^th anniversary of McDonalds, complete with stacks of Big Macs and a live shot with Ronald McDonald. My purpose is not to single out this news department but to illustrate the pressures producers face. More importantly, we need to understand what is happening and level with viewers about how these stories wind up on the news, in other words--full disclosure; we should encourage media literacy in our audience and be media literate producers ourselves.

In the interest of my own full disclosure, I spent five years developing and helping manage a video news service for The Cleveland Clinic (CC). CC is among the finest academic medical centers in the world. In addition to patient care, education is integral to CC’s mission. The produced stories and video elements that CC provided to stations could be used in a number of different ways, from turnkey turnaround of tracked packages to pulling elements for inclusion in what the station was putting together itself. As a longtime advocate for ethical journalism, my position was clear. Identify what we send; then make certain that final editorial control is with the journalists, not CC. And encourage stations that use our material to localize by talking to doctors, researchers, and clinicians, independent of CC. Within The Clinic, our unit was clearly separated from marketing; the physician CEO, who was there when we started, made it clear that our role was more in line with education than advertising or promotion.

The problem with what’s happening now is that the commercial marketing content that winds up in newscasts is often neither identified nor acknowledged as such. My wife observed that there is a generation of media consumers who don’t clearly distinguish between marketing content and news. In essence, she was saying that segments of today’s audience are media illiterate. But the problem goes deeper. Many producers are not media literate, at least not in any sophisticated fashion. Ultimately, this is a leadership issue. The imperative to set standards and explain expectations falls on newsroom managers and on the culture of the organization. In the expanding world of online journalism the need for media literate writers, producers, and editors is especially critical. The amount of content available, through aggregations sites such as thenewsmarket.com, and content delivered directly to stations by third parties, can serve as valuable resources for news organizations. The challenge is to use it responsibly, critically, and level with viewers, users, and readers, about its source and even the purpose of the provider.

Journalists who figure this out, and add this level of media literate context, will actually be doing consumers a service. The option of not using such content at all is certainly laudable, but becoming less, and less, realistic. Provide honest context and full disclosure, understand the motives of content providers, and level with viewers about how something finds its way into a newscast or web story, and be critical if appropriate. That’s a brand of news that serves the public and will keep them coming back for more.

(Final full disclosure. I consulted with thenewsmarket.com, briefly, more than two years ago.)

New Century Convergence

Back in the last part of the last decade, in the last century, the word convergence rose in prominence as new technologies tempted our imaginations to envision new ways of distributing content and making money. The last part of the last sentence is always of lasting importance; if we don’t make money, new ideas usually don’t last.

Now we are engaged in a great media war, testing whether the powers of our business models, however conceived and however dedicated, can long endure (my apologies to President Lincoln for the paraphrase). As we meet on the great battlefields of the current media wars, we have to think about the next decade, but also learn from the last. With our current convergent realities —that include portable devices as well as desktops--and younger audiences more comfortable online than almost anywhere else, perhaps looking backwards, in new ways, will help us move forward.

Suppose our starting point is now, and not 1995. Rather than find ways to push comfortable content from another century—TV as we know it—take the creations crafted for the small screens of pods and smart phones and package it for the medium to large screens of LCD and plasma sets. In order for this to work, producers who work for TV stations and networks need to provide context and quality gate keeping in order to add value to the proliferating amount of video and multimedia content being produced during the last years of the first decade of our new century. That is the task for real convergence, now and in the immediate future. The content is there and the amount available is growing and will grow even more dramatically, as prices for good cameras and editing software come down. We must find the most watchable and compelling “stories”, and then make certain that the best reach the widest audience. That approach will drive real convergence for the 21^st Century. Let me know if you’re willing to try.

Telling Hard Stories That Matter

Several friends have mentioned to me that they would like to see more frequent entries in Irv’s Eye View, not necessarily the magazine length pieces I’ve been doing every couple of months. So here it goes…

A couple of recent NY Times stories on the economy merit attention. Take a look at Sunday’s big page one piece on a woman who is suffering from the predatory practices of lenders, while admitting that she needs to take responsibility, too. The other piece is in today’s paper, on the real impact of the government’s policy in dealing with the mortgage mess. What we see in these stories is how saving the financial system trumps helping ordinary Americans. There is a clear and urgent need to prevent a collapse of the banking system and this is not to suggest otherwise or diminish the importance of these efforts. But the sad truth is that the longer term health of the economy depends on qualified buyers, and current owners, being able to pay their bills. The disturbing part of what is happening now is the lack of focus on maintaining low payments for the best credit risks, whether it is in mortgages or other loans, including credit card debt. So why is this money stuff of interest to a blogger on communication, culture and the media?

The media’s ability to miss big stories, particularly if they involve complex financial matters, requires reporters to muster the best story telling skills they have in order to properly tell those stories. This is an election year which means the stakes are high, so finding stories like Sunday’s NYT profile should have a real bearing on how we vote. As the clichéd closer might go: What happens on Wall St has impact on Main St. The media, both mainstream and new, ought to lead the way in telling these important stories and making the connections in ways that matter. The more personal, backpack style journalism is uniquely well-equipped to capture the real world meaning of the musings and missteps of politicians and economists.

