One of my favorite YouTube video bloggers is c0nc0rdance. He posts regularly on scientific topics, ranging from creationism to non-nutritive sweeteners to homeopathy. He approaches all his topics meticulously, often providing something of a scientific literature review for the masses on key topics. His scientific rationalism and opposition to creationism, however, paint a bulls-eye on his videos, and YouTube is all too happy to provide the tools with which to attack. Here is c0nc0rdance's video summary of his recent trials and tribulations. I've read similar accounts on other sites, including a ContentID copyright ownership notice filed against an individual who recorded a walk outdoors, with the only music being bird songs, and posted it to YouTube.
Now, there are many folks who, for various reasons, disagree with c0nc0rdance's posts. This turns out, however, to be a little beside the point. The point is that Google, in an effort to avoid lawsuits like the ongoing Viacom one and preserve the Safe Harbor component of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, has made it too easy to censor the content of others on YouTube with little recourse on the part of the censored. Now, from the perspective of a legitimate copyright holder or licenser, YouTube's DMCA take-down and ContentID tools help either remove infringing content or at least attempt to monetize that content. The critical problem is the lack of those who use these tools, including the "Flag as inappropriate" tools made available to all those who watch content on YouTube, is that they contain barely a modicum of due process and assume the individual being targeted is guilty until the accuser gives up. There is an appeal process, but the appeal process can be countered by the accuser and the accuser's determination generally stands.
Google is not an agent of the law, so due process is certainly not required of it. Still, their corporate mantra is to "do no evil". Even taken with a grain of salt, the lack of any meaningful review in these various censorship tools or the lack of requirement that claimants actually provide evidence is problematic. Speaking up for what you believe, especially in the face of concerted efforts to silence you, takes a lot of guts. Allowing such easy means of shutting down opposing views, even under the guise of legitimate copyright enforcement, is awfully stifling of free speech and open discourse.
So, what can be done about this? I propose a solution. This would be a relatively easy thing for YouTube to implement, and it is not a solution for all things. Those who wish to voice their opinions anonymously would not be helped, but for folks like c0nc0rdance, this could make all the difference. I propose that YouTube have a special registration option for Approved Accounts. Approved Accounts would be those for which the account holder has provided his or her name and personal or business information, including address, with some form of documentation for confirmation. Where an Approved Account has been hit with some form of censorship/copyright request, YouTube could allow an appeal to automatically go in favor of the poster of the video. Here is where it gets tricky. In the case of a copyright holder filing notice, if they are convinced their copyrights are being infringed, they could ask YouTube to provide the name and address of the Approved Account holder who posted the video, but only if they are registered with YouTube and are willing to share their own legal contact information. The poster of the video would be notified that their information was provided to a claimant and the claimant's information would be provided in return. At that point it would be up to the claimant to use existing legal tools to pursue infringement.
In the case of the publicly available "flag as inappropriate" button, the Approved Account process would not be much help. The only way to fix abuse of this feature is for YouTube and Google to make a concerted effort to review material carefully and with an eye toward context. An informational video about breast feeding, mammograms, or testicular cancer may show parts of the human anatomy that are typically regarded as inappropriate public content, but the context is such that the display is not scurrilous in the least, and therefore not broadly objectionable.
If YouTube continues to allow blatant abuse of the censorship tools it makes available, without appropriate review of the claims, YouTube will rapidly degenerate further and send those with legitimate original content and political and social views elsewhere. YouTube is already a service saturated with naval gazing and empty content. It cannot continue to drive away those who have a voice and need an outlet.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Monday, January 25, 2010
The Kindle: A Review and a Recipe for Survival
I checked out a Kindle 2 from work a couple weeks ago. I love books and I love reading. I like the feel of paper pages and the durability of a good book. I find I can't read extended works on computer screens because of problems with eye strain. Can the Kindle overcome these roadblocks and help me better appreciate digital texts?
While using the Kindle for reading is quite unlike reading a book, it does allow one to read text and view black and white images quite clearly in even low light without any of the eye strain associated with traditional electronic displays, like LCD or CRT displays. The E Ink display is indeed clear and crisp, and the Kindle itself is thin and light. I read through several novels on it with no headaches. I tackled a novel by a friend of a friend on the device and the first 11 Conan novels by Robert E. Howard. Because the display only draws power when it changes or is updated I only had to charge the device once, when I first got it.
