Feb 8, 2010 3:35 PM Tonight at 6pm, CBS13 is airing part two of an investigation called "Fantasy Island". It's about the UC system's island research station worth millions. In an era when budgets are being cut to the bone and beyond, we ask the question - is this resource worth the investment? One of my blog readers tipped us off to this story - which I handed over to producer Mike Luery to look into. I just wanted to say kudos to viewers who point out issues we need to investigate. We do a better job when we find out what it is you know and want to know more about. I'd also like to say heads-up: part two airs tonight at 6pm! If you miss it, you can log onto www.cbs13.com and watch it when you have time. It's worth it. Feb 4, 2010 9:06 PM
"No Holds Barred", that's how it was billed...putting dyed-in-the high quality wool democrat Willie Brown and feisty but fashion-challenged Republican consultant Frank Luntz together on stage at Sacramento's Crest theater today.
Standing next to my cameraman, at the back of a nearly packed audience in the basement screening room, I was ready to hear them rip into a debate about Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson's strong-mayor initiative.
Turns out, they both support it. However, Luntz thinks the voters should be given the right to decide for themselves if they want that kind of leadership. Brown, on the other hand, admits he created his own strong mayor position in San Francisco and believes voters should only decide in the ballot box who they want elected.
Just hours after the political glitterati left the stage, news broke that the 3rd District Court of Appeals effectively nixed a June vote on the initiative. The court denied a request to delay a January ruling that concluded a strong mayor initiative cannot be decided by voters because it would violate the city's charter.
Late in the day the mayor issued a statement saying "I'm very disappointed by the decision, and that's putting it mildly". He says "...inspired like never before to fight" but it's not yet clear what's going to happen next...
So, back to Willie Brown and Frank Luntz, who frankly didn't linger long on the topic of the initiative, but instead traded jokes and shared insightful political analysis on much bigger issues.
Some highlights: Willie Brown slammed special interests (actually he called them "nitwits") and pointing out as they put together many of California's ballot initiatives they've created a "cottage industry" for themselves. He also said President Obama should have tackled health care reform one strategically chosen issue at a time, but instead essentially squandered his political capital trying to tackle it all at once.
Frank Luntz added President Obama and other elected officials have not clearly communicated their key issues to the American public, and have deeply underestimated just how angry voters now are. He warned to expect some surprises from voters who ant someone they can trust and will be looking for accountability as they head to the polls in the midterm elections.
Luntz kicked off the whole event today with a quip - that he wasn't allowed to say it but he and Brown first met at Betty Ford [alcohol and drug treatment center]. Brown shot back: "that was when I was dating Betty"!
At the very least, it was an entertaining little gathering.
Feb 3, 2010 8:43 PM
For a couple of weeks I've heard our weather team repeat this word "virga". It's a favorite word of mine, but if you haven't caught the definition - here it is, according to Random House: streaks of water drops or ice particles falling out of a cloud and evaporating before reaching the ground.
It causes what looks like sheets of rain falling from the clouds. It always reminds me of something you'd see in a classical oil painting!
Feel free to share you favorite words and their definitions with me... Jan 29, 2010 9:11 PM
Why do some feel the need to drag others down when they try to do good? What's the upside? Where's the benefit? Why should one act of good mean less than another? How can any act of good be considered bad?
I ask because I received several emails criticizing people who are adopting, or trying to adopt, Haitian orphans. Assuming they are working through legal channels and adopting children who truly have no homes, what is wrong with reaching out and helping them?
The critics say children here need homes first. Yes, there is a need - I've seen it firsthand, and I've heard the familiar phrase that charity begins at home. However, when someone has the impulse to do something good, how can you stop them and say they aren't doing the right kind?
An act of love has ripple effects. When someone chooses to adopt from Haiti, that may prompt someone else to do what they've always considered - adopting from closer to home. I've heard of someone adopted from another country growing up and choosing to adopt from the country they now call home. One act of generosity and kindness spreads to many and should be recognized and appreciated, not judged and vilified. Judgment and rage too have ripple effects...that usually end up helping no one. Jan 28, 2010 7:56 PM
-
Driving down the road the other day I saw those flashing lights - luckily not behind me, but a few hundred yards ahead. In this case they were yellow - on a Caltrans vehicle - but I knew I had to switch lanes. So I looked over my left shoulder, put on my clicker and made my move - just in time by the time I finally was able to merge.
A regular visitor to my blog reminded me that by law I needed to do this (even though it's always been my instinct anyway).
