04 February 2012
Super Bowl prediction for 2012
I know it is after the fact but I predict that the Green Bay Packers will lose their first game after the announcement that Madonna will be the half time show at the Super Bowl and will mar an otherwise unblemished record. They will continue to be so disappointed in the NFL's selection of half time entertainment that they will be unable to complete a proper trouncing of all future competitors. This will enable them to pull out of the final rounds of play without having to be exposed to the already overexposed baggy old noise maker. I'm just saying.
It's all in the game.
I have finally gotten past my emotional frustrations and attachments to this year’s political shenanigans. My hopes have been dashed and disappointments have weighed heavy but are starting to fade. Those of you who were pulling for Obama 4 years ago know what I am talking about. All that talk of hope and change we have been fed turns out to be nothing more than the same old smoke and mirrors we have seen over and over again for years and years. 2012 is shaping up to be nothing less…or more for that matter.
The Republicans have assembled the same old mix of challengers (as is usually produced by the challengers), none of which can deliver the whole package that everyone would love to see. All have some fine qualities and bring some valid ideas to the table but they all come up short in other areas leaving much to be desired. It would be nice to have the ability to create a composite candidate that represented the best of all the rest. I am certain there are those that have tried to pull this off by presenting themselves as such but because it was not the person they really were they quickly faded out in superficiality. Looking for the candidates that stand on their own character without pandering to the polls and swaying their positions based on the desire of their financial supporters, is like searching for a soda that doesn’t use high fructose corn syrup. The cost of searching, finding and obtaining just doesn’t seem worth the effort.
The other thing that continues to amaze me in these races is the ability to call the game early. How many of you have gone to a basketball game and with the jump ball to start the game the announcer comes on and says first one to score a basket wins? Or who has tuned into the Boston Marathon just to see the start of the race and see who makes it to the end of the block first figuring surely they have it all sown up?
Surprise, this one is going past the first point scored but in my opinion, big fat hairy deal. The game will still be called before half time. A few states will get their 15 minutes of fame and then fade into obscurity with 38 of the other states that don’t garner a passing fancy. Nothing meaningful is coming of it and sadly doesn’t seem to matter. The talking points are the same old rhetoric and the solutions, or rather the appearance of solutions, are the same as well. I am getting tired of it all and have started to tune out which I am sensing is the same for many of the others out there. Besides, there is a football game coming up.
Some points to be made out of all this. Like a marathon race or a NASCAR race all the camera time and attention is given to those in front. If you are not in front then your only chance of catching some attention is when the guys in front come around to pass you or you are involved in a horrible crash and then you get the same amount of attention that is given to all wrecks (woo, glad that wasn’t me, check out the replay, alright commercial, time for a potty break). You might have some good ideas Rick and Ron but you are way behind at the moment and that means you will have to quadruple your efforts just to catch back up to the leaders and be considered as a candidate at this point. Most do not have the energy or stamina to accomplish this as you can see by the number of candidates that have dropped out already. Some never even made it to Iowa. Some are too dumb to realize just what it takes to create inertia.
The sad thing is the media in general and the public at large generates this inability to focus on anything beyond A vs. B. The reality of the matter is that the average person out there is way more interested in choices C,D,E,F,G,H… and has been for quite some time. Look at the channels on cable and the fact that there are more viewers collectively following them than the big three networks. The internet is full of niche players that cater to the interest of individuals. Their audience isn’t meant to be everyone, it is only meant to be those who enjoy a like view. Until the mainstream realizes this and figures out a way to serve the many individuals, we will remain stuck with the bland clichés that sway many but serve no one.
So why is the media so quick to focus on just this or that? I am guessing that cost might be one thing since it cost money to cover everything and they don’t think they can generate enough interest to justify worthwhile coverage of back of the pack.
Also, they have a distinct bias (no matter what they claim or choose to believe). Owners and operators of the media have pushed their points of view since their respective mediums were first invented. Don’t expect anything different at this point in the game. They all do. And we tend to tune into those that most closely align with our points of view or at least give us the most entertaining stirring of emotions.