So don’t miss this part of the economic story and get caught up only in the price of gas and food. Tell readers, viewers, and users that those credit card come-ons that arrive almost daily in the mail should include a skull and crossbones warning--ditto, for the low rate mortgage lies. Get out there and tell these stories. It’s already been in the NY Times so we will start to see the networks and local news folks falling in line. But this economy has been with us for more than a few months, now.

Yes, there have been many stories about people losing their homes, foreclosures and fire sales. But the story is bigger than that. With the exception of the super rich, this crummy economy hits everyone. The people who pay their bills on time, every month, are feeling the squeeze and it hurts, even if they can hang on. And Washington’s remedies fall short of helping, at least so far. The irony is that if the best credit risks were rewarded, by being allowed to pay at their current best rates, that would help the failing banks. Instead, higher rates are driving away the most reliable customers and discouraging new business. That’s no way to fix a failing economy.

Fixing TV News, From The Inside Out

That he not busy being born

Is busy dying.

Bob Dylan, from It’s Alright Ma (I’m Only Bleeding)

THE DOWNWARD SPIRAL

The decline of television news, in ratings, revenue, and the public’s esteem, would drive most industries to find new ways to do business. Instead of engaging new ways of doing business, the leaders of TV stations and network news operations, persist in following old maps that lead to nowhere. Cutbacks, layoffs, and new, more efficient technology, allow newsrooms to cut costs, but there is a cost to this cost cutting. Chief among those consequences are diminished quality and employee angst. Lower quality and unhappy employees get the attention of owners and general managers when they affect revenue. So why do television news operations keep doing things the way they have done them for the last forty years? Why haven’t some of the more enlightened approaches to leading competitive, profit-driven, organizations taken hold in the world of local, network, and cable news?

The top-down, command and control, approach to running news operations has not really changed much in the 35 years I’ve worked in, or been associated with, TV news. There is a news director, or network EP, or news division president, who is in charge of a multi-million dollar enterprise, of varying scale, depending on market size or available audience. The staffs work long hours producing increasingly more content to fill the always-voracious appetites of the 24-hour news cycle. In order to feed the beasts of newscasts, websites, teases, and special projects, each news worker, has been doing more and more, with less and less. Most important is that the viewers—the public, citizens—are not being served as well as they should be. Mid course corrections, layoffs, consultant-driven new approaches, and the litany of recycled, old ideas will not cure the disease that afflicts TV newsrooms. What it will take is bold leadership willing to change the rules in order to stop dying, and begin the process of being born as a renewed business.

Perhaps you’re thinking that what I have described is a dramatic overstatement, hyperbole for effect. If you are lucky enough to work in a newsroom or organization where my description would prove alarmist, I am happy for you. But even if that is the case, what follows may prove to be valuable and even revolutionary. In fact, if you work in a place that is good, you have an advantage in probably being more receptive to new approaches and creativity.

A BETTER WAY

Servant-leadership is an approach to organizational leadership attributed to Robert Greenleaf. Greenleaf was an AT&T executive who, after a long career, retired and became a consultant and advocate for this approach. Servant-leadership, as an articulated management philosophy, has been around since the 1970s and counts among its advocates and adherents a number of top selling management authors, university professors, and business executives. Among the key tenets of servant-leadership is the idea that in order to lead we must first be servants. As is the case with most transformative ideas, the power is in the paradox; by serving we lead.

Servant-leadership is not a fad, or a cure all for every problem that businesses face. It has limitations, but it also has tremendous power. Most important, it is better suited to television news than the long-standing models of leadership that we find inadequate to solve the current crises we have been describing.

As the demands on TV news staffs have increased over the years, fertile ground for oppressive work environments sow the seeds of anger and disaffection. The bottom line creates demands; and the short-term interests of making budget and raising stock prices drive the people running newsrooms. In this climate it is easy to lose track of why we work in news. For many, serving the public interest by informing and educating the public, about important events and stories, is the reason for the job. Serving and service are at the heart of our chosen work. Yet bombastic bosses and competitive chaos often rule the day. Some of the most successful people in television news are not very nice people. My apologies if that is a surprise, but it shouldn’t be. Fortunately, some of the finest people I know, also work in the business and, usually informally, find ways to practice servant-leadership without calling it that, despite the typical culture of old style newsrooms.

NEW APPROACHES

When TV news first became profitable it still had a dominant position in terms of being one of three main sources of information, along with newspapers and radio. Often, the most outrageous content and presentation would win the day. However, the most successful formats and stations tend to be substance driven and consistently well crafted in their presentations. The quick fixes of “flash and trash” fade famously, unless there is substance. The best tabloid newscasts are deceiving, in a good way. By that I mean they are generally well written, clever, and contain interesting but ultimately meaningful content. So what I am about to say is not dependent on style or format. Good TV news connects with, and serves, the viewers. And in that spirit of serving the viewers, leaders of newsrooms and stations, need to wake up and become servant leaders who model service as the key to leadership. For this to work and become a thriving business model, we must also reorganize the way work gets done in newsrooms.

To begin with, assignments and content choices must be less directive and more collaborative. Self directed teams have to operate as independently as possible to create content that is fresh and meaningful. The servant leaders in charge have to set the tone, create meaning, and articulate a shared vision. Smart news staffers can then begin to create and serve in their own way, giving “birth” to stories, ideas, and new ways of getting the work done. Morning meetings become brainstorming sessions and idea incubators, instead of “daybook” recaps. Each reporter-photographer team, and the newscast team of the producer, anchors, and video editors, make up self directed teams within the newsroom. Teams overlap and fit within a larger structure that is department wide. A good analogy is how a football team is organized. Within one team, we have the smaller units of offense and defense. Within those units it is broken down even further by position groups. Offense and defense have coordinators and the position groups have coaches; the head coach coordinates and leads so the team is, indeed, a team.

