Our Favorite Goat

It doesn't matter if it comes from Al Gore's mouth, from Jon Stewart's mouth, or my roommate's: I inevitably get irritated when anyone blames everything on "the Media." The Media is everyone's favorite scapegoat, but I might consider taking their criticism with more than a grain of salt if I knew what they were talking about. I am often on the side of the Media because I am a part of it and I generally believe in its supreme importance, but I don't pretend to faithfully campaign for the goodness of our country's media at all times even when it's doing something wrong. That's my disclaimer.

What is the Media? Are we talking about big newspapers, little newspapers, magazines, celebrity gossip shows, Cosmopolitan, The O'Reilly Factor, News at 6, NPR, ABC, FOX, the Onion? I think half the time when people are blaming all of the country's problems first on Bush, and second on the Media, they don't have a clear idea of who they're talking about. Al Gore included (during his Thursday appearance on The Daily Show, which was the trigger of my post). He made a lot of good points and Jon Stewart was generally hilarious as usual, but Gore was talking a lot about the Media and he lost me at the capital M. Which Media? After listening to him berate newscasters mostly, I was able to conclude -- if not shakily -- that he was talking about TV news. I think.

I try to stay away from TV news, besides the occasional 60 Minutes, mostly because I agree with Gore. It is very focused on entertainment. The teasers make the stories seem more interesting and important than they actually are, and when it comes down to it the short short stories don't actually say anything. TV news doesn't have the time or the interest to report on Iraq or Israel everyday, so they focus on the local, on the zany, or the different. Generally the stuff that doesn't matter. So it's the entertainment value over the actual investigation, money over matter. But would anyone watch it if it was meaningful? Would any of the approximate 50 percent of Americans watch the news "regularly" if was about exposing politicians rather than Paris Hilton? How heavy do people really want the subject matter when they get home from a long day at work? And really, there are only so many watchdogtype pieces that can come up at any given time. Maybe it's not that TV news is in league with the government and the capitalist economy, as Gore suggested, but that they don't think that anyone really cares. They probably don't. Apathetic, I think, is the word i'm looking for.

Don't newspapers do all that? Newspapers have the same annoying headlines, leads and nuts trying to get people to read it, they also have issues of ownership and advertising income, but they also have more meat. It would take a newscaster 30 minutes to read the feature I wrote earlier this year, but in print people can read it, look at the picture of the penis drawn into the grass, and take from it what interests them. Newspapers have broken some brilliant stories in the past few years, and many many journalists have been jailed and tried for not revealing their sources. Isn't that evidence enough that some reporters, at least, are trying?

Maybe the invasion of the Internet is just what we need. Newspapers (and local news stations) are focusing more and more on the local local issues, the things the people who actually read the papers care about. The local scandals, the local heroes. There are countless places the public can read about Iraq, there's only one place they can read about the city council meeting. That's the trend, anyway.

Either way, people are going to blame the Media. I don't know what, exactly, the Media is, but it's the cause of all the problems in the world.

rescheduling

Today is Sunday. It is past two o'clock and i'm marvelling at how the sun shines through my dirt-streaked windows at this time of day and how the clouds are still just visible, covering the sky with a whitish film. For the majority of Sundays since October 2005 -- when I first began my editor duties at the Daily Nexus -- I have been smooshed into the editor-in-chief's office with my clipboard, yellow pad, and pen, discussing news and half dreading a week's worth of story assigning, editing, and late nights. Today i'm eating carrots, listening to music, and I have a vague idea of what i'm going to do for the rest of the day.

Perhaps i'll start to feel more nostalgic about the end of my editing duties come Thursday, when I have spent a whole week making dinner, going to Wednesday karaoke night, finishing my assignments, and going to bed at a reasonable hour. Maybe my freedom will become more apparent tomorrow, around midday, when I haven't received a call from a single reporter, assistant, or photographer. Or later in the week when I hear a siren on campus and don't feel the familiar flutter of "I hope that's not a story." It's been a good year, it's been intellectually stimulating, i've spent countless hours laughing, problem-solving, arguing with some co-workers who have become very good friends, i've learned more than I ever needed to know about the inner workings of UCSB and how to re-word sentences. I've left a legacy of organization, competence, and a couple memorable stories. But I think four years of meager pay and four quarters of Sundays and five o'clock on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays was enough.

Well it's certainly strange this relative absence of stress, now that i've completed the hardest part of the quarter juggling a full-time job, an internship, and three classes, and purchased a one-way plane ticket to my immediate future. And i'm looking forward to it staying that way, through finals, through the packing and the plane ride and the first month or two of finding a place, adjusting, and building a life. But I will make sure to treasure my two o'clocks and five o'clocks, hesitantly at first, then more confidently up until I take them for granted. I have earned this time.

here's to hoping this is true

If I may make a terrible comparison that only I will understand, decision making is a lot like editing. A lot of things are like editing done right, but right now i'm feeling the decision-making parallel.

When I first read a horribly written and organized article (at least by Nexus standards), I feel overwhelmed, I do not know what it's trying to say, I have no idea which details matter, and I have a million questions buzzing around my fingertips. If it's especially confusing, i'll sit down with the writer and ask him or her to summarize the issue. If it's workable, i'll go through cutting and pasting, organizing by topic and spacing paragraphs to keep myself organized. Then i'll start from the top. Formulate a lead that grabs the reader, gets them hooked on the most interesting aspect of the story. Then i'll write the second paragraph, the nut. This usually takes the longest, summarizing the article and pertinent background into four to five sentences. It's also usually accompanied by a feeling that the article will never, ever make sense, nor did it make sense to begin with. Nevertheless, the remaining paragraphs usually organize themselves, pending the insertion of a really good quote, some good transitions, interesting lead-ins, and sentence variety. It's a bell curve, really, in terms of difficulty, and a diagonal in terms of improvement.