The media also has the self perception of (and reality to some extend) of being influence peddlers. In other words, they say stuff, people listen and they think and feel and do based on what they are told. This is called power and the media likes to use this power to persuade their audiences in the direction they would like them to go. Sadly, reality suggests that it works. Therefore they frame the debates and topics of discussion only upon those areas they deem serving their purpose. “But Ed, I have seen polls that state that America is interested in this or that, and that our most pressing problems are this or that. How can you say the media is driving the agenda when they are just reporting what the polls show America is wanting?” Take any news story that you are familiar with and have some real knowledge about and then look at how it is covered and not just by one source but by several. Then tell me those slight differences in wording, sentence structure and turning of a phrase don’t hint at bias. Even the headline that tops many articles gives clues to the desired reader’s response. Some headlines are completely out of sync with the article, and are totally misleading but then there are many that don’t read beyond the headline.
Only two areas escape this treatment, one being the generic story report that is copied and pasted as is into several outlets (look at Google news feeds and read a story covered by many sources and you will notice that the articles referenced are all exactly the same, word for word), while the other is the only slightly interesting local interest story that is churned out by the local reporter because ‘we have to have so much of this kind of thing in our paper and I was the one that got stuck with it’ piece. The really juicy stuff, the stuff that gets you noticed, praised and awarded, requires an injection of something more. You are writing to please your audience, and your audience is always prioritized by the desires of the boss and owner coming first, the writer coming next, and the reader/viewer in the end. Just be aware of this next time you feel yourself jumping on the bandwagon. It might be time to take a break from it all, change channel or pick up a good book.
The next point I still find amusing is that the challengers may load the gate with a dozen horses for the race and quickly boil things down to one prime challenger but the incumbent party is pretty much stuck with no choice. They have to dance with their leftover. Oh sure, they might pretend at some point to offer up another choice or two but that would be like admitting making a mistake and that won’t do for the guys on top so they must continue to show (and sometimes “show” is all it is) support for their candidate. Mediocrity thrives on just this kind of practice. Kinda sad really.
Do you realize that there are probably another half dozen parties out there besides the Republicans and Democrats and we seldom if ever hear about any of them? They don’t even make first cut and because someone is deciding that there is no chance or probability for them to win, we lose the opportunity to choose for ourselves and learn of them and from them and sure enough their probability of winning becomes nil. A self fulfilling prophecy?
Last point of things to notice this go around is that everyone loves a bandwagon. There is nothing more fun that to jump on a bandwagon, but you have to be very careful and choose the right bandwagon to jump on. If you choose the wrong bandwagon you might have to explain yourself or worse yet jump off one bandwagon and quickly jump on another. You can’t be “seen” as having picked the wrong bandwagon; it could harm a guy’s reputation. Rush has built his reputation around the fact that “I told you so”. He has had to be extra careful with his wording so that he will have just the right sound bites to fall back on when he needs help convincing you that he was right all along. And of course the Donald can do no wrong (just don’t look at his record too closely) so he is really going out on a limb this early in the race by declaring his support of Romney.
But it is all part of the fun of the game we call American politics and if you have gone through more than one race with an active interest or seen a couple of decades of elections come and go you will start to see that this really is a silly season. It is sad that we have to take any of it seriously because it is all so laughably absurd but there are serious outcomes and gravely serious consequences, and that forces us to participate. Once again I find myself wishing it didn’t really mean so much and because it does mean so much I am wishing we had better choices.
I wonder if we really do get what we deserve. That’s a scary thought.
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.
The Republicans have assembled the same old mix of challengers (as is usually produced by the challengers), none of which can deliver the whole package that everyone would love to see. All have some fine qualities and bring some valid ideas to the table but they all come up short in other areas leaving much to be desired. It would be nice to have the ability to create a composite candidate that represented the best of all the rest. I am certain there are those that have tried to pull this off by presenting themselves as such but because it was not the person they really were they quickly faded out in superficiality. Looking for the candidates that stand on their own character without pandering to the polls and swaying their positions based on the desire of their financial supporters, is like searching for a soda that doesn’t use high fructose corn syrup. The cost of searching, finding and obtaining just doesn’t seem worth the effort.
The other thing that continues to amaze me in these races is the ability to call the game early. How many of you have gone to a basketball game and with the jump ball to start the game the announcer comes on and says first one to score a basket wins? Or who has tuned into the Boston Marathon just to see the start of the race and see who makes it to the end of the block first figuring surely they have it all sown up?
Surprise, this one is going past the first point scored but in my opinion, big fat hairy deal. The game will still be called before half time. A few states will get their 15 minutes of fame and then fade into obscurity with 38 of the other states that don’t garner a passing fancy. Nothing meaningful is coming of it and sadly doesn’t seem to matter. The talking points are the same old rhetoric and the solutions, or rather the appearance of solutions, are the same as well. I am getting tired of it all and have started to tune out which I am sensing is the same for many of the others out there. Besides, there is a football game coming up.
