Thursday, June 25, 2009

Decency and Credibility

When Matt Groening, creator of The Simpsons, was in high school he decided to run for class president. In what was likely a very clever goof, he ran on a platform called Teens for Decency and his slogan was, “If you’re against decency, what are you for?” His classmates, who were likely impressed and confused at the same time, elected Matt president.

I bring this up because I continue to be flabbergasted at the Republicans. Just five years removed from the height of their powers, they now wander aimlessly – against everything the president wants, but for absolutely nothing. You can look at the so-called “leaders” of the party like Limbaugh, Steele, Gingrich, Cheney and Palin to quickly see why – all of them have horrendously high unfavorable ratings, are polarizing figures and haven’t offered a single good idea to move the country forward. I’m not surprised there was a bloodless purge in the GOP after the election, but I was surprised that they haven’t rallied around a single likeable figure that may have appeal to people outside the Ozarks and Smokey Mountains.

Having the right leader would also help the GOP with its credibility. You can’t accuse a president of fiscal recklessness when the last Republican president spent money hand over fist and expanded government more than any president since Johnson. You can’t call a Supreme Court nominee racist when you’ve opposed anything that might help minorities. If an independent or someone with a better reputation mentioned some of these points, they may hold water. But if someone with no credibility and is unlikable to boot says them, forget it. You always need to consider the source.

As for South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, the GOP is probably relieved to have a heterosexual scandal for once. But once again, here’s what Sanford said about Bill Clinton when he was in Congress. If Sanford wanted impeachment for what Clinton did, he’d best step down himself. That is, if he still holds an ounce of credibility. Wasn’t the GOP damaged enough already before he blew it too?

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

The Revolution Will Not be Televised

Leave it to the brave people of Iran to not only find a legitimate use for Twitter, but also to kick the mainstream media to its knees. Remember how the first Gulf War brought CNN and 24-hour cable news into the forefront by showing how antiquated the old network news broadcasts were? The current situation in Iran will go down in history as the first one to be brought to homes around the world through viral video, tweets, blogs and cell phones while traditional media fiddles around with Palin vs. Letterman. When you don’t cover such a volatile, important election in a critical part of the world, especially because you’ve carelessly cut your overseas bureau, expect to be caught flat-footed when the world passes you by.

It’s amazing how far things have progressed, not just in Iran but in the power of technology to empower people to take matters into their own hands. State-run media, clamping down on foreign correspondents and censorship count for nothing under these circumstances. Imagine what could have happened in China 20 years ago if the technology of today was around. Who needs the media to broadcast your message when you can do it even better by yourself?

Another variable few are mentioning is one even I am beginning to believe. The democracy that still has a fragile hold in Iraq is starting to sow seeds across the Middle East, hands down the most undemocratic region on Earth (except Israel). Recent elections in Lebanon went well and we could very well see be seeing the green shoots emerging here. It may be time to read this post again.

We are certainly hopeful in Iran that the people will prevail. You can see plenty of coverage in Iran across the Web (except the mainstream media sites) but here are three that show the marches:

Iran Protest March I
Iran Protest March II
Iran Protest March III

And here are three that show the government cracking down (some are graphic).

Iranian Police Cracking Down
Iranian Police Shooting Civilians
Protesters Rioting and Police Shooting Them

Friday, May 29, 2009

Thoughts from a Grumpy Old Man

As I approach 40 I remember back to over half my lifetime ago and recall how aghast I would be when older people would have no clue what shows young people were watching (back then it was Miami Vice), music they were listening to (Depeche Mode for goth kids, Springsteen for regular kids, The Replacements for punk kids) and which celebrity was considered cool and a teen role model at the time. Of course back then there was no Internet and cable was only about 40 channels so there were basically two groups – the kids and few adults who knew this stuff and were “with it,” and the many adults and few kids that didn’t know what was happening in the mass market. I remember thinking that as an adult I would do my best to try and stay connected to popular trends so the next generation wouldn’t consider me an old fart.

Naturally, I was unsuccessful but guess what? I’m not ashamed; in fact, I’m proud of my pop culture ignorance. I think the turning point was just this past week when the brouhaha over the parents of “Jon & Kate Plus 8” came out and my first thought was: I’ve never heard of this show, I have no idea who Jon and Kate are and I DON’T CARE. And I felt much better about myself.

Part of this metamorphosis is the unavoidable fragmenting of the way we receive entertainment. Back in the 80s and early 90s you could watch TV, go to the movies, see a band, listen to the radio or buy a cassette. You knew where to get this information because there were only so many places to go. Now of course, the plethora of choices is too vast for any pop culture aficionado to simultaneously track. As choices proliferate, so too do the multiple audiences that find them fascinating. Shows like “American Idol” used to be the norm to find new entertainment to emulate (my generation’s was MTV); but now mass market shows like this are the exception.