As we know, breaking news is a critical part of any news agenda. To carry the football analogy a bit deeper, breaking news is playing defense. We have to “protect” ourselves and have a solid defense to compete effectively. But building an offense that is driven by enterprise reporting, and solid story-telling that dares to try new approaches, tell untold stories, and give voice to viewers previously ignored, will set the news operation of the future apart and create new value for viewers, and advertisers. To some extent this happens today in the best newsrooms, but we must grow and move forward so that the reliance on the police blotter and reactive coverage of car crashes ceases to be the dominant model—the 1970s model—for our time. This will only happen if great servant leaders allow storytelling to flourish, the kind of stories that explain the big picture along with the close-ups of important details, stories that have meaning to the lives of viewers. This is a sharp contrast to the cavalcade of crime and predictable features we see recycled, day-to-day, week-to-week, and year-to-year.

RISK TO GAIN REWARD

In order to create the climate where a new class of newscasts can be born, owners will have to become willing risk takers. But it is the kind of risk with substantial rewards. Properly executed, this strategy will reward the risk by creating content that will serve the viewers in ways that will compel them to watch; it will give birth to workplaces that celebrate individual contributions as part of contributing to a team; it will allow leaders to serve the staff in ways that demonstrate appreciation, shared vision, and respect. This is not a pipe dream. Businesses of all types and sizes have created new models that lead their industries, through servant leadership. Outstanding workplaces bring outstanding work to life. To continue down the path the TV news industry is headed will lead to more cuts, more disaffection, tempered only by occasional upswings in the economy, but ultimately nothing will really change. The slow tortured death of TV news as we know it is the alternative to what we are proposing. The birth of new forms and workplace-environments will be profitable and fulfilling; why not begin the process. As with any birth there is pain and a commitment of time. But the rewards are nothing short of transformational.

Obama and Clinton & Apollo and Jupiter (with thanks to Bob Dylan)

Changing of the Guards is a Bob Dylan song from the late 1970s. It’s not widely known or performed much anymore, but it seems appropriate for our current time. The opening line is “Sixteen years”. The rest of the song is a stream of consciousness in richly drawn images. But the messages resonate now--powerfully--as we plod along in the process of choosing a president.

(here are the full lyrics)

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/b/bob+dylan/changing+of+the+guard_20166482.html

When I heard the song recently that opening line made me think about the back-to-back, two-term, presidencies of the first Clinton and the second Bush. It has been 16 years of polarized politics and mean-spirited mayhem, at our expense. While the Bush failures and destructive policies are unprecedented, Bill Clinton—and now Hilary—focus on the negative, with too much delight. Barack Obama’s early success grew from his ability to inspire something better in people. John McCain, in his own way, at least offers the hope of more civility in government. Yet there is an abiding feeling, reflected in the success of attack politics, that a positive focus and failing to “go negative” equal weakness. The flawed reasoning goes something like this: “If (s)he is not tough enough to deal with negative ads, how can he stand up to tyrants?”

In the middle of Changing of the Guards there is the line, “She was torn between Jupiter and Apollo”. Jupiter represents the most powerful chief of the Roman gods. Apollo is the artistic, musical, poetic deity, with the ability to function as a healer. As a nation we must not be afraid to encourage the “Apollos” of the world to step up and lead. But when we are afraid, Jupiter becomes the dominant model of leadership; power, the story goes, is needed to confront power. Remembering President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s warning, that fear itself is what we must fear most, Apollo should be our leadership model at this critical moment in history. Right now, Barack Obama best represents these ideals.

Obama must not be afraid, as he is forced to defend himself against charges of elitism. Instead he ought to fearlessly face the fact that his greatest test will be building a government that will inspire trust and respect, both of which have been damaged during the last 16 years. Obama’s strategic vision and actual plans for how this government will operate should be revealed right away, with as much detail as possible. Rather than simply a list of policy initiatives, Obama ought to tell us, today, the way things will really work if he is elected. With little executive experience, this is particularly critical for the senator from Illinois. Share an honest plan that will include a sense of each cabinet member’s role, rich with examples and metaphors that will help us understand how a President Obama would govern. And don’t be afraid to share ideas about specific personnel. If this is done well, it will serve as a compelling piece of the puzzle that voters will have to solve as they choose between Jupiter and Apollo in the months between now and November.

Hilary Clinton has been a remarkable campaigner, winning important primaries and prolonging the race. Much has been already written about the cost of the enmity created and the negativism used to keep her campaign alive. And the comparisons of the charismatic male in whose shadow she worked as first lady, to the charismatic candidate she now opposes, are meaningful but overstated. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama should never be confused with each other. Hilary and Bill share many qualities and seem more alike than different, at least in style if not speaking ability; Hilary and Barack would bring complementary qualities to a ticket or government. When Barack creates his blueprint, maybe Hilary should be penciled in as attorney general or the first to fill a Supreme Court vacancy. Again, don’t be afraid; use the best and brightest our county has to offer, a category in which Sen. Clinton clearly belongs.