Some points to be made out of all this. Like a marathon race or a NASCAR race all the camera time and attention is given to those in front. If you are not in front then your only chance of catching some attention is when the guys in front come around to pass you or you are involved in a horrible crash and then you get the same amount of attention that is given to all wrecks (woo, glad that wasn’t me, check out the replay, alright commercial, time for a potty break). You might have some good ideas Rick and Ron but you are way behind at the moment and that means you will have to quadruple your efforts just to catch back up to the leaders and be considered as a candidate at this point. Most do not have the energy or stamina to accomplish this as you can see by the number of candidates that have dropped out already. Some never even made it to Iowa. Some are too dumb to realize just what it takes to create inertia.
The sad thing is the media in general and the public at large generates this inability to focus on anything beyond A vs. B. The reality of the matter is that the average person out there is way more interested in choices C,D,E,F,G,H… and has been for quite some time. Look at the channels on cable and the fact that there are more viewers collectively following them than the big three networks. The internet is full of niche players that cater to the interest of individuals. Their audience isn’t meant to be everyone, it is only meant to be those who enjoy a like view. Until the mainstream realizes this and figures out a way to serve the many individuals, we will remain stuck with the bland clichés that sway many but serve no one.
So why is the media so quick to focus on just this or that? I am guessing that cost might be one thing since it cost money to cover everything and they don’t think they can generate enough interest to justify worthwhile coverage of back of the pack.
Also, they have a distinct bias (no matter what they claim or choose to believe). Owners and operators of the media have pushed their points of view since their respective mediums were first invented. Don’t expect anything different at this point in the game. They all do. And we tend to tune into those that most closely align with our points of view or at least give us the most entertaining stirring of emotions.
The media also has the self perception of (and reality to some extend) of being influence peddlers. In other words, they say stuff, people listen and they think and feel and do based on what they are told. This is called power and the media likes to use this power to persuade their audiences in the direction they would like them to go. Sadly, reality suggests that it works. Therefore they frame the debates and topics of discussion only upon those areas they deem serving their purpose. “But Ed, I have seen polls that state that America is interested in this or that, and that our most pressing problems are this or that. How can you say the media is driving the agenda when they are just reporting what the polls show America is wanting?” Take any news story that you are familiar with and have some real knowledge about and then look at how it is covered and not just by one source but by several. Then tell me those slight differences in wording, sentence structure and turning of a phrase don’t hint at bias. Even the headline that tops many articles gives clues to the desired reader’s response. Some headlines are completely out of sync with the article, and are totally misleading but then there are many that don’t read beyond the headline.
Only two areas escape this treatment, one being the generic story report that is copied and pasted as is into several outlets (look at Google news feeds and read a story covered by many sources and you will notice that the articles referenced are all exactly the same, word for word), while the other is the only slightly interesting local interest story that is churned out by the local reporter because ‘we have to have so much of this kind of thing in our paper and I was the one that got stuck with it’ piece. The really juicy stuff, the stuff that gets you noticed, praised and awarded, requires an injection of something more. You are writing to please your audience, and your audience is always prioritized by the desires of the boss and owner coming first, the writer coming next, and the reader/viewer in the end. Just be aware of this next time you feel yourself jumping on the bandwagon. It might be time to take a break from it all, change channel or pick up a good book.
The next point I still find amusing is that the challengers may load the gate with a dozen horses for the race and quickly boil things down to one prime challenger but the incumbent party is pretty much stuck with no choice. They have to dance with their leftover. Oh sure, they might pretend at some point to offer up another choice or two but that would be like admitting making a mistake and that won’t do for the guys on top so they must continue to show (and sometimes “show” is all it is) support for their candidate. Mediocrity thrives on just this kind of practice. Kinda sad really.
Do you realize that there are probably another half dozen parties out there besides the Republicans and Democrats and we seldom if ever hear about any of them? They don’t even make first cut and because someone is deciding that there is no chance or probability for them to win, we lose the opportunity to choose for ourselves and learn of them and from them and sure enough their probability of winning becomes nil. A self fulfilling prophecy?
