Archive for February, 2008

Crashing

Skier CrashAs my wife pointed out, I am 40 43 years old, and I still ski, a lot. Saturday, while skiing like a 16 year old, I took a spill. Not just a quick fall, but a nasty one. I went from 30 miles an hour to 0 in no seconds flat after catching my ski on a tree root buried under the snow. Being under the chair lift didn’t help, as I was serenaded by catcalls from above.

As I scampered to put my skis back on and limit my immediate embarrassment, I couldn’t help but chuckle, thinking that I owed the mountain something for all that joy I had recently cashed in on. For I had just completed several circuits of the same secret stash – all the while screaming like a kid, and smiling like a fool.

I woke up Sunday morning, feeling as if I had been hit by a car. My ribs are achy, my head hurts, and my knee is gimpy. All around, I wish I was dead. Now it’s Tuesday, and while my knee is better, my ribs hurt even more. I feel crummy.

Ski Crash RocksSo today, while I gobble Ibuprofen (thank you modern chemistry for that miracle), karma has reminded me that joy must sometimes come with sacrifice. There is a yin to every yang and everyone must pay. I remember the unadulterated joy of flying through the snow Saturday as vividly as I remember stopping so quickly on my head.

The crash, while painful, is the natural result of taking chances, having some fun, and throwing caution to the wind – every once in a while. I intend to temper my childish skiing activities in the future. I am getting old you know. I will have to be a bit more selective in my adventures.

I think I’ll sneak up that hill over the summer though, and dig out that stupid tree root… so the next guy will hopefully get all the smiles without the cracked ribs to show for them.

That’s gotta be worth a few karma points.

Did the Bush administration use terrorism warnings to their advantage?

Keith Olbermann over at MSNBC tells the tale of how terrorism warnings issued by the Bush administration over the past few years have strangely coincided with either potentially damaging news about the administration, or positive news for the Democrats . In the video below, Olbermann details 13 clear examples of terror related announcements from the Bush administration that came within hours or days after negative news surfaced about the administration.

Is it possible that the Bush administration used terror threats, many of which were later proven to be totally false and misleading, to divert attention away from their own misdeeds and screw ups elsewhere? We could just consider it part of an ongoing pattern of propaganda by the administration. Remember, using messages designed to change people’s opinions or more importantly, BEHAVIOR is a fundamental part of the definition of propaganda.

def. – Propaganda is a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of large numbers of people. Instead of impartially providing information, propaganda in its most basic sense presents information in order to influence its audience. The most effective propaganda is often completely truthful, but some propaganda presents facts selectively to encourage a particular synthesis, or gives loaded messages in order to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the cognitive narrative of the subject in the target audience.

I remember being told told to go buy duct tape and plastic drop cloths to protect my family from an impending chemical or nuclear attack, which turned out later to be verified as false. Yes, that whole week of water cooler discussion and hardware store excitement was the direct result of one of these announcements. Home Depot stock probably went through the roof.

I also remember as a child, being taught to hide under my school desk, to protect myself against a nuclear bomb attack. Living near one of the world’s largest hydroelectric plants made us a huge target we were told. Niagara Falls was a vital target for the commies, it was REALLY IMPORTANT, and we were going to be targets our whole lives – just for living here!

Use common sense, and filter things you see on TV with natural skepticism. If it sounds like a bunch of hype, it very well could be. Your natural instincts are not fooling you.

There are a lot of things in the world to be afraid of – skyrocketing prices on food and everything else, the faltering economy, the death toll in Iraq, and people who would scare you into doing their will. You are far more likely to die in a car accident, fire, or murder, than by a terrorist attack according to statistics.

Watch the video.

How the media sells war

Iran - You're Next!Selling things to the United States public was a $28 Billion industry last year. The United States government is one of the advertising industry’s biggest customers, spending over $1.6 Billion last year selling ideas, policies, and actions to you. Can you think of a better way to describe the selling of an organization that has no tangible products?

By comparision, McDonald’s, who actually sells a product, spent approximately $700 million on advertising last year on the road to $ 22.8 billion in revenue. (On a scarier note, I also found out that US Pharmaceutical companies spend over $50 Billion annually, when you include Marketing and promotion, which includes those pervasive pens, pads, and other junk you see in your doctor’s office.)

Ad Age Magazine once listed the Top 10 Advertising Icons of the last century – the Marlboro Man was number one, followed by Ronald McDonald, and a clearly disappointed, and likely not so Jolly, Green Giant came in third. These images are part of our culture, and we recognize them immediately. We all know these images, and can visualize them, because we have seen them in the media thousands of times. This list just reinforces the concept that products, ideas, and messages are sold by repeating them, many times, and in many different ways.

In the media, how things are communicated is as often as important as what is being communicated. Marshall McLuhan once wrote in his book, The Medium is The Message, that “All media work us over completely. They are so pervasive in their personal, political, economic, aesthetic, psychological, moral, ethical, and social consequences that they leave no part of us untouched, unaffected, unaltered.

McLuhan was saying that pictures, small edited soundbites, and other smaller components of a message can become as important, or more important to people than the original message itself. Sorry to pick on Donald’s again here but the message is clear- we see smiling happy families, loving the hearty, filling, plentiful, food.