While the Kindle is reportedly not as friendly to ebook formats as the current crop of Sony Readers, the new firmware allows it to view PDF files in addition to its native format and unprotected MobiPocket files. Have a Word document you need to read? Just use the MobiPocket Publisher program to convert your Word document to MobiPocket format and transfer it over. To the computer the device shows up as a flash drive with a few preset directories, and with 4 GiB total storage there's more than enough room for whatever textual materials you want to throw at it.
The kindle remembers your last location in each of the ebooks contained on it and allows you to create a number of bookmarks for each ebook. Further, you can highlight passages for later reference. There is a QWERTY keyboard of sorts on the face of the reader below the screen that lets you enter text, especially useful when utilizing the device's search function, which allows you to find words within the ebooks.
It is not without flaws, however. The E Ink display is slow to refresh, a problem not, reportedly, unique to the Kindle. As time goes by and the technology develops I'm sure refresh times will improve. As the screen is now it's not a problem, really, but the refresh delay is quite noticeable. You can't scroll the documents you view but only navigate a page at a time, much like with a real book. Another gripe is that too much of the face is devoted to the QWERTY keyboard, making the device larger than necessary. This is just a symptom of a larger problem: the device tries to be too much. The result is that many of the functions don't work as well as on a dedicated device and the Kindle carries too high a price tag. At $260 the Kindle is a luxury. "But it does so much," you say. "It allows you to buy books via the cellular connection on the go and it can read books out loud and play MP3 files, and who knows what else! Amazon's even making an app store for it!" I explored the narration via text to speech functionality and found it lacking. It's reluctant to activate and sounds, as expected, relatively computerized. The device also has trouble with MP3 files, playing them back with some odd noise in the background.
As it is now, the Kindle 2 is a device meant for people with disposable income. This device simply isn't ready for the masses. We already have cell phones that try to do everything, we don't need a second device to lug around. Rather, I think the future of the e-reader market is dependent upon appealing to the masses. Many technology bloggers think the future of the ereader is in the same direction the cell phone has gone: a multifunction computing device with various apps that has moved from being an effective phone to a portable digital gadget that just happens to offer passage phone capabilities. They see the ereader as needing app stores and touch screen capabilities and all sorts of other add-ons. I say anything that increases the cost and brings it into competition with cell phones is a bad thing.
No, the recipe for success is to simplify. We need a reliable, durable, and above all affordable device that does what it does well, rather than many things in a mediocre fashion. I think manufacturers need to push toward making the wonderful E Ink display technology cheaper. The device that finally throws open the doors will be an e-reader that comes in below $100 and doesn't try to be everything to everyone. It needs to have a large enough display and a clear enough E Ink screen, and basic navigation buttons. It would be a shame to lose search functions, but those are not necessary for most books, I suspect, so the QWERTY keyboard can go. Cell phone and wireless capabilities are also unnecessary for a basic reader. Playing MP3s is nice, but should only be included if it works flawlessly. Goodness knows much cheaper devices have been doing so for years now.
There will always be a place for a nice, always connected device like the Kindle 2, but such a device is not for me. It has managed to convince me that the technology exists to bring portable ereaders up to par with the book, if not as a replacement as a peer of sorts. The time of digital books is finally, definitively upon us, but success is contingent on a measure of ubiquity, and the only way that will happen is if ereaders successfully carve out their own niche instead of trying to be like every other portable device on the market.
While using the Kindle for reading is quite unlike reading a book, it does allow one to read text and view black and white images quite clearly in even low light without any of the eye strain associated with traditional electronic displays, like LCD or CRT displays. The E Ink display is indeed clear and crisp, and the Kindle itself is thin and light. I read through several novels on it with no headaches. I tackled a novel by a friend of a friend on the device and the first 11 Conan novels by Robert E. Howard. Because the display only draws power when it changes or is updated I only had to charge the device once, when I first got it.
While the Kindle is reportedly not as friendly to ebook formats as the current crop of Sony Readers, the new firmware allows it to view PDF files in addition to its native format and unprotected MobiPocket files. Have a Word document you need to read? Just use the MobiPocket Publisher program to convert your Word document to MobiPocket format and transfer it over. To the computer the device shows up as a flash drive with a few preset directories, and with 4 GiB total storage there's more than enough room for whatever textual materials you want to throw at it.