We are reminded, as we write, that our focus and interests are more communication and culture, rather than politics and government. The media, new and old, would be well-served by finding new metaphors for the campaign and the future of the country. Our demographically driven, map focused realities are critical to understanding, but offer only one dimension. To place our future in new contexts—some of them even ancient, like mythology—will serve all of us by bringing needed insight and clarity to the task of choosing the next president. Unless we see in new, creative ways, we will be stuck in the divisive and destructive politics of the last 16 years.

The Future of News

Most television newscasts, on most stations, in most parts of the country, are mostly the same. The “actors” are different, both the on-air anchors and reporters, and the persons who are covered by the news team. But the stories and situations are usually predictable. How TV news covers those situations, and reports those stories, needs to change in order to grow and become important to those who are currently watching and the many who don’t watch, but would if the programs meant more to them.

As in most arenas, innovation in technology precedes innovation in content and form; TV news is way behind in terms of delivering its content in ways that take advantage of the newest and most meaningful technologies. Too often, form and technology become the story instead of the story itself driving the coverage. Story fundamentals remain the heart and soul of good and compelling media. The dramatic narrative of daily news coverage can benefit and grow by using specific new technologies in more effective and immediate fashion.

First, smaller cameras give news men and women advantages and, literally, angles yet to be explored and developed. Too often, however, the new breed of “VJs” (Video Journalists) are trying to tell stories in the old way, when a reporter and photographer—usually with a large camera—went out and covered traditional packages, or voiceovers and sound bites. Instead, these new story tellers should be looking to a more inchoate (sorry for the SAT word, but it works) and fundamental method of connecting with the audience. When storytellers came and entertained and educated their audience, whether their own family or a larger community, they did it simply around the dinner table, campfire, local bar or coffee shop. Now we have incredible tools to help tell those stories, to millions of people with pictures, sound, graphics and the attractive human story-teller, who is now accessible to her (or his) listeners and viewers.

In order to move forward we need a combination of talented risk takers and newsroom employees who are driven by a pioneering sense of excitement. Enlightened leadership may not drive these changes, but would certainly accelerate the pace. More likely, economic realities will lead the charge forcing the current realignments we are seeing at stations across the country. For those companies and organizations willing to risk, for great reward, the benefits will be substantial. We have seen how “viral videos” take on a life of their own. Younger viewers want new forms that are clearly different from mom and dad’s evening newscasts. Mom and dad, who are the bedrock 25-54 demographic that watches news, will adjust if the content and delivery are relevant and compelling; new formats must be well-done, however. It is not enough to try something new. Something new must be worth watching and provide value that helps viewers get through the day.

The other technological imperative driving new ways of delivering the news is more akin to traditional radio than TV. The web based components of news departments have to offer the news as it happens, in engaging ways. Instead of waiting for the evening newscast to air, developing stories have to be shared, responsibly, as they are developing. The world wide web and its progeny—iPhones, Blackberries, and phone delivered content—must drive the traditional newscasts, not the other way around.

After long years of not much changing in TV news we have an exciting opportunity to link good TV with new technologies in ways not possible until now. As is the case with most of television, one big breakthrough will spawn imitators and copycats. That is good. The way media evolves is not a zero sum proposition. We know that radio did not put the movies or newspapers out of business, nor did TV. For that matter radio, TV, the internet, newspapers coexist and evolve. But as the media scholar Neil Postman teaches, there are winners and losers with any new technology. Someone in the TV news universe is going to win big when it comes to really using the new technologies in ways that benefit everyone.

New Suspects

In the classic film Casablanca, after the Nazi Major Strasse is shot, the prefect of police, Capt. Renault, tells his men to “round up the usual suspects”. If you remember the movie, you’ll recall that Renault represents the status quo, the man who is a survivor, with just a few redeeming qualities. Of course Renault was not a fool; he knew what he was doing. But Renault is not an innovator or a real leader, not the kind of person who makes a difference. The real leaders in the movie are Rick, memorably played by Humphrey Bogart, and the resistance leader, Victor Lazlo. These two compete for the affection of the beautiful Ilsa, played by Ingrid Bergman.

As I watch what is happening these days in local television news I’m reminded of how many of the “leaders” at stations are more like Capt. Renault than Rick or Lazlo. It seems that whenever there is an opening for a job that could make a difference, the GMs and group executives reach out to the “usual suspects”. Nobody gets upset, nobody gets too excited or takes much risk, but nothing really changes, either.

With this week’s news of massive layoffs at CBS stations, and recent cuts at many other stations, you wonder why bold leadership is in such short supply. The consequences of these latest cost saving moves will declare themselves in the months and years ahead. The already diminishing audience for local TV news will shrink even more. Unlike industrial layoffs where fewer assembly line workers mean fewer cars produced, TV stations slash these jobs and keep on programming the same—sometimes more—amount of content. Inevitably, the quality diminishes and the diminishing quality means fewer viewers: the ultimate lose-lose situation.

If you doubt the truth of these assertions do a little analysis of the last ten years in local TV news. The mantra of the late 80s and early 90s was “do more with less”. Then it became, “do even more with even less”. As more got done with fewer people, the audience eroded, fragmented, and went elsewhere for content. On top of all of these cuts, many of the “usual suspects” failed to recognize the power of the emerging juggernaut known as the “web”. Oh, they finally came around but not before real innovators created better websites and ways of distributing content.

