O Christmas Tree, O Christmas Tree...

It's the holidays again and like always everyone wants to know what's going on in the white house! As all of you know it is vitally important that we know what type of tree the President's family has because to not know would send the country into an even worse economic downfall! Okay, not really, but seriously, why should I care? Does it matter what tree they pick out and where it is from? What would happen if they didn't get a tree or if the first lady chose to put up a fake tree from home. In my opinion that would impress me more. I would love to hear that they wanted to use their own tree from home instead of one delivered. But I guess since it will be on display, it must look its best.

I just think this country is too caught up on tradition. I understand that it is important to have traditions and stay true to them, but does the media have to devote air time to letting us know what tree they got? I'm not trying to be cynical or even say that I don't like Christmas or anything like that. I just don't understand why the media had to tell me over and over again what tree they chose. In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. However, if they are trying to keep the countries spirits high and get us into the Holiday spirit then I support that. We need some happiness in this country right now.

What I really wanna know is, what would the news media do if they not only got a Christmas tree, but they also placed a Star of David and a Crescent Moon around the tree as well? Can we say media field day?


The video of the tree being delivered can be found here.

This Matters...

I don't know why this story surprised me. There has always been a difference between the way the government treats normal citizens and the way politicians are treated. I guess this difference exists because when the one who is making your laws is arrested for breaking the law, he already knows the judge so he will get off easy. Charles B Rangle and Steven Rattner both broke the law, but both got a simple slap on the wrist instead of jail time. The story can be found here, but basically Rangle, a congressman, evaded taxes for 17 years and claimed he didn't know he had. Even though he is a congressman who helps with tax laws... Yet even though he did that he still didn't get removed from congress and all he got was a slap on the wrist. Yet normal people who evade taxes for much less time get federal jail time! Completely uneven punishment scale.


Rattner was a wall street financier who bribed New York State officials for 150 MILLION! Yet all he had to pay back was 6.2 million with a two year ban from the securities industry. Not a lifetime ban. A temporary ban. Are you kididng me? This is what our officials and the people who handle our money do? And yet no matter what they do they don't get punished like an average person. What if they were to murder someone? Would the legal system care then? Or would they accept some lame brain excuse? In my opinion stories like these matter because it shows the problems we have in our government AND legal system. The corruption is unreal.

Smart Girl...?

Sarah Palin is doing her best to take the media by store. She is already loved by the media and has had a ton of media coverage since the last presidential election, yet she is taking it farther. She now has a reality  TV show! The fact that she has launched this show at this particular time does matter! The timing is perfect. Right now the talk of the next election is growing by leaps and bounds. Who is running? Who stands a chance? What's the rater interest? Who has the best media personality?

All this questions are being asked and Palin supporters are trying to keep her in the spotlight of the media. Now she has this show and her daughter is on Dancing with the Stars, so it is unlikely that people will be forgetting her anytime soon. The article and a clip can be found here on CNN's website.

In my opinion this is just another way politicians are trying to hijack the media and use it to their advantage. I am interested to see if this show helps Palin, or hurts her since opposition will be trying to twist everything said into something negative. And a reality TV show has a lotta quotes that can be taken. I hope she treads carefully with this show.



*Photo can be found here*

The Grinch Who Stole Christmas!

What I find fascinating about media and politics is the way people will try to skew the view of politicians by using the media and popular outlets. Right now there is a lot of media hype about the upcoming elections in November so the competition of mudslinging is underway. The Huffington Post had an article about Republican Grinches that I found both fascinating and hilarious. They accurately used a well known Christmas story to tug at peoples heartstrings. No one wants to be labeled the Grinch who stole Christmas, which is what the democrats did. By tugging at Americas heart strings they can cast a negative light on a candidate. Some people may only see a picture referring to one issue and that can skew who that person votes for if they were on edge and undecided. This is using the media at it's best. A an overall simple issue that can be turned into a much larger issue in a flash.

Dr. Seuss's story is a well known and popular Christmas story that is used to represent the "true meaning of Christmas". No one needs to know what the employment issue is about, all they need to know is that the Republicans will take Christmas away from people and ruin it! Don't you just love the media? All it takes is a picture....

The Power of Oprah

When I was browsing the Huffington Post I came across an article referring to Jon Stewart's and Stephen Colbert's rally coming up on October 30th. I know that the two have been trying to garner support for awhile and they have been using the power of their shows to do it, but what I think will really help them is Oprah.