The kindle remembers your last location in each of the ebooks contained on it and allows you to create a number of bookmarks for each ebook. Further, you can highlight passages for later reference. There is a QWERTY keyboard of sorts on the face of the reader below the screen that lets you enter text, especially useful when utilizing the device's search function, which allows you to find words within the ebooks.
It is not without flaws, however. The E Ink display is slow to refresh, a problem not, reportedly, unique to the Kindle. As time goes by and the technology develops I'm sure refresh times will improve. As the screen is now it's not a problem, really, but the refresh delay is quite noticeable. You can't scroll the documents you view but only navigate a page at a time, much like with a real book. Another gripe is that too much of the face is devoted to the QWERTY keyboard, making the device larger than necessary. This is just a symptom of a larger problem: the device tries to be too much. The result is that many of the functions don't work as well as on a dedicated device and the Kindle carries too high a price tag. At $260 the Kindle is a luxury. "But it does so much," you say. "It allows you to buy books via the cellular connection on the go and it can read books out loud and play MP3 files, and who knows what else! Amazon's even making an app store for it!" I explored the narration via text to speech functionality and found it lacking. It's reluctant to activate and sounds, as expected, relatively computerized. The device also has trouble with MP3 files, playing them back with some odd noise in the background.
As it is now, the Kindle 2 is a device meant for people with disposable income. This device simply isn't ready for the masses. We already have cell phones that try to do everything, we don't need a second device to lug around. Rather, I think the future of the e-reader market is dependent upon appealing to the masses. Many technology bloggers think the future of the ereader is in the same direction the cell phone has gone: a multifunction computing device with various apps that has moved from being an effective phone to a portable digital gadget that just happens to offer passage phone capabilities. They see the ereader as needing app stores and touch screen capabilities and all sorts of other add-ons. I say anything that increases the cost and brings it into competition with cell phones is a bad thing.
No, the recipe for success is to simplify. We need a reliable, durable, and above all affordable device that does what it does well, rather than many things in a mediocre fashion. I think manufacturers need to push toward making the wonderful E Ink display technology cheaper. The device that finally throws open the doors will be an e-reader that comes in below $100 and doesn't try to be everything to everyone. It needs to have a large enough display and a clear enough E Ink screen, and basic navigation buttons. It would be a shame to lose search functions, but those are not necessary for most books, I suspect, so the QWERTY keyboard can go. Cell phone and wireless capabilities are also unnecessary for a basic reader. Playing MP3s is nice, but should only be included if it works flawlessly. Goodness knows much cheaper devices have been doing so for years now.
There will always be a place for a nice, always connected device like the Kindle 2, but such a device is not for me. It has managed to convince me that the technology exists to bring portable ereaders up to par with the book, if not as a replacement as a peer of sorts. The time of digital books is finally, definitively upon us, but success is contingent on a measure of ubiquity, and the only way that will happen is if ereaders successfully carve out their own niche instead of trying to be like every other portable device on the market.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Perfectionism as Demotivator and a Cause of Procrastination and Laziness
If you know me you may not think of me as a perfectionist. If you really know me you know that deep down, I really am a perfectionist. Perfectionism is the need for things to be "just right". Perfectionism is called that because people often mistake the desire to get things "just right" with the desire for some kind of universal state of perfection. Rather, "just right" is anything but universal, and instead quite personal. Perfectionism is also fickle in how it strikes.
One of my brothers must do everything correctly and thoroughly and the results must be presentable and pristine. He has been unable to complete college-level classes as a result, and indeed he struggled mightily with grade school and high school. It wasn't enough to read the assignments and turn in a paper. Due to the unique wiring of his brain everything he reads must be completely understood, inside and out, and every assignment or paper that results must be "just right". The same principles apply to getting up in the morning, showering, dressing, and starting the day. The process must be perfect. My brother has to get up in the morning and start the day, but he doesn't have to read if he doesn't want to. It should come as no surprise, then, that my brother does not enjoy books and reading. Imagine what it would be like to you to have to read every word and extract every bit of meaning and subtext.