If you doubt that quality still sells, look at the number one market in country. WABC continues to work at producing an outstanding product, by keeping good people in important jobs. For these efforts, Channel 7 Eyewitness News is rewarded with good ratings and viewer loyalty. This doesn’t happen simply by throwing money at the news department. It requires good people who know their jobs and understand the audience. But this scenario is increasingly unusual. And as good as WABC is, it is a traditional newscast much like what stations have been airing—with obvious updating in style—since the 1970s.

So we are now at a critical point in the evolution of television news. With a bad economy the imperative to become more creative is categorically critical. We have to use the technologies of today to touch viewers with stories that matter in ways they can access easily and enjoyably. Dare to be different but tell stories that matter. Try new approaches but remember the foundation of good story telling, meaningful content. As a producer at NHK, Japan’s national network, told me a few years ago, “see like an eagle, taking in the big picture, but also see like an ant, taking in the small details that make the big picture meaningful and interesting”.

And when you are looking to create don’t only seek out the usual suspects. They may be predictable, even safe, but the unusual suspects can help us all see in new ways.

Communication Studies and David vs. Goliath

Then they'll raise their hands,
Sayin' we'll meet all your demands,
But we'll shout from the bow your days are numbered.
And like Pharaoh's tribe,
They'll be drownded in the tide,
And like Goliath, they'll be conquered.
Bob Dylan, When the Ship Comes In

Flying west, high above the North American continent, the words of Bob Dylan come clearly through the high fidelity earphones attached to my generation five iPod. Todd Gitlin's Media Unlimited on my lap, the messages about messages and information present an eerie counterpoint to the mythical incantations of the man who was once called the voice of a generation.

The great dancer, director, and choreographer, Twyla Tharp writes in her book, The Creative Habit, that playwright John Guare says that every tale tells one of two stories. They are Romeo and Juliet and David and Goliath. Whether you agree with Guare or not, it's an interesting lens from which to view Gitlin and Postman. And it seems, also, to resonate in our discussions.

We've identified the Goiaths as the big corporations that control the media onslaught. So who are the Davids? And what will be their contribution? Are we the ones, students and academics, who will lead the way and serve as a counterweight to the Goliaths? Or will it be some young entrepreneur who instead of selling to Murdoch or Google decides to keep her creation and rival the giants? Or will it be a giant like Google that professes a creed of “Don't be Evil”?
Remember, too, that even David, the greatest King of Israel and the forebear of Jesus, was a complicated and tortured soul. The future King who killed the giant becomes a killer himself. David sends Uriah to his death so David can have Bathsheba. And David's son, Absalom, meets an untimely death, a source of tremendous grief for the great King David.

When we work to enlighten the public and weaken the Goliaths what follows in their place? Leadership and artistry confront money and power. The intellectual path influences but seldom compels. Our field of Communication Studies offers a vantage point from which we must bring a practical, real world approach to our deep learning and insight. How do we get beyond the righteous exhortations and condemnations about the status quo?

Stanley Deetz's ideas about practical theory offer a bit of hope for the future. Professor Deetz, himself, engages the corporate world through his work. Michael Schudson is a University of California, San Diego, Communications scholar; like Deetz, he engages the world of business and offers insight. My experience has been that many in the capitalist world are open to a certain type of intellectual who can get off his or her high horse and help handle higher pursuits that are also profitable.

Perhaps this is a utopian capitalism that may never arrive; but it is a worthy goal, more realistic than many of the failed socialist experiments. But if we are to be the Davids opposing the corporate Goliaths we must not forget that once the giant is neutralized leadership is required. And simply knocking down the giant does not make the world better. What follows must be a compelling and rich alternative. Postman is correct in his assessment of capitalist radicals. We need them to drive progress and shape the world. But we must not let them abuse their power. We must help them strive to reach higher and to remember that even the great King David faltered after his boyhood victory over Goliath.

Gonzaga Reflections: Week Three and Four

All power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Lord Acton

Name me someone that’s not a parasite and I’ll go out and say a prayer for him.

Bob Dylan, from Visions of Johanna

As Noam Chomsky fights his battles with what he describes as the powerful, dominant elite, I have to wonder if Prof. Chomsky is deserving of our prayers, or even our praise. Whenever a social critic of Chomsky’s intellectual power makes his case we should listen and learn. We must also ask where is he coming from and where will it lead us? He presents his view that the dominant mass media, aided by corporate and government public relations, manufacture a narrative that perpetuates the power of the powerful. To follow his reasoning, much of society is complicit, from public officials to those working in the media, especially at the networks and the New York Times. He further explains that about 20 percent of the public, the intellectual class, influence the other 80 percent. If you are reading this you are probably in the 20 percent that takes the time and has the intelligence to fall into the group of influencers.

Fifty one years ago the head of General Motors told a Congressional Committee that “What’s good for General Motors is good for the country”. GM is no longer the power it was in the 1950s. In the era of globalization Toyota might be more powerful and, in my opinion, certainly makes better cars. Noam Chomsky would probably not have agreed with GM in 1955 and I’d bet he doesn’t today. The point, of course, of GM’s well known one liner was that if the company does well, its workers do well, its customers get a good car for a good price, and the economy chugs along in 1950s bliss; it is capitalism as it was meant to be! At the very least it’s the narrative that capitalists want us to believe. For the most part it’s a pretty compelling story. The world’s leading competing narrative at the time was Communism, with its utopian aspirations and Stalinist history and reality. In the middle of these two super powerful narratives were the social democracies of Europe, the “Great Society” of the 1960s US, and the other moderate streams of political economy, from Japan to Canada.