Last point of things to notice this go around is that everyone loves a bandwagon. There is nothing more fun that to jump on a bandwagon, but you have to be very careful and choose the right bandwagon to jump on. If you choose the wrong bandwagon you might have to explain yourself or worse yet jump off one bandwagon and quickly jump on another. You can’t be “seen” as having picked the wrong bandwagon; it could harm a guy’s reputation. Rush has built his reputation around the fact that “I told you so”. He has had to be extra careful with his wording so that he will have just the right sound bites to fall back on when he needs help convincing you that he was right all along. And of course the Donald can do no wrong (just don’t look at his record too closely) so he is really going out on a limb this early in the race by declaring his support of Romney.
But it is all part of the fun of the game we call American politics and if you have gone through more than one race with an active interest or seen a couple of decades of elections come and go you will start to see that this really is a silly season. It is sad that we have to take any of it seriously because it is all so laughably absurd but there are serious outcomes and gravely serious consequences, and that forces us to participate. Once again I find myself wishing it didn’t really mean so much and because it does mean so much I am wishing we had better choices.
I wonder if we really do get what we deserve. That’s a scary thought.
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.
17 November 2011
Perry started down the right path
It may be a little bit after the fact but I wanted to see if there was going to be any additional points to the storied headlines from the Republican debate the other night other than the much maligned Rick Perry's forgetfulness. The real story was not his forgetting the third target of his smaller government plan but that no one jumped on the band wagon.
Here was a real opportunity to make real cost cutting efforts a meaningful part of the debate and start identifying Federal programs and agencies that should no longer exist (as if some of them ever should have in the first place). What would have been much more exciting for this political race and for America is if a new competition would have started that night to see who would produce the most aggressive proposal for real government reduction. The starting bid of three programs was not even bid up to four.
There are far more possibilities than those offered. The National Endowment for the Arts, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, Environmental and that is just to name a very few of the big well known areas. There are dozens more of the lesser known that could come off the top that very few have even heard of.
In addition to the outright elimination of some programs, severe cuts to others would help force them to focus on core functions and objectives that serve the purpose for which they were established. As budgets got bigger, the scope of many agencies grew far beyond their original designs as they became an obstacle and stumbling block to the very public they were designed to serve.
Of course this was promoted heavily by those in Congress that felt they had to pass a new law for every whiny complaint that past through their door. Thanks also to every whiner that brought it too them thinking that government is the solution to all our problems. And a special mention to those that execute said laws and regulations and using their own interpretations to enhance what they feel those requirements were really meant to be.
And because every one of those government programs and agencies support a "someone" somehow, there will always be opposition to turning them off. Any of them.
This is a vicious cycle we have put ourselves in and when only one in ten candidates is even willing to 'talk the talk' you know the odds of real fiscal reform (where someone will 'walk the walk') are not in the cards this go around. Don't be fooled by the sound bites and photo ops but instead look for those that will let actions speak louder than words. I'm still looking, are you?
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.
Here was a real opportunity to make real cost cutting efforts a meaningful part of the debate and start identifying Federal programs and agencies that should no longer exist (as if some of them ever should have in the first place). What would have been much more exciting for this political race and for America is if a new competition would have started that night to see who would produce the most aggressive proposal for real government reduction. The starting bid of three programs was not even bid up to four.
There are far more possibilities than those offered. The National Endowment for the Arts, Housing and Urban Development, Education, Energy, Environmental and that is just to name a very few of the big well known areas. There are dozens more of the lesser known that could come off the top that very few have even heard of.
In addition to the outright elimination of some programs, severe cuts to others would help force them to focus on core functions and objectives that serve the purpose for which they were established. As budgets got bigger, the scope of many agencies grew far beyond their original designs as they became an obstacle and stumbling block to the very public they were designed to serve.
Of course this was promoted heavily by those in Congress that felt they had to pass a new law for every whiny complaint that past through their door. Thanks also to every whiner that brought it too them thinking that government is the solution to all our problems. And a special mention to those that execute said laws and regulations and using their own interpretations to enhance what they feel those requirements were really meant to be.
And because every one of those government programs and agencies support a "someone" somehow, there will always be opposition to turning them off. Any of them.
This is a vicious cycle we have put ourselves in and when only one in ten candidates is even willing to 'talk the talk' you know the odds of real fiscal reform (where someone will 'walk the walk') are not in the cards this go around. Don't be fooled by the sound bites and photo ops but instead look for those that will let actions speak louder than words. I'm still looking, are you?
This is Ed Nef with a view from the Farr West.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)