Entertainment itself has also changed. While musical or acting talent is always in the eye of the beholder, you used to have to show at least some talent to achieve fame. Now of course, everyone has the means to be a celebrity and talent is less important. You can be famous for simply being famous. While I have never seen Jon & Kate’s show, I doubt there is anything on that show that only they can do. Most reality TV is resplendent in its ordinariness. We used to watch TV to see interesting characters or exciting scenarios. Now many watch TV and see ordinary people doing ordinary things. Does simply being on TV make the ordinary interesting or fascinating? Future anthropologists can decide that. I wonder what people like Margaret Mead or Andy Warhol would think of how popular culture is established today.

And me? I used to eat up popular culture when I was younger too. But as I got older and started a family I inevitably got busier with work, kids, grad school, blogging (sometimes) and other more important things. In essence, I got a life. And if doing that takes time away from keeping track of TMZ, then I can very easily accept that. Instead of watching life I am living it. Just like Jon & Kate!

Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Yankees to NY Fans: Drop Dead

It gives me zero pleasure as a lifelong Yankee fan to say this, but I am extremely happy not to live in New York and say that my tax dollars went to subsidize the most expensive baseball stadium in history that gives fans views like this:

And if that’s not enough, the Steinbrenners are shocked – shocked, I say! – to find people unwilling to shell out $2,500 for seats behind home plate. Today they cut prices 50%, as if that will make any difference. The result has been constant views like this on TV:

Just as politicians in Massachusetts may follow Herbert Hoover’s suicide example of raising taxes during a recession, the Yankees fleeced New York’s taxpayers out of $1.5 billion with a subsidized stadium. Then they fleeced their fans by charging four figures for a single seat or $5 for an obstructed view seat. An obstructed view seat is not worth five cents. And if all that wasn’t enough, this money is going to the highest payroll in baseball that boasts Chien-Ming Wang with a 34.50 ERA and Mark Teixeira with a .220 batting average. Why isn’t Joba back in the bullpen already?

Like all diehard sports fans, Yankee fanatics follow their team through good and bad. But occasionally something really, really stupid happens that sends fans in an uproar. This time, there were about 20 stupid things that have happened. It’s likely the Steinbrenners lowered the premium seating prices because they were embarrassed by the empty seats on TV. I happen to think people not paying for these seats is absolutely justified. You reap what you sow and you get what you pay for, and nobody is going to fork over four figures for a team that treats their fans this poorly, no matter what the economy is or what place the team is in.

The Steinbrenners still haven’t learned that you can’t buy a championship. It appears they also haven’t learned you can’t build a stadium at the taxpayers’ expense, overcharge them on everything from a $9 beer to a $1,250 plastic seat, and expect them to keep their blind devotion. It appears New Yorkers, never known for their patience, have finally had enough.

More Info: My earlier post on keeping George Steinbrenner the hell away from the Hall of Fame.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

The Photo-Op Tea Party

As a PR flack, I like the concept of the anti-tax, anti-bailout tea parties that took place today. We all lost money in our retirement plans last year, our wages are frozen and those of us lucky enough to have a job are hunkered down, but we still have to cut a check to the government. The government will then take much of this money and offer it to banks and investment firms that made dumb decisions on mortgage default swaps and CDOs, or auto makers that made dumb decisions on SUVs and continuing the mighty Buick brand.

Who wouldn’t be a little aggrieved by these decisions? The whole idea has a nice populist ring to it, and it appears the folks behind the tea parties (hold that thought for a minute) spread the word online through viral video and Twitter, showing the overhyped online service has another use besides telling everyone who’s not listening to the radio right now what song you’re hearing and hating.

But while the tea parties make good theater and the clueless media will eat it up, the whole thing came across as staged and phony. The idea did not match the execution. No American, regardless of their politics, likes to pay taxes, but what will be the outcome from these protests? Are people going to refuse to pay taxes? The colonists in 1773 had a plan – no unjust taxation without representation – and they stuck to their plan. To borrow a working phrase, what are the action items coming out of this protest?

Then there’s the tea party organizers. It’s no secret this was the brainchild of CNBC commentator Rick Santelli, and then was spurred on by organizations like Freedom Works (Dick Armey’s group) and Top Conservatives on Twitter. Fox News has breathlessly overhyped the event, with live coverage across the nation. All of this is perfectly legitimate, of course.

But once again, where the hell were these so-called “conservatives” when our last president was spending money and expanding government hand-over-fist for the last eight years? If you don’t like the tax-and-spend policy, fine. But what is your answer for the current situation? If you don’t want a big stimulus package, how would you get the economy moving again? If you don’t want to bail out AIG or GM, what’s your answer for safeguarding the American jobs and industries that would vanish if both of them disappear like Lehman?