As societies evolve so do their media. That the media tend to reflect the values and realities of their communities and nations is the heart of the argument in opposition to Chomsky. As we evolve, Dr. Chomsky fails to present an alternate narrative and power structure superior to the one he deconstructs and criticizes. In the film, Manufacturing Consent, we hear the Dutch Defense Minister accuse Chomsky of having ideas that are contrary to the values of representative democracy, rather, he argues, Chomsky’s values are more in line with direct democracy. Later in the film Chomsky cites the early Kibbutzim in Israel, as an example of the social model that would allow for a media environment powered by the people. The other one that comes to mind is the small town meeting in Vermont, where individuals rule directly without intermediary elected legislators or executives. The problem is that the Israeli Kibbutz and the New England Town Meeting are extremely small scale enterprises and have not thrived except in very limited circumstances. So with those exceptions duly noted it seems there will always be “elites” in any society. And, in general these elites wield power, often responsibly but not always. Noam Chomsky does not like the people in power and what they stand for, and I doubt that he ever will. But their power is far from absolute and the news media have served to check that power, more effectively in some periods than in others.

So it comes down to who is in power. “Power to the people”, was a rallying cry in the 1960s and 70s, also a fairly popular John Lennon song. Since Manufacturing Consent was released, the World Wide Web has become a major platform for media. Much of the content on the web is produced by the same corporations that control the large newspapers and the evening news on the networks. But the web also serves as a platform for distribution of individual expression, unrivaled in history. Really Simple Syndication or RSS makes it possible for anyone with a computer and website to create content and distribute it easily and efficiently. Many high school students regularly post their work on iTunes. So the powerful still have power and our vigilance to guard against corruption is required now as it has been in the past. The web, however, has given more power to the people.

The powerful elite—as a class--have existed throughout history. The values of humility, good will, and the Golden Rule drive our religious, spiritual, and ethical traditions. But even among institutions dedicated to these values, there is an elite group. As members of the 20 percent that influences the other 80 percent, we should look at ourselves and the narratives we perpetuate. Our ability to read Chomsky, Hall, Herman, Marcuse, and many others gives us power, whether we agree with them or not. And who is to say the narratives of Chomsky and like minded theorists are any more compelling than the ideas of capitalism expounded by the so called dominant elites? When it comes to choosing which elites to follow, I’d favor a socially responsible capitalist to the intellectually engaging but wrong headed approach of Dr. Chomsky.

Perhaps adding the preceding line to the Dylan quote from above will make more sense now.

“The peddler now speaks to the countess who’s pretending to care for him,

Saying, name me someone that’s not a parasite and I’ll go out and say a prayer for him.”

In a societal sense, who is it that cares for us?

Reflections on Communication by Computer

This blog is an assignment for the Communication and Leadership Program at Gonzaga University.

Buying an airline ticket, ordering a book from Amazon, or registering for a class, all these transactions are easily and efficiently performed on-line. Telling a loved one that a family member is ill, that a pet died, or that you’re engaged, all these relational messages are handled with more sensitivity by phone or in person. When looking at communication from a relational versus a transactional perspective think of a spectrum, not absolutes. When you buy a book in person, you are relating to the salesperson and cashier. When you discuss a pet’s death, numerous transactions evolve. In exploring the richness of Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and comparing it to other forms of communication, including Face to Face (F2F), the lenses of transaction and relation can help us see more clearly.

The transactional part of CMC makes life easier and provides access to options not available F2F or by phone. Making an airline reservation is a good example. On websites like Expedia or Orbitz you can look at all the flights available and get the best prices. This is a significant advantage over going to a ticket office or phoning individual airlines. And it doesn’t end with the reservation. As our classmate Megan mentioned on the discussion board, you can use an automated kiosk at the airport to print your boarding pass. With some airlines, Southwest in particular, if you don’t check in by computer, you're at a disadvantage. You don't get the best seats if you wait till you get to the airport.

On the relational side of CMC, rapid growth is attracting advertisers and corporate owners. The examples of relational CMC mentioned at the start of this blog are fairly clear, but they are presented rhetorically, to make a point and explain a distinction. My Space, Facebook, and Friendster, represent leading examples of social networking sites (SNS). Their allure is how they connect people to each other and build on-line communities. Using graphics, photos, video and sounds, users have the tools to create rich environments, and their identity. How the users' homepages reflect particular identities influences the friends they make and the status they achieve, in the online world. Whether that identity reflects reality or fantasy, or lies somewhere in between, can be of more importance to the host of the page than those who read it, according to communication scholar Daniel Chandler.


Personal homepages may not always be of great importance to those who come across them, but they’re profound, creative opportunities for people to reflect on themselves and think about how they want to represent themselves to the world (Thurlow, 2004, p.99).

When my younger daughter got a letter with the name of her freshman roomate, they immediately connected on Facebook. This led to a phone call. When they met F2F, they were already acquainted. Apparently, their representations on Facebook were realistic constructions and neither was surprised.

Much like the off line world, the SNS world is filled with opportunities and threats. Take a look at my earlier blog below on Deadwood as a metaphor for the commercial side of the web. As for threats, a few weeks ago we all received a four-page article from Gonzaga’s Vice President for Student Life, explaining some of the dangers on SNS.


