Tiger, Tiger, Burning Blight

Yet another media circus occurred today. Tiger Woods held a press conference to apologize for his much televised marital failures and transgressions. In this instance the circus atmosphere was delivered by both Tiger Woods and the media, who collectively presented themselves as clowns and buffoons. Tiger was the lesser clown here where he merely came across as a stiff and puppet-ish character. His performance simply reflected someone who really isn’t a polished or comfortable public speaker; at least not when discussing topics outside his own turf. He apologized, asked for forgiveness and vowed to strive to do better. Tiger also implored the media to refrain from intruding into the lives of his wife, children and mother.

Now for the real clowns of the show. The media exhibited their well developed skills of trying to get the audience’s attention by any and every act that might be offered up to the lowest and basest interests that typifies the public’s insatiable appetite for repugnant behavior. I understand that there is a large proportion of the population that seems addicted to seeing other people’s failures and disgraces. But the media doesn’t just prostitute themselves when feeding this appetite, they cultivate it and enable it. You cannot completely blame them for acting this way, since they are paid and paid well to provide the muck to the masses.

And it is in the media’s efforts to squeeze every ounce of vile, vulgar, sordid and squalid measure of their audiences’ attentiveness out of such stories that demeans and disserves the public. To sensationalize these events beyond providing the simple story and facts is unworthy of a society that advocates individualism and striving to making your own way. These principles do not rely upon us degrading others and finding satisfaction in our judging their inferiority. Even if you think it is necessary and important to know about their problems and troubles, it is not necessary to fixate upon and foam at the mouth over every miniscule detail or salacious factoid that can be dug up in a never-ending quest for some way to keep an easily generated new item alive in the media, in order to titillate and arouse the schadenfreude in us all.

What is the point or value in asking people or “experts” if they think that Tiger is sincere in his apology? Is their opinion really of any value? If they agree that he is being real and honest, does that mean he is? If they are convinced that he is acting or lying just for his own benefit, do you think they have some special ability to know what may or may not be in his mind or heart? His apology is meant for you, not for the public-collective. You, and you alone, have to decide to accept or reject his apology based on the merit you see, feel and find in his effort. And you have to use your values in that judgment, including your belief in forgiveness and compassion for others; and from my perspective you have to be confident that you would want everyone else to treat you according to your principles is the same way.

As for the media, I hope that more people will reject the rubbish and putrid fare that they proffer as the best that they can bring to the public conversation. If this is the best that they can do then we should all be looking for quality and top-notch media providers; because you should not be settling for the dregs when the you can easily have the cream. Their success and power is completely granted to them by you. They only succeed if you are willing to pay them. And you do pay them. If you think that you don’t then consider who is if not you?

As for Tiger, he lost my respect and I won’t support him. But I will let him try and earn back my respect.

How To Tell If You Are A Media News Idiot: A Test

Considering that we are all presently alive and therefore living in the Information Age, it is not inappropriate to ask whether we as individuals or we as a collective society are benefiting from the almost unlimited and unprecedented access to information that is promoted and advertised as the essence of the “Information Age”. This access has certainly not just changed our society; it has redefined almost every aspect of our lives which our society has established as the aspired to norm. We communicate with each other in forums and formats that did not even exist only a couple of years ago. We shop virtually, we entertain ourselves both singularly and as groups, and we work at home in our underwear conducting official functions on behalf of our corporate, public or governmental employers.

Among all this information that is available to our finger-tips, viewed on our screens and heard via our media players are a cornucopia of news purveyors. This veritable horn of plenty presents news outlets that are not actually any different than they have been in the past, there is just an over abundance of different voices harkening for our attention. Talking heads that are presenting the ‘news’ with any number of objectives and motives of their own divorced from insuring that you are being given facts as opposed to ‘spin’. This includes news celebrities and personalities that are perceived by many of their viewers as more important than the news or the validity of their representation of the information that they are presenting. While we have always had this aspect to our news distributors, I am not sure that it has been as callously and heinously abused within the American journalistic industry as it is today. But I can accept that it may only seem worse, since there is just more of it; rather than that the level of disreputable behaviors exhibited by the individuals, companies/corporations, and institutions constituting the news media is any greater than it has ever been.

So what’s a person to do? Who do you, or can you, rely upon to provide you with access to accurate, honest, and dependable news and information about your world? Well, the answer to that question is another American Intelligence Test. And as I have done before, you have to score your own test; and you have to rely upon your own self-respect and integrity to decide if you answer correctly or not. Just like with the ‘news’ media, you have to decide if you trust the source; and you will notice that this issue is part of the test itself.

So quills to the ready. It’s Test Time!

Question 1: Do you watch the News (A), or do you watch a News-caster or News show (B)?
The context of this question is whether the news is important to you because it is vital to insuring that you are aware of what is happening in the world and our society. And, that the news is not just reassuring you that the way you see the world is being affirmed by the broadcast; or that the news is a form of entertainment that you enjoy without any consideration of what the news reports are about?

Question 2: Do you find that you agree with and like the statements made by the news reporters/anchors regarding their news reports? [Y/N]
When you are listening to the reports (and interviews) are you usually on the side of the reporter, and agree with what they are saying? Do you think to yourself: “Yes, that’s the way it is.”?

Question 3: For the primary News show(s) that you watch regularly, do you trust that the news/information being presented and accurate and reliable account; and is the news being presented without the reporter’s/anchor’s position/opinion also being expressed? [Y/N]
Is the reporter/anchor telling why the new item they just mentioned is a good or bad event, that they agree with or disagree with the position depicted in the news, or that the news item is something that you should support or resist?

Question 4: Do you think a comedy show, like the Daily Show on the Comedy channel, could possibly provide better insight into issues in the news than the more traditional news broadcasts that you watch? [Y/N]
If you have ever watch one of these shows, has it ever seemed that the comedy show brought the events, issues or information into a better perspective and demonstrated a superior presentation of the new items to you than was done by the “real” news reporters, anchors, shows?

Question 5: For the news broadcast that you would consider your favorite, do you trust the reporter/anchor or new show? [Y/N]
This question is asking if you would place the judgment of the new-casters above your own? Do you think they have asked the right questions, done the right research or insured that the research was properly done for them; and that they have understood the event, issue and the news itself better than you?

Test Over. You can place your News IQ quills back in the old inkwell.

How did you do? And, oh yes, the most important of all the questions is: are you being honest with yourself?

If it’s of any interest, here’s how I did.

Question 1: A Question 2: N Question 3: Y Question 4: Y Question 5: N

This is your second opportunity to determine if you contribute more intellectual value to the American collective brain-bank than your fellow Americans, or if you are a millstone pulling us asunder.