On January 1st, Caltrans vehicles with flashing lights were added to a list of emergency vehicles that require you to slow down and move (if you can safely do it) one lane away.
On its website, the California Department of Transportation warns violating this "new provision is punishable by a fine of not more than $50".
So keep your eyes peeled and stay safe. And, Harris - thanks for the reminder.... Jan 27, 2010 7:26 PM I'm listening to President Obama make a pitch to the American public in his State of the Union address. Despite Joe Biden's big grin, and Nancy Pelosi's enthusiasm (she keeps jumping up) the President seems strained. He's saying the right words - about frustrated, angry "Main Streeters" who (just like he did, he says) "hated the bank bailout". But even though he acknowledged jobs need to be his new focus, the pain of what our country is going through still seems too fresh for Americans to be as "hopeful" as the President says he is...and believes Americans are.
He also touched on the idea of strong and decent Americans being sick of pettiness and partisanship. Soon after he said that the camera cut to the audience showing lawmakers clearly divided. Democrats stood and applauded and Republicans sat quietly. It happens during every State of the Union speech, but this year it really does seem like everyone's extra sensitive. The President's managed to get a few laughs out of the crowd, which has eased the tension a bit. But it snaps back fast.
The President is now talking about tax breaks and incentives for small businesses and small banks - back to that Main Street focus. That topic did get a bipartisan cheer. He also just announced "I do not accept second place for the United States of America". Powerful words. He's talking about American innovation and investing in green jobs and educating our kids in science and math - it's hard to argue that American can really move forward without doing all of that.
Now a bold promise: doubling our exports in five years to create millions of jobs - creating something called a "National Export Initiative". Onto education: he's announcing a new tax credit for college and increases in Pell Grants . He says only ten percent of income should be dedicated to repaying student loans and wants to allow early debt retirement. Those are sure to be popular ideas, but how will the government pay for or make up for all that?
The President's now talking about helping homeowners and pushing health care reform - no surprises there - but he did make another lighthearted comment saying "Let's clear a few things up...by now it should be clear that I chose to take on health care because it was good politics." President Obama made Hail Mary pass to try and get health care reform passed.
How many times have we heard that the Federal Government should tighten its belt too? Freezing government spending, the way he proposes it, will only address a fraction of our nation's debt. It's better than nothing but again he's speaking to a skeptical country - this too is a hard sell. Restoring the "Pay as you go law" just got a big cheer and promising to publish earmark requests so the public can see them: who can't stand and applaud for that? Talk about a backlash if any lawmaker sat silent for that.
He's moved back into talking about partisanship again saying he's still "trying to change the tone of our politics" and that "we still need to govern...the people expect us to solve problems." "Just saying no to everything...is not leadership", the President is now directly challenging Republicans. "I know that all of us love this country...so let's put aside the schoolyard talks about who's tough...let's leave behind the fear and division."
He is now trying to build momentum for that last thought to stay unified by talking about ending the war in Iraq and how to handle the war in Afghanistan, supporting veterans and controlling and reducing nuclear weapons. On that global theme, he's making the segue to Climate Change - saying America's finally stepped up on an international scale to lead the fight for a cleaner environment. Seamlessly he moved from the environment to human rights - staying on that global scale and addressing Haiti.
Standing on clearly liberal ground, the President promised to take on the "Don't ask don't tell!" law that targets gays in the military. He also vows to fight for equal pay for women. Yet, he doesn't stay long on that partisan soapbox, before focusing on "American values" and admitting Americans have lost faith. Highlighting big banks' bad behavior, and that partisanship again, he admits he hasn't achieved "Change we can believe in" but says he can't do it alone, and in one year.
Obviously, there are many other topics the President covered that I didn't touch on here. His speech ran about 70 minutes and he was all over the map! I did however write about what caught my ear....as a journalist and a citizen. President Obama ended by saying "I don't quit - let's seize this moment." Earlier, he stated "It is time to get serious...." Yes, I think we all agree on that.