I think i'm beginning the down slope to my decision-making bell curve. I've talked to the necessary people, I've organized, i've reorganized, i've prioritized, i've rationalized, i've toiled, i've made lists, i've thought long and hard... i've written my lead and my nut and I think i'm just leaving that part where my efforts feel hopeless and just starting that part where the story writes itself -- where the decision decides itself. I'm just about to insert the best quote into the story, which generally makes me feel (if it's good enough) like all the stress was worth it.

Well I don't know if I could ever say that. Maybe when hindsight kicks in in a year or so. But the journey back to normal feels so much better when the high point of the bell curve (the vertex, if you will) was just out of my reach.

by the way

I believe that global warming is happening. Perhaps that point was a little muddled by my late-at-night brain. I think that the world’s reliance on cars -- especially the U.S.’ -- and its relative resistance to making them run with anything other than gas is disgusting and I wish I understood how cars work so I could do something to change it. I also hate that America is resistant to sign anything that pledges to lower emissions… though the UCs, for example, are doing well in that area, not everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. At the same time, it seems like nothing anyone does is going to be enough, if global warming is occurring like scientists say. But I suppose a counter to that is somewhat like the arguement for voting: every little bit makes a difference. And it couldn’t hurt to try.

I think most people are aware of it by now, which is probably a result of Al Gore and, at least at UCSB, the drill approach they’ve taken to provide us with speakers and books and discussions on it. It just seems like it’s all going to blow over. Like the Iraq war, perhaps. Next year, the vast majority will wonder if global warming is still around, it’ll be like a distant memory and everyone will be thinking, instead, about the presidential elections, or whatever it is that comes next. I could harangue the media for that, but I will abstain because i'm considering "the media" as a career and I believe in the good of newspapers, at least, at any cost. As long as the people that matter don't forget about it, the ones who sign bills and make cars and get the masses to change their lives and do things in general. Until then... I, personally, will think twice before driving anywhere (now more than ever because, with a broken car, I can't drive anywhere), use low-emissions light bulbs (even if they are blindingly bright), be receptive to new hybrid/electric/whatever car technology, and do whatever else I can think of to reduce my own impact on the environment.

I will not, however, buy credits to offset my carbon emissions. I think that's a strange and counter-productive way to live environmentally. I can use my car as much as I want as long as I pay some company according to how much I drive to invest in sustainable energy sources. Really? I will also probably not spend a year without toilet paper like the family in the New York Times who decided to be zero emissions for an entire year. But I believe in it.

Just the encouragement I need...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/05/business/05jobs-web.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

sleepwalk

I have stayed up so late the past three nights that I can't see clearly. I stumble through my homework, job applications, readings, preparations with my eyes half closed, my vision blurry through my dry lashes. The yellow light my overhead light gives off makes it seem later anyway... so I pull through that work that just keeps coming, only to awaken before 8 the next morning for more.

I haven't been this busy since this time four years ago. Every day is 20 waking hours long (to steal a phrase from my more articulate friend) and while I don't really mind the things I fill these hours with, it'd be nice to sleep.

I went to see 20/20's John Stossel speak tonight. And while my views are not in line with his libertarian outlook, it was refreshing at least to hear something different. College students are fed a diet of liberal(itarian) in classes, from speakers, and reading the newspaper. I don't realize how tiresome it all gets, this academic, optimistic, but generally worthless tone all college discussions take. So there was a liberal kid or two in Stossel's audience (not including me the fly-on-the-wall journalist), and one of them asked during question and answer how America came to have a 40-hour work week. I think he was getting at labor issues that are big around here this time of year, but Stossel started talking about how Americans have the freedom to choose the length of their work weeks... which could lead me (and led him) into a long discussion of money and the economy. But I guess my point is that it's what i've chosen, this 80-hour work week, and regardless of whether i'm making the economy healthier by my decision to work, it generally occupies me -- makes me happy.

I think, however, that my year on the newspaper staff has taught me one thing that's not necessarily positive: to hate activists. Two years ago this time I went to a protest of the war in Iraq, a protest I now wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. The activists I deal with daily are, for the most part, fairly ignorant and not picky about what they're protesting. So we get this large group of people who lead every rally just for the sake of parading around campus and yelling and who love to spout facts that are almost true at best. And though I love the environment, it's these people who pitch stories to me every week that make me hate the concepts of sustainability, going green, climate neutral, and especially global warming. I haven't yet seen An Inconvenient Truth, but Stossel made a point I found very compelling: years ago, the catchphrase on everyone's tongue was global cooling -- what happened to that? We love to be scared , but mainly, if we can't predict the weather, how can we predict climate change? It's important to look at, important to take steps to curb the harm we're doing to our environment, but it really is a ridiculous fad that's receiving far too much publicity, from my paper included. He also seemed to think the Prius is a waste of time, but then again (as he said) he has the money to pay $10 per gallon for gas (as opposed to the rest of us -- and me, whose car is broken).

I can see it happening already. If I spend most of my life in journalism, i'm going to come out the other end much more cynical, still hating activists, and quite possibly believing in decreased regulation of government -- like the good conservative I... am?