My perfectionism is much more selective. I can read books normally, and I don't mind looking like a ragamuffin most days if I don't have to be anywhere. No, my perfectionism feeds into writing, describing, and explaining. When I produce something I want it to be "just right", but "just right" is a whole lot of work and not always attainable. When I write papers I don't outline all my points and draw up a rough structure. I start at the begining. That's the way I read, so that's the way I write. I don't re-read my finished work to edit it but rather edit as I go. For every new paragraph or page I write I've re-read and altered the previous ones several times over. Do I get better papers in the end? No, I don't. It's a poor strategy, but its the one I feel compelled to follow.
To most people I might seem pretty darn lazy. I seem to have developed a negative affinity for work. I also tend to put off doing work until the last minute. I'm a talented procrastinator. Why is this? I'm sure some of it's innate. I was told that as a child I was unofficially diagnosed, based on observations by a local university professor and students, as ADD with hypoactivity: not hyperactivity but hypoactivity. Another element of my lazy, procrastinating behavior, though, is acquired. I think it has to do with perfectionism.
I have a rather poor self-image, and this has a lot to do with the trouble I have compromising with myself. Perhaps you've heard the term satisficing. Satisficing is a form of compromise in which your approach to something is "good enough". Satisficing is thought to be the standard human decision-making process. We decide our course of action based on what we know will work rather than trying to seek perfection, or as satisficing theory calls it, "optimisation". There is often a vast difference in time and effort expenditure when it comes to "good enough" vs "just right". Sometimes "just right" is only a little bit more work, but just as often it's twice the work for minimal payout. To avoid satisficing I simply wait until the last minute. Then I don't have a choice. If I start moving too early I'll start trying to optimize and I'll get stuck in a spiral, covering ground already covered and decisions already made. Since I'm not a perfectionist when it comes to reading this doesn't really improve the content of my output so much as fiddle with it until it bears some structure or impression of perfection. It also causes me to be too wordy because I keep spitting out words until I think I've explained a point every meaningful way possible.
I procrastinate, then, to avoid being forced to contend with myself and my inequities for too long. By forcing all my work into a limited span I can only retread ground so much. The pressure forces me to make headway, however painful said headway may be. It forces me to confront certain decisions I can't make without that pressure. It also hurts my output, because I tend not to give things the time they deserve. If I spent a few more hours on my output, though, I would probably spend it fiddling with my output instead of doing something more meaningful like trying to improve my understanding of the material. That just seems to be the way I'm wired. Whereas one person might be able to see improved content understanding with an additional 2 hours of work, most of it focused on information intake , I would need to spend probably an additional 4 hours, 1 dealing with content and the rest fiddling with sentence structure, meaningless phrasings, and formatting cues.
On a certain level I enjoyed programming in high school and in college. On another level I hate it. I have to get programming "right". Not only does the program have to do what I want it to do, the code itself has to look the way I want it to look. When I write for fun (RPGs or fiction) I have the same problem. I start at the beginning and just fiddle along in the order I'd imagine reading it, very little planning or structure guiding my work. Some may say this isn't perfectionism at all, but in a way it is. I have to do things a certain way or face cognitive consequences. May way of coping is to simply make sure my exposure to these unpleasant moments of satisficing are minimised. I procrastinate and I don't do any work I don't feel I "must" do, especially if the returns don't seem to justify the anticipated investment.
So is this the whole of it? No, not really. As with many other things, the truth is messy and complicated, but I think this represents part of it. I won't go into my detailed near-sightedness (also known as my lack of big-picture view) even though I think it's closely related. I suspect I'm not the only person who has this particular problem, and I'm sure my solution isn't the only coping mechanism but just one of many.
One of my brothers must do everything correctly and thoroughly and the results must be presentable and pristine. He has been unable to complete college-level classes as a result, and indeed he struggled mightily with grade school and high school. It wasn't enough to read the assignments and turn in a paper. Due to the unique wiring of his brain everything he reads must be completely understood, inside and out, and every assignment or paper that results must be "just right". The same principles apply to getting up in the morning, showering, dressing, and starting the day. The process must be perfect. My brother has to get up in the morning and start the day, but he doesn't have to read if he doesn't want to. It should come as no surprise, then, that my brother does not enjoy books and reading. Imagine what it would be like to you to have to read every word and extract every bit of meaning and subtext.