It’s natural for an opposition party to say it’s against something. But if you don’t offer an alternative, forget anyone on the fence jumping on board with you for long. And if you claim to be a “conservative” but didn’t flinch when Bush was doing the same things as Obama, you’re nothing but a partisan weather vane, as mindless as the partisans in Berkeley and Harvard Square that you claim to despise. You’ve actually got more in common with them than you think.

So while the tea parties might make you feel good for a week and will get you a photo op or two on Fox News, in a week it will all be forgotten without a real platform. They are full of sound and phony fury, signifying nothing.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

The Media Keeps Circling the Drain

Did you notice who did and did not get picked for a question in last night’s presidential press conference? Here are the winners:

Associated Press
NBC
ABC
CBS
Univision
Stars and Stripes
CNN
Fox News
Politico
Ebony
ABC Radio
Washington Times
AFP

Note who did NOT get called: The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, etc – not a single leading daily paper. That’s gotta hurt these places, many of whom are already on life support. I’ve blogged many times about the media’s problems, including here and here.

When a president does a press conference, he usually has a chart stating who is attending and where they are sitting so he can choose who to ask. Remember this was a one hour conference with 13 selected questions, and since Obama likes to give long answers you’ve got a little over 4½ minutes per question. He can freely decide who to ask and who to ignore. Did Obama decide to ignore the daily papers because of their growing obsolescence, or was it an accidental oversight? May the conspiracy theories begin, but you know what I think.

I actually like some of these choices – Univision is the network of choice for the country’s fastest growing minority, Stars & Stripes is a wise selection and Politico is one of the rare media outlets that is actually growing because they're on to something. And by including Fox News and the Washington Times you can’t say he only chose places that would throw softballs. And except for Ann Compton at ABC Radio, all the questions were pretty good.

I am confident predicting that in the next couple of years the president will return to his high-tech outreach that worked well during the campaign, and conduct some webcasts and online-only exchanges with the public. I know I disparaged Twitter below, but grassroots mobilization for elections lends itself well to online social media as more industries realize you don’t need the media to be the messenger anymore. Everyone but the daily papers get that.

Friday, March 20, 2009

The AIG Bonus Dilemma

In the days after 9/11, an almost unanimous Congress passed the Patriot Act. While most of the Act was indeed important and deserved to be passed – especially parts that improved border security, tracked foreign assets and allocated money to improve surveillance technology – debatable items like indefinite detentions without trial for suspected terrorists and the ability for the FBI to search personal records without a warrant have come under criticism by those who believe the Act violates the Fourth and Sixth Amendments. In its haste to respond to such an unbelievable act of terror, Congress may have rushed to judgment on some actions that should not have overlooked the Constitution.

Yesterday, the House fast-tracked a bill that would place impose a 90 percent tax on bonuses paid to any AIG employees and employees of other financial companies that accepted at least $5 billion from the TARP bailout. It was approved by a vote of 328 to 93. I am having déjà vu all over again.

I am in no way defending the boneheads at AIG who destroyed the world’s largest insurance company by their over reliance on collateralized debt obligations and mortgage-backed securities. And I’m sure Congressional phones are ringing off the hook with outraged constituents gathering torches and pitchforks. The pressure for the government to act, after they may have overlooked this payment, must be enormous.

But in the heated mode to act fast and ask questions later, serious mistakes can be made. I call this the “ready-fire-aim” plan of action that I try to avoid on a personal level. By changing an existing contract – unfair as that contract may be – the government is setting a dangerous precedent as an unreliable and capricious business partner; one that can quickly change any written contract based on popular opinion, as opposed to the rules of law and the Constitution itself. That occurred with part of the Patriot Act and I feel it happening again.

Unfortunately the government needs the insurance companies and hedge funds of the world to fix this problem, especially if it unveils some kind of public/private sector combination of buying troubled assets from banks. If I ran a hedge fund (and still had a job) this would show me that the government cannot be trusted if it has the right to change the plans and redo compensation and benefit laws at will. This is a dangerous precedent that I doubt would stand up in a court of law.

Andrew Ross Sorkin of the NY Times stated this very fact a few days ago, along with the possibility that the AIG people receiving these bonuses may be the only ones who know how to clean up their mess. I’m skeptical about the last part, and Sorkin has been raked over the coals for this. But he’s right about the contractual obligations and the knee-jerk response it has understandably and unfortunately set. In our rush to punish wrongdoers, we cannot overlook the law, even when it comes to detaining terrorists or suddenly taking bonuses away from people who have not deserved it.

UPDATE: Look who agrees with me -- Nate Silver, Henry Blodget and Paul Krugman. Holy crap!