You also might want to take a moment and reflect on the physical safety of this tool when posting information about yourself. No expectation of privacy combined with the full range of humanity represented in these forums means that you may be exposing yourself to someone who may not have the same values or assumptions about appropriate behavior as you, or may even have a mental defect or disease which could put you at risk as a victim of criminal behavior. Very likely you would not place a placard in the front of your house or dorm describing intimate details of your personal life, private sexual
matters, detailed comings and goings or anything else that someone less careful and competent than you might construe as an invitation for communication or even harassment and stalking that could prove dangerous. Use physical space as your guide. What you wouldn't put on a poster on your dorm room door you might want to think two or three times about posting on-line (Gonzaga University, 2006, p. 3).

What we do in the public part of CMC is visible in ways that can be destructive and long lasting. The world can be a dangerous place and media, to paraphrase McLuhan, are extensions of ourselves (1964, Title Page).

When it comes to conducting business transactions online we find a rich environment filled with opportunity. Besides the simple examples previously cited, think about E-Bay and the web based marketplace it enables. You can find almost anything. Specialty sites for everything from wine to windsocks are available; all it takes are a Google search and a couple of clicks.

The relational side of CMC sizzles with excitement but only goes so far. From dating sites to SNS, people are using their computers to connect. My question, though, is where does it lead? Ultimately, if F2F is the end point, or the beginning of a new phase, the richness of what Martin Buber describes as the I-Thou relationship is possible, facilitated by CMC. But through CMC alone, we are left with the more routine and typical interactions characterized by I-It (1958). Most of our temporal life is lived in this realm; but the most intimate human relations require certain senses, which can only be imagined in the world of CMC. As for the spiritual dimensions of CMC, I invite you to consider its role and potential. I intend to do so in the weeks ahead.


References
Buber, M. (1958). I and Thou (Second Edition). New York: Charles Scribner Sons.

Gonzaga University, (2006). Thoughts on Facebook. based on: "Thoughts on Facebook," Tracy Mitrano, copyright, Cornell University, 2006.

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media:The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Thurlow, C., Engel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer Mediated Communication, Social
Interaction and The Internet. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Lasers in the Jungle, Podcasts & I Love NY

Irv's Eye View-Lasers in the Jungle & Podcasts

by Irv Kass

Sunday, 29 October 2006

http://www.MediaMogirl.com Adapted from an online class discussion in the Gonzaga University Communication and Leadership Program These are the days of lasers in the jungle Lasers in the jungle somewhere Staccato signals of constant information A loose affiliation of millionaires And billionaires and baby These are the days of miracle and wonder This is the long distance call The way the camera follows us in slo-mo The way we look to us all --Boy in the Bubble, by Paul Simon When Paul Simon sang those words in 1986 we were 11 years past Vietnam and five years before the first Iraq War. There was actually an Army recruiting commercial, at one time, featuring lasers in the jungle. Artists identify trends and social dynamics in ways that are, at once, clear and compelling. With the miracle and wonder of technology come consequences. Here's a link to the full lyrics that make the point more completely than just the excerpt cited above. Better yet, listen to the song if you have it. http://www.lyricsfreak.com/p/paul+simon/the+boy+in+the+bubble_20105881.html Now we find ourselves, once again, mired in a war. Indeed, most of our lives we've been in wars, both hot and cold. The current conflict was made possible by the events of 9/11/01, we are told. And so... I write this from New York City. As a native of the city--born in Brooklyn, raised in Queens, and received my undergraduate education in Greenwich Village at NYU in the shadow of the newly erected Twin Towers--I have deep affection for this place and its people. My official residence and voting address are in San Diego County, California, USA, literally on the other edge of the continent. But my parents and older daughter are New Yorkers and I spend the equivalent of a couple of months a year here. So from this center of our civilization, the most attractive target for terrorists because of what it stands for, the social dynamics of our communication technologies are amplified and multiplied. Last week I attended a "Podcasting Summit" convened by the NAB (National Assoc. of Broadcasters). Most attendees were there to figure out how to use podcasts in practical ways. We heard a great deal about "monetizing" podcasts, something I happily embrace. So it was instructive to see the pods in podcast being widely used. Riding the subway from Queens to the Javits Convention Center in Manhattan, iPods were everywhere. Old, young, black, white, Asian, Hispanic, a rough count yielded about every seventh person with earbuds of some sort drowning out the screeching sounds of subway cars. As strange as it might sound, the NY subway is a comfortable place for me. Maybe it's because my mother had me riding the trains before I was born. Something about the motion and the mixed multitude, to steal a Biblical phrase, bring me comfort. Having my iPod added to the experience and lessened the noise. Ultimately all the tech tools we use, email, iPods, near supersonic travel speeds, cell phones, etc., combine to make the mobile lifestyle possible. The social dynamics of doing business with clients in several cities is nothing special these days. In the "flat world" described by Thomas Friedman it can be an advantage. The social dynamic of actually showing up and meeting people F2F (first time I've ever used that abbreviation) can enrich relationships that are usually engaged by computerized communication. The ability to be this mobile is a profound and relatively recent shift in social dynamics. Members of my immediate family can live in three of the four corners (NYC, Seattle, and San Diego) of the US, and be together electronically and physically with relative ease. How different from the world of our grandparents. When my older daughter was in high school, she wrote an essay about a table. Her computer was sitting on a library table that had belonged to my maternal grandfather. We had the table shipped from NY to CA. I'm certain my mother's father wrote letters, conducted business, and used this table in ways people did in the early part of the 20th century. Now my daughter was using the same table with new tools, a computer connected to the internet. In the early part of the last century my parents' immediate families would not voluntarily live far away from their families, too hard to stay in touch. Yet all four of my grandparents fled the Russian Pale of Settlement to escape the pogroms and tyranny of the Czar. Trains and steam ships got them here; long waits between letters kept them in touch with the old country. They crossed the threshold of New York Harbor, welcomed by the well-known words of Emma Lazarus. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.... http://www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0874962.html (full text) Today's new immigrants have phone cards decorated with their homelands' flags, and email and websites coded with national identifiers that speed messages across borders and oceans at the speed of light. They are welcomed by some and reviled by others. The other day, I sat in a Russian restaurant where the wide screen high def TV was playing news reports received on satellite directly from Russia. It's been 98 years since my grandfather landed at Ellis Island. He could have understood the words spoken on that TV; I cannot. As mentioned earlier, the convention I attended was at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center. Javits was a long time US Senator from New York. The Senator was something that sounds odd today, a "liberal Republican". He died in 1986 the same year the Javits Center opened. There is a statue of the late senator at the entrance to the building with this quote from his autobiography: "For me, New York will always have the luster and magic of a brand new adventure around every corner, vitality coursing every street. It is still the most exciting city of modern civilization. "I conceive of the new man of intellect as a worker determined to light the world...as a man whose credo is to learn to teach, to roll up his sleeves and give to the people he is bound to live with some of the intellect, the spirit and the beauty which animates him". Senator Javits was a man who apparently had not yet learned about gender inclusive language. The quote is from another time, not so long ago, but another time, which explains the language. The main message, though, endures. http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_K._Javits So we, the users of technology, should humbly remember the words of Sen. Javits, even as we meet to learn how to "monetize" the new technologies. After all we are all learners and teachers.