My perfectionism is much more selective. I can read books normally, and I don't mind looking like a ragamuffin most days if I don't have to be anywhere. No, my perfectionism feeds into writing, describing, and explaining. When I produce something I want it to be "just right", but "just right" is a whole lot of work and not always attainable. When I write papers I don't outline all my points and draw up a rough structure. I start at the begining. That's the way I read, so that's the way I write. I don't re-read my finished work to edit it but rather edit as I go. For every new paragraph or page I write I've re-read and altered the previous ones several times over. Do I get better papers in the end? No, I don't. It's a poor strategy, but its the one I feel compelled to follow.
To most people I might seem pretty darn lazy. I seem to have developed a negative affinity for work. I also tend to put off doing work until the last minute. I'm a talented procrastinator. Why is this? I'm sure some of it's innate. I was told that as a child I was unofficially diagnosed, based on observations by a local university professor and students, as ADD with hypoactivity: not hyperactivity but hypoactivity. Another element of my lazy, procrastinating behavior, though, is acquired. I think it has to do with perfectionism.
I have a rather poor self-image, and this has a lot to do with the trouble I have compromising with myself. Perhaps you've heard the term satisficing. Satisficing is a form of compromise in which your approach to something is "good enough". Satisficing is thought to be the standard human decision-making process. We decide our course of action based on what we know will work rather than trying to seek perfection, or as satisficing theory calls it, "optimisation". There is often a vast difference in time and effort expenditure when it comes to "good enough" vs "just right". Sometimes "just right" is only a little bit more work, but just as often it's twice the work for minimal payout. To avoid satisficing I simply wait until the last minute. Then I don't have a choice. If I start moving too early I'll start trying to optimize and I'll get stuck in a spiral, covering ground already covered and decisions already made. Since I'm not a perfectionist when it comes to reading this doesn't really improve the content of my output so much as fiddle with it until it bears some structure or impression of perfection. It also causes me to be too wordy because I keep spitting out words until I think I've explained a point every meaningful way possible.
I procrastinate, then, to avoid being forced to contend with myself and my inequities for too long. By forcing all my work into a limited span I can only retread ground so much. The pressure forces me to make headway, however painful said headway may be. It forces me to confront certain decisions I can't make without that pressure. It also hurts my output, because I tend not to give things the time they deserve. If I spent a few more hours on my output, though, I would probably spend it fiddling with my output instead of doing something more meaningful like trying to improve my understanding of the material. That just seems to be the way I'm wired. Whereas one person might be able to see improved content understanding with an additional 2 hours of work, most of it focused on information intake , I would need to spend probably an additional 4 hours, 1 dealing with content and the rest fiddling with sentence structure, meaningless phrasings, and formatting cues.
On a certain level I enjoyed programming in high school and in college. On another level I hate it. I have to get programming "right". Not only does the program have to do what I want it to do, the code itself has to look the way I want it to look. When I write for fun (RPGs or fiction) I have the same problem. I start at the beginning and just fiddle along in the order I'd imagine reading it, very little planning or structure guiding my work. Some may say this isn't perfectionism at all, but in a way it is. I have to do things a certain way or face cognitive consequences. May way of coping is to simply make sure my exposure to these unpleasant moments of satisficing are minimised. I procrastinate and I don't do any work I don't feel I "must" do, especially if the returns don't seem to justify the anticipated investment.
So is this the whole of it? No, not really. As with many other things, the truth is messy and complicated, but I think this represents part of it. I won't go into my detailed near-sightedness (also known as my lack of big-picture view) even though I think it's closely related. I suspect I'm not the only person who has this particular problem, and I'm sure my solution isn't the only coping mechanism but just one of many.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Local news trawls new depths, hits new lows
Local news programs are not national news programs. This truism is one everyone knows by new. National news programs aren't perfect. Sometimes there's a subtle (CNN), or even not-so-subtle bias (Fox News) to the tone of reporting and story selection and focus. Whatever bias may or may not exist, it is consistent and predictable, and even the more biased nations sources are careful to keep news separate from editorial content. Editorial content can be informative, but it is clearly distinguished from regular news content in that a distinct personality is involved and it is usually pretty clear that that personality is opining in concert with whatever news they're sharing.