The Daily Show and the Colbert Report only reach a select audience of late night viewers who tune in to watch that kind of satirical show. The Oprah Show reaches another type of audience that views in the afternoon for more soft news. The reason Oprah will help them is due to the fact that she announced her decision to give flights and hotel accommodations to the audience of the Daily Show so that they can go to the rally. She will inevitably mention this gift, and her support, on her show. That will allow another section of society to 1) know about the show and 2) either attend or watch the rally.

The story can be found here, and I personally think the reason Colbert and Stewart are trying to garner this much publicity is they want to out do Glenn Beck. Why, I don't know, but that is my belief. I think that by having the power of Oprah behind them will help them immensely.

The link to the video is here and I highly recommend watching it as it is very entertaining. Colbert and Stewart feed off of each other and I am not sure that is a good thing or not.

*Photo links are here and here

Freedom of Speech?

Is reciting the pledge mandatory? Do you have to recite the pledge in order to be "American"? According to one judge, it is mandatory! Judge Littlejohn of Mississippi ordered attorney Danny Lampley to say the pledge with the rest of the courtroom. When Lampley refused the judge sentenced him to contempt of court. According to past rulings, it is a precedent that you cannot be forced to salute the flag or recite the pledge. The article can be found here and here (there is a little variance between the two).

What I wonder is this, if the media covered this story more, would it affect the populace? In one of the articles people are cited as saying that they don't feel it's american to refuse to recite the pledge while others feel it is a breach of the freedom of speech. What would people say if a debate was started about the pledge? I wonder this because we are in a difficult recession with a war going on so I wonder if that would sway people away from the freedom of speech argument?  The fact that a judge felt he had the ability to hold a person in contempt makes me worry about what is happening with our legal system. I personally think that overall the system is corrupt, yet it still has its place in maintaining order. Therefore, I think judges and all acting members of the legal system need to not abuse their power which I think this judge has done. He should know case law. The case WV School Board v. Barnette is a well know, well referenced case that he should have known. It sets the precedence and Judge Littlejohn should abide by it.

Judge Gone Wild

I was in one of my classes today when I heard about a story that had flown by under my news radar. It involves a Federal Judge and a stripper! The entire story can be found here, but I find the possibilities of this story to be the most interesting. Judge Camp is a senior judge who had been taking a lighter case load due to his seniority. Apparently, he also found the desire to do some extra curricular activities with his free time. He was caught during an FBI sting buying drugs from an undercover office with the stripper (the name is not released).


What I find interesting is the fact that this doesn't seem to be getting as much coverage as other trials. I would have assumed that all forms of media would be having a field day with this story. This is a judge who has sentenced people with drug charges to serious jail time. Yet here he is caught doing the same thing he chastises others for doing! Attorneys are revisiting his past decisions to see if any of them can be over turned due to these new charges, but it is doubtful any will be. I have seen more media coverage over Senators having affairs than over this and I just find it a tad ironic.

I have to admit though, I feel worse for his wife and sons. Maybe it's for the best that the media isn't having a field day with this story and embarrassing the family even more.

Temple of DOOOOOOOOM!!

So I was browsing through The Huffington Post when I came across a media article about The Daily Show. Jon Stewart was on Bill O'Reilly's show the other day so O'Reilly decided to come on The Daily Show. I found the entire interview to be very entertaining overall, but what is more interesting is the fact they came together in agreement on something!

The started out by referring to Fox News as the Temple of Doom which I have to agree with. Everyone on that network seems to feel the world is about to end and that is how they talk to their audiences. Stewart gave O'Reilly a compliment by saying he was the fairest when speaking of Obama and his agenda out of anyone on the network, and I also agree with that.

But what the both agree on is that corruption has to end. Corruption in politics and the MEDIA. In order to campaign they have to raise money. When asking for money they are told basically "If I support you, I want this and this" which puts the campaigner in a tight spot. But to get the media on your side costs a lot of money. O'Reilly said upwards of 150million just to run for president! That is absolutely ridiculous when media is supposedly "free". Both Stewart and O'Reilly agreed that the corruption was a major issue and they mentioned it within the media several times.  The link to the article with the videos is here so you can feel free to watch it. I highly recommend watching it. I was very interested and the after interview "analysis" that Stewart did was hilarious!

On a side note about the Temple of Doom here is something funny. I have always disliked Fox News and I have never hidden that fact. In an interview with Rolling Stone's President Obama expressed his view of Fox and he also (for good reason) dislikes him. That can be found here.

Wait....what?

So, I am going out side the political ring a bit because I want to discuss a story that made me go, "wait, what?". I was listening to HLN a few weeks ago and they mentioned a woman named Bethany Storro. Storro was in the hospital being treated for acid burns on her face. She told police that an unknown woman had come up to her and randomly thrown acid in her face. Of course, when I heard this my heart broke for the woman because that is so unfair and appalling! The fact that a stranger would do that took me some time to wrap my mind around. No one should have to deal with that. Well, turns out there was more to the story.