Jan 22, 2010 3:26 PM
I just did my first radio "hit" on Jim Kozimor's show today and had a blast. It probably won't surprise you to learn that I am not a sports radio listener, instead I'm always tuned into NPR. However, I love doing radio in any format. I used to host a classical music and news show on public radio in Florida and have done little news "hits" on pop radio in Detroit. I always have a ball. You don't have to worry about hair and makeup and can laugh and relax and - surprise surprise - actually talk for more than a few seconds. In a traditional newscast, if you've noticed, we get about ten to fifteen seconds max to say anything off-the-cuff. So now, I'm looking forward to my next cameo (just stepping in for Sam Shane who's off today and Monday). If you care to tune in, it'll be on Monday at 2:20pm...let me know what you think! Jan 18, 2010 8:58 PM Today my kids celebrated Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday at home. It was pouring rain and I had to go to work, so we spent just a few hours in the morning together. We watched a few cartoons, read a little and talked about topics that ranged from the mundane to the Solar System. I also made sure they realized why they weren't in school today, so we discussed Martin Luther King, Jr.
They generally know who he was and what he did, but I tried to take them one step beyond and show them why he is considered so brave and wise. We watched his "I Have a Dream" speech on YouTube and I tried to boil down some of what he said. I tried...but I'm not sure what sunk in. Part of me thinks there is no way they really can understand. After all, they live in California where their classrooms look like perfectly cast television commercials, with kids of all backgrounds and colors. They see each other as equals and so far it's always been that way. As they grow older they'll begin to understand things aren't always, and haven't always been so harmonious.
When I was a teenager, I experienced just a few fleeting moments that gave me a clue - just a hint - of what it feels like to be considered "less than". My family moved to Saudi Arabia, where generally women are expected to stay home, only showing their face (well, truly only their eyes) in public unless accompanied by a male relative. Women cannot even set foot in some stores - and signs are clearly posted to make sure they know they're not welcome. Even the buses have reserved sections in the back "for women only". I lived there only a short while but when I did venture onto the streets with my brother and father, I still saw in the eyes of some (not all) what was clearly sheer disgust, as if to say "how dare you walk freely among us". The looks I got shot through me like an arrow.
I cannot imagine growing up being treated that way and having my identity shaped and defined by a society that limited and degraded me. I cannot imagine what Martin Luther King, Jr. felt and experienced. I cannot imagine how the generations of Americans who felt (and sometimes still feel) as if they are unwelcome and unequal have managed to overcome. I can only try...and try to explain to the next generation why it's important...in hopes that one day we can say this will never happen again.
Jan 14, 2010 4:25 PM
One of my New Year's Resolutions was to start up my "Word of the Week" blog. I thought I'd kick it off again with a word I'm hearing quite frequently, after the earthquake in Haiti: decimate. It's used interchangeably with the word destroy, but did you know its meaning has changed significantly over the years?
The official current definition of decimate, according to Dictionary.com, is: "destroy a great number or proportion of". However the obsolete definition is: " to take a tenth of or from". It comes from Old English when warriors "select[ed] by lot and execute[d] every tenth soldier of (a unit)." So really, to say a natural disaster decimated a place or people would be to destroy a fraction of, not the entire population or place. As I said, it's not used that way any more, so it still means generally causing widespread destruction. Any way you look at it, it's not a word that means anything good.
In Haiti, my fear is the devastation caused by the decimation will last for years....
Jan 12, 2010 9:03 PM
Today a 7.0 earthquake hit Haiti and the first place I looked for pictures of the devastation was on Twitter. That was my starting point, followed by a Google search of newspapers for updated reports. I may not be part of the "Y" generation but I consume news like I am.
With all the earthquake damage limiting more traditional forms of communication, uplinked photos from cell phones told the story of the tragedy faster and more effectively than anything else I found. It made me wonder how much more we may have known early on about Katrina had Twitter been around then. In this natural disaster, not only were pictures distributed worldwide within just hours, but also individuals and organizations started raising money for relief efforts instantaneously.
Today was the perfect example of the triumphs and challenges the "New Media Reality" brings. Timely original content, provided for free, was picked up by media outlets worldwide, and incorporated into their reportage. We showed and credited pictures we found on Twitter during our 5pm newscast and offered our viewers more than just the static map we were able to generate.
When there are obstacles to getting critical information, this New Media Reality is priceless. In this case, earthquake damage blocked the way, but we've also seen government censorship get in the way too. Remember the Iranian anti-government rallies? Students were killed and jailed but the government kicked reporters out of the country. It was only through Twitter that we learned about what was really happening there.
As I've blogged about before, this new reality cuts both ways for the media industry. The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism just released a study that showed newspapers produce the bulk of original news content. However, when their content is picked up by outlets like Google and redistributed for free they lose the advertising revenue that pays reporters' salaries. I am hoping that some new business model can be determined soon that allows this two-way free flow of information will continue. We all benefit from it...especially on days like today. | |