Local news has always had trouble keeping quality stories, local interest stories, and crap filler separate. When you have smaller markets and 3 or 4 local station affiliates attempting to compete with each other for local news ratings standards tend to take a back seat to viewing eyes, and boy do they take a back seat. I live in Cleveland, Ohio. Every time I watch a local news show I'm astounded at the lack of quality standards throughout the newscast. I know I've set up a big rant about a particular kind of content, but let's start simply, shall we?
Local news stations in this area have horrible writing and editing when it comes to creating sentences and narratives. When the stories are read by reporters and anchors they have piecemeal flow and grammatical errors abound. There are problems with consistent voice as well. Given the quality of what comes out of these people's mouths, I can only assume spelling and punctuation errors also abound on paper and teleprompter feeds.
Next on the plate is story selection. Local news only has so much choice. They don't want to dwell too much on national stories that may be covered again in the national news casts. This is partially because people might change the station if they hear the same content over and over, but also because it has the potential to make the local station look even worse by comparison. Who would want to have their own amateurish content shown up repeatedly by national newscasts? No, instead they try to take on national issues briefly or by focusing on local impact. This can be helpful. Unfortunately its the other news story selections which are most disappointing. Thanks to newspapers and on-line news sources I can honestly say that sometimes the local news completely glosses over stories of major local impact in favor of what are effectively local fluff pieces. I understand the need for some positive news or some local flavor beyond simple news reporting, but the local stations have taken this balancing act to absurd levels. Local news will take 2 minutes on a major road accident on an important thoroughfare and then waste 4 minutes on a segment comparing 2 "As Seen on TV" style products which may appeal to only a tiny percentage of viewers.
The biggest problem with local news, however, is that of the blurring line between news and opinion and editorial content. This is especially apparent when it comes to reports about crimes and criminals, especially where someone has been arrested or is sought as a suspect. While national news casts are generally pretty careful about judging criminal suspects, making sure to keep such news stories informative but heavily steeped in words like alleged, charged, etc..., local newscasts are not nearly as careful. If someone is sought in a rape case the local anchor may append a "That's disgusting," or "I hope they catch him," at the end of the story. Rape is not a light matter, but someone who is sought or has been arrested as a suspect is not guilty until tried and found guilty. Editorial comments like the above suggest to the audience that the newscaster's opinion has been decided. The imagined examples provided are mild because I can't remember any of the specific examples. The specific examples were worse, however. They were more damning and totally inappropriate for a newscast. For other types of stories this kind of editorial behavior is simply unprofessional. In cases where crimes and suspects are involved, this kind of reporting borders on dangerous. Why editors and writers at local news stations believe this kind of behavior is acceptable I cannot fathom.
So, in the hunt for rating, local newscasts have sunk to new lows. While they trawl the seedy bottom of local happenings the writers and editors attempt to lower reporting quality. Rather than setting professional standards and sticking to them, they seem to be determined to limbo under the Lowest Common Denominator bar. My hope is that someone in local television news sees the light and attempts to fight back. There has to be a way to garner both viewer ratings and quality marks for local reporting. Maybe it's just that local news stations are hiring all the wrong people. Maybe there's just a lemming-like, industry-wide race to the bottom. Either way, something has to change if anything like integrity is to be preserved in the world of local news reporting.
Local news has always had trouble keeping quality stories, local interest stories, and crap filler separate. When you have smaller markets and 3 or 4 local station affiliates attempting to compete with each other for local news ratings standards tend to take a back seat to viewing eyes, and boy do they take a back seat. I live in Cleveland, Ohio. Every time I watch a local news show I'm astounded at the lack of quality standards throughout the newscast. I know I've set up a big rant about a particular kind of content, but let's start simply, shall we?
Local news stations in this area have horrible writing and editing when it comes to creating sentences and narratives. When the stories are read by reporters and anchors they have piecemeal flow and grammatical errors abound. There are problems with consistent voice as well. Given the quality of what comes out of these people's mouths, I can only assume spelling and punctuation errors also abound on paper and teleprompter feeds.