We all know that the reality of eating at McDonald’s is far different- the 15 minute wait at the drive thru (of course a new word had to be created here – thru), mostly low income customers, and consistently lousy service. Nobody is showing THAT message on television during the Super Bowl, are they? There is a difference between the advertising images and reality, and the management of that gap is the sell.

This ability to invoke images and messages repeatedly is very useful when selling war too.Wait, you say. You don’t think that we are being sold war? Think again.

War is carefully packaged, imaged, and delivered to us in many forms by the media. Openly paid for recruiting ads, reporters being paid to write favorable stories, and other public relations “freebies” are just some ways to get messages out. A news media hungry to fill the demands of a 24/7/365 news appetite is glad for soundbites and images of uniformed generals, government insiders, and pundits to fill time talking about the war – any war.

War sells, and ratings show it, and the more we watch, the more the media makes selling the ads during the shows about war. It is in the media’s interest to sell you war, because to them, WE ARE BUYING IT.

The more viewers a program has, the higher the ad prices for that program. A simple example of this is Super Bowl ads that cost almost $3 million for 30 seconds of air time. This is because last year billions of people saw those ads. Dollars buys eyeballs is the fundamental principle to remember when seeking to understand advertising based TV ratings.

Even the names of our military conflicts are chosen for their media value. We had “Operation Uphold Democracy” as 20,000 US troops supported a dictator in Haiti in the 1990’s; “Operation Enduring Freedom” as we invaded Afghanistan in 2001, and the wickedly ironically named “Operation Just Cause” as George Bush, Sr. turns on long time ally Manuel Noriega in Panama as Bush’s political winds shifted against Panama in 1988. Who could argue against a small, insignificant invasion, of an unknown country in an operation NAMED JUST CAUSE? It was not only great marketing, it was a great sales job. Most of us barely noticed as we took over the country and put our own leader in place.

I recently watched a short, fascinating movie called War Made Easy, narrated by Sean Penn. It looks at media coverage leading up to the last 60 years of wars. Expert after expert show how the media supports war, often unwittingly, but frighteningly more often consciously.

Creating support for a war follows a familiar campaign. It is a time tested formula, one that the US Government marketing staff has been polished over the years from Vietnam to Iran.Many corporations in the United States and the world have a great interest in PROMOTING war. Their products are no good without war – missiles, bombs, tanks, all no good without a war or conflict. War is good business. Their lobbyists seem to be the only ones with access to congress anymore. Money buys access, access buys war. Businesses that depend on the selling of war do well.

From the folks over at Just Foriegn Policy:

The film demonstrates the use of the following types of deception:

  • The rhetoric of democracy is repeated over and over to convince Americans that bombing other people is actually an act of kindness.
  • As war approaches, we are told it is inevitable. Neither outside events – such as Iraq allowing weapons inspections – nor domestic opposition will stop it. So why work against it?
  • The media defers to war planners. In the film, a top CNN official brags that he asked the Pentagon to approve a list of possible military commentators.
  • If you are pro-war, you are objective. If you are anti-war, you are biased. Phil Donahue and Peter Arnett were fired for not supporting the war, even though Donahue hosted MSNBC’s highest-ranked show at the time. The channel’s executives wrote privately that they did not a want an “anti-war face.”

War propaganda in the U.S. is sophisticated, and most of it blends into the media background. Educate yourself. Pay attention to the details. Ask questions. Be a healthy skeptic. Remember that war is always bad, no matter what you hear.

Sell peace. Here’s just one way for you to get involved.

GOP politics in a nutshell

Glenn Greenwald over at Salon writes: “The House Republicans have produced a new dramatic ad complaining about expiration of The Protect America Act and demanding immediate passage of the Cheney/Rockefeller Senate bill — thus vesting in the government the power to spy on us with no warrants and vesting in the telecom industry license to break the law with no consequences — as the only way for us to avoid imminent, violent death. The ad – entitled “America at Risk” – should immediately be mounted on a museum wall under a plaque that reads: “The Republican Party in the U.S., 2001-2008 (and counting).”

The video is not only awful, but a direct knockoff of an ad for the 24 series television show.  It’s as close to propaganda that I have ever seen here in the United States, almost comical in its fervor.  Let me know what you think.

lessig 4 congress?

runlessigrunFrom an article at Ars Technica – Stanford University professor, and renowned cyberlawyer Lawrence Lessig has announced that he is seriously considering a run for Congress by launching a Beta campaign site. This comes in response to a quickly growing grassroots campaign urging him to run for the congressional seat left vacant by the recent death Tom Lantos (D-CA).

Lessig , who has become an academic and online celebrity for his work on intellectual property in the digital age, made headlines late last year when he announced that he would be shifting his scholarly focus to the study of political corruption. In the short video – 10 minutes to announce two ideas that Lessig prepared announcing the foundation of his new Change Congress movement. In hindsight, it could also be the first PowerPoint presentation used to announce candidacy for Congress.

I believe that Lawrence Lessig would make many positive changes if elected to Congress.

I hope he decides to run.