T

 

The grisly details can be found here, but the jist of it is her story didn't sit well with police. Storro told police that her eyes were left uninjured because she was, thankfully, wearing her sunglasses. Well, the issue with that is it was evening....so why did she have her sunglasses on? Then the police followed the splash pattern and determined that she had thrown the acid on herself!!!!! Once confronted, Storro admitted that she had thrown it on her own face.

Not only is it odd that she did it to herself, but she had also received donations to help pay for the damage done! Yes the money will be returned, but will she be held accountable for anything else? Rumors that she will be charged with fraud are circulating, but who knows what the police will do. I'm just trying to figure out why someone would throw acid on their face. Can you say "OW"?? 


*The picture shown above can be found on the New York Daily News' website here

Gas Explosion: Why did this happen?!?!

I wanted to discuss the recent gas explosion that occurred in California. The story can be found here and it's pretty basic. A gas pipe burst for some reason that has yet to be determined. The pipe has been shipped to Washington to be examined so the reason the pipe burst can be determined. I think this is a great story that NEEDS more hype. This explosion leveled an entire neighborhood, killed some, and injured many others. Pacific Gas and Electric needs to be hung by the media since there was concern over the pipe in 2007! There were also reports called in that the people smelled gas the day before the explosion. The fact that the pipe still burst is 100% PG&E's fault in my opinion. This is 2010, 3 years after a budget request to replace that pipe and others that were also deemed dangerous. The reason the media needs to continue to hound the gas company is the make sure of two things. 1) The people who lost their home or family members need compensation from the company if the company is found to be at fault (which is highly likely) and 2) to make sure they replace the other dangerous pipes.

The media does have the power to make sure those things occur. They can keep this in the light and make PG&E do those things or lose face in the people's eyes which may get them pressure from the government as well. This incident does matter. There is no reason this should have occurred.

Rachel Wade Murder Trial

I find this to be very interesting news. The entire story can  be found here, and all over other major news networks. Basically Rachel Wade and Sarah Ludemann were in love with the same man. Wade couldn't handle the competition so she was found guilty of stabbing Ludemann through the chest and killing here. Wade's trial was all over news and her sentencing was an even bigger deal it seems. I find it to be a very sad ordeal overall, but what I find interesting is the level of coverage it received. It's not the only murder that has happened in the past year, so why is everyone talking about it?? In fact, HLN showed the sentencing live for a majority of the day on September 3rd, yet did it need to be shown? I realize it was a very upsetting ordeal, and my heart goes out to Sarah Ludemann's family, but is it hard news? Does CNN, CBS, and the other major networks need to give it so much coverage?

In my opinion this is another aspect of the media showing what will grab viewers. They showed Ludemann's mother's testimony of why Wade should get life in jail over and over. It brought tears to my eyes to hear Ludemann's father speaking of his daughter. They wanted that. It's a different type of murder so it got a higher level of coverage since people want to hear about it. It's not a story that will affect us in our daily lives, such as a tax hike, but they still showed it over and over. Why? Does it matter? Is it an important story that we need to know about? I'll leave that to you to decide.

Media and Politics

I want to start my blog out by posting about my overall opinion of the media. I don't think the media benefits the people as it should. I feel that it has become such a commercialized industry that we only hear what they want us to hear, or what the highest bidder wants them to say. When concerning politics the media has control over the outcome of the election. If they refuse to cover a certain politician then he/she will fall between the cracks and no matter how good he/she may be, people won't know about them. That holds power. Being discussed by the news media is free publicity that can help get your name known. The problem is making sure you have GOOD publicity.

In my opinion Fox News is the most bias of all the news networks, but that can be contributed to the number of conservative viewers they have. Fox merely caters to what the people want to hear, not what they need to hear. In an article found here they discuss the news ratings different networks have. I found the article interesting because it shows a reason why the networks report what they do. A liberal network will report what liberals want to hear, the same with conservative networks. Fox is a highly conservative network, so they will and do report to reflect that. I simply disagree with that mentality. I want to hear the facts uncolored by bias.

I was not as cynical about the news media until watching the 2008 presidential election. I would change the channels and the differences in the way information is portrayed was amazing to me. One network would be praising what a candidate said and the next would be ripping it apart. If a person only watched one network, they would only hear that point of view.

I do understand that the media is all about ratings. They want people to watch their network or read their paper, so I understand catering to the masses to a degree. However, I don't agree with the level of bias we have. I just wish the media would show all sides of a story. Leave the debating and analyzing to the experts. The news needs to be unbiased.