Next on the plate is story selection. Local news only has so much choice. They don't want to dwell too much on national stories that may be covered again in the national news casts. This is partially because people might change the station if they hear the same content over and over, but also because it has the potential to make the local station look even worse by comparison. Who would want to have their own amateurish content shown up repeatedly by national newscasts? No, instead they try to take on national issues briefly or by focusing on local impact. This can be helpful. Unfortunately its the other news story selections which are most disappointing. Thanks to newspapers and on-line news sources I can honestly say that sometimes the local news completely glosses over stories of major local impact in favor of what are effectively local fluff pieces. I understand the need for some positive news or some local flavor beyond simple news reporting, but the local stations have taken this balancing act to absurd levels. Local news will take 2 minutes on a major road accident on an important thoroughfare and then waste 4 minutes on a segment comparing 2 "As Seen on TV" style products which may appeal to only a tiny percentage of viewers.
The biggest problem with local news, however, is that of the blurring line between news and opinion and editorial content. This is especially apparent when it comes to reports about crimes and criminals, especially where someone has been arrested or is sought as a suspect. While national news casts are generally pretty careful about judging criminal suspects, making sure to keep such news stories informative but heavily steeped in words like alleged, charged, etc..., local newscasts are not nearly as careful. If someone is sought in a rape case the local anchor may append a "That's disgusting," or "I hope they catch him," at the end of the story. Rape is not a light matter, but someone who is sought or has been arrested as a suspect is not guilty until tried and found guilty. Editorial comments like the above suggest to the audience that the newscaster's opinion has been decided. The imagined examples provided are mild because I can't remember any of the specific examples. The specific examples were worse, however. They were more damning and totally inappropriate for a newscast. For other types of stories this kind of editorial behavior is simply unprofessional. In cases where crimes and suspects are involved, this kind of reporting borders on dangerous. Why editors and writers at local news stations believe this kind of behavior is acceptable I cannot fathom.
So, in the hunt for rating, local newscasts have sunk to new lows. While they trawl the seedy bottom of local happenings the writers and editors attempt to lower reporting quality. Rather than setting professional standards and sticking to them, they seem to be determined to limbo under the Lowest Common Denominator bar. My hope is that someone in local television news sees the light and attempts to fight back. There has to be a way to garner both viewer ratings and quality marks for local reporting. Maybe it's just that local news stations are hiring all the wrong people. Maybe there's just a lemming-like, industry-wide race to the bottom. Either way, something has to change if anything like integrity is to be preserved in the world of local news reporting.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Christmas cometh and the cards come out.
Yes, one of the elements of moving into adulthood is, or at least was, that one took upon oneself the sending of Christmas cards to important family and friends. I never did get my head around this. Christmastime was always too busy and cards took planning and making decisions and all sorts of stuff I couldn't manage to pack into the limited Christmas holiday. But this year we will attempt it belatedly.
I guess I'm cheating. I'm recording addresses in a spreadsheet and I'm going to do a mail merge to print labels. That way I don't have to sacrifice envelopes if something goes wrong. Computers have eaten my brain. I can't fathom hand-writing that many envelopes and cards. I can just type it! And I type pretty fast for the most part.
That and I've been doing so much work in Excel and Access lately at work that I'm started thinking in terms of data organization and data sorting. If I can't manage, sort, and organize the data I'm dealing with, what's the point of writing it down? Physical address books are so clunky! Useful, but clunky. I guess maybe after putting all this stuff into Excel I may have to find a way to import it into some other program that will let me do other stuff with it.
This is what happens to perfectly good minds (OK, so that's debatable) when technology strikes.
I guess I'm cheating. I'm recording addresses in a spreadsheet and I'm going to do a mail merge to print labels. That way I don't have to sacrifice envelopes if something goes wrong. Computers have eaten my brain. I can't fathom hand-writing that many envelopes and cards. I can just type it! And I type pretty fast for the most part.
That and I've been doing so much work in Excel and Access lately at work that I'm started thinking in terms of data organization and data sorting. If I can't manage, sort, and organize the data I'm dealing with, what's the point of writing it down? Physical address books are so clunky! Useful, but clunky. I guess maybe after putting all this stuff into Excel I may have to find a way to import it into some other program that will let me do other stuff with it.
This is what happens to perfectly good minds (OK, so that's debatable) when technology strikes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