Google, You Tube, Deadwood

Irv's Eye View- On Google, Deadwood and Elucidation

Written by Irv Kass

Wednesday, 11 October 2006 http://MediaMogirl.com

Hello, again, everybody. With Google forking over the big money to buy You Tube it makes you wonder if it’s the end of a chapter, and the beginning of a new one. Google is a great company, one I would be pleased to work for or have as a client. Its corporate slogan of“Don’t Be Evil” is an amazing approach for a corporation of its size, influence, and capitalization. We all benefit from such an approach and the success and competencies of Google. But spending 1.6 billion dollars on You Tube? Why wouldn’t this innovative company build its own video site and do it better than any other player in the game? Oh, wait, the company started to do that with Google Video but seems to have gotten off track. For some reason, Google’s big announcement at the Consumer Electronics Show earlier this year focused on building relationships with Hollywood and the networks to distribute more traditional content. To its credit Google also emphasized the open marketplace, but seems to have put its money on Hollywood and the big players, at least until now. Ultimately it will be a combination of content from a variety of distribution sources that will work on the Web, but the excitement, and the money apparently, is where it should be with the emerging grass roots digital video world that will only get better. But Google’s big expenditure reminds me of the late Senator from Illinois, Everett Dirksen, who pointed out that—and I’m paraphrasing—a million here, a million there, and it starts to add up. In our new millennium dollars just substitute a b for the m in million. The real point is that Google and other well capitalized companies should be leading the charge. Yes, it’s exciting that entrepreneurs like the founders of You Tube and My Space before it, get windfalls from Google and News Corp. But we, as users of the digital video resources, have to be vigilant and reject the onslaught of cross-promotional noise that big money owners are likely to inject. The very smart folks at these companies will be wise to pay attention and not tinker too much with their newly acquired and very pricey assets. Virginia Heffernan of the New York Times, http://screens.blogs.nytimes.com has some interesting takes on how the emerging world of You Tube and other open video posting sites are heating up the cold medium of television. When you watch what’s happening, the HBO drama, Deadwood, comes to mind. It’s kind of like the Wild West out there. Now, it’s the not the cleaned up version of John Wayne westerns, or Gary Cooper for that matter, but the real F-You, kick your ass version that we see on Deadwood. I’ve never watched an entire episode of Deadwood from start to finish. That’s because I’m a late adopter of the show and need to catch up. One day I’ll rent the first season and get caught up enough to engage full episodes. But the compelling nature of the show is inescapable. The villains, the heroes, the language and the ambiguity of individual characters give it an almost Shakespearian quality. And nobody really plays fair. So it’s not a nice town but it’s never dull and there are ample opportunities for deadly failure and breakthrough success. At this particular point in the development of video on the web it will become increasingly messy and also exciting to see who emerges as the breakout winners in the crowded streets of VlogWood, worldwide. We can only hope that the evolving character of that world, our world, turns into a positive—not weak by any means—force that will not only entertain but enlighten and elucidate. A good friend—Rolland Smith--who you may know from his work in television news is an eloquent advocate for elucidation as a prime goal for media. www.RollandGSmith.com Creative use of new media can be tough, fun, and it can also elucidate. It’s not just about conflict, though conflict and tension draw interest. It’s how the tension resolves or is left unresolved that’s important. So, kick some ass, go F yourself or whoever is F’ing with you, but in the end, aspire to be like William S, and his progeny, and leave us with something that elucidates.