Mar 26, 2009
Posted by VC on Mar 26, 2009 in In The Know, Uncategorized | 0 comments
My walls rumble ominously in the wake of the sonic shock wave produced by the lightning, rattling the framed art on my walls. I’m siting in my bedroom with my laptop on my thighs, reading an article on wsj.com about how Texas School Boards are deciding whether to buy books that challenge evolution. Frankensteinian Coincidence?
If Texas School Board chairman, Republican Dr. Don McLeroy, has his way, the science books in Texas must include the notion that the complexity of cells cannot be attributed to evolution. It could also be the product of intelligent design, aka thinly-veiled creationism. I don’t understand why a man who is supposed to foster policy which increases ways to explore and understand the world in the classroom, would shut down the discussion about the origins and progression of life on Earth. I was under the impression that an education involved scrutinizing the unknown, not stamping it with a catch all, discourse terminating concept.
I don’t think a dentist is really qualified to be on the State Board of Education. Especially one who teaches Sunday school. Isn’t that a conflict of interest? Oh, wait…This is Texas. No need to separate church preachings and state funded things here. No need to pretend like he isn’t a creationist. He readily admitted to the Austin American Statesman that he is.
What’s really scary, is that the Board has the purchasing power to influence the textbooks adopted not only in this state, but also nationwide.
“Together the Board, the commissioner, and the Agency facilitate the operation of a vast public school system consisting of 1,227 school districts and charter schools, more than 7,900 campuses, more than 590,000 educators and other employees, and more than 4.5 million schoolchildren. The Board establishes goals for the public school system and adopts and promotes four-year plans for meeting those goals.”-TEA website.
Add the fact that many public schools usually cannot afford to purchase new textbooks every year; these books could be in use for a decade. For the next two days, the Texas School Board will attempt to handicap the intelligence of students in the public school system. They’re supposed to be taking public testimony on the issue before voting and making the curriculum addition official. But the link for the registration form for public testimony at State Board of Education meetings is broken.
My walls are rumbling again.
Share on Facebook
Mar 16, 2009
Posted by VC on Mar 16, 2009 in Musing | 0 comments
Recently my gorgeous boyfriend forwarded one of Clay Shirky’s blog posts to me called Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable which discussed reasons why the newspaper was going to die soon. I was interested to see that the issues my professors presented to my classes during my undergraduate coursework at UT are blogworthy and what non journalists are saying about them. One of the revolutionary approaches to the industry briefly mentioned by the article that is being used successfully by independent online start up journalism venues is crowd sourcing. It deserves further investigation and discussion.
The collaborative effort of researching data between non professional and professional journalists poses challenges to the credibility of a story written on a platform, the internet, which is already regarded skeptically by many who are used to the more established form of news publication, the newspaper. It is much easier on an overworked journalist’s psyche to ask audiences for help researching of than to drown in the investigative process. Government documents are not reputed to be the shortest or most fascinating reads. Furthermore, it is the in the best interest of a properly researched article to have as much time dedicated to it as possible; but the fact remains that there are only 24 hours in a day to accomplish goals. When a journalist is on a tight deadline to produce something articulate and well researched, the public is very commonly done a disservice by mainstream media. So, logically the traditionally underpaid professional journalist should ask for assistance. But from whom?
Any random volunteer who subscribes to an RSS feed? How credible is a citizen journalist? Much fresh perspective can be gleaned from a person who will not realize a financial loss after writing information that is potentially damaging to advertising revenue but in the public interest to publish. However, to what standards will they adhere? For what reasons should a non journalist follow the SPJ Code of Ethics or read the Elements of Journalism? Would a citizen journalist even know they exist?
I’m not going to pretend like I know for sure how the American public feels about consuming news researched by their neighbors. However, I do know that the public is not married to the traditional format of journalism. Sites like Current.com exemplify that they are open to consuming stories prepared by storytellers from all walks of life. Awards have been given to sites for crowd sourced articles. The citizen who researches could very well be someone who wanted to be a journalist and has all the training to do so, but decided that their career should be something that pays all the bills.
One of the major things that is left unresolved is how to fund journalism that people consume for free. Sites like nytimes.com have tried to make their sites pay sites and failed. How much value can you place on something for which you do not pay? As far as getting money from ads, I have never intentionally clicked on a news outlet’s ads. Ad dollars for web sites that get millions of hits like the Daily Kos are barely enough to pay for one guy’s bills and pay a few people. Grants and donations successfully fund magazines with top notch articles like Spiegel. But Americans like free stuff. I’m not sure that they would be willing to pay for it. And then who is paying for it? Does the source of the money put the publication’s bias into question? This is the spot in the conversation when people shake their heads and say, I don’t know.
Shirky describes the public’s perception of the printing press revolution which transferred the power of literacy and information access to the masses as questioned. “Was this an educational boon or the work of the devil?” Shirky writes, articulating the trust issues that people have not only with themselves but with the unorthodox sources who utilize new technology to publish and distribute to the masses. Historically people have been and are uncertain whom they could trust now that they had and have many contradictory versions of stories. User generated content may or may not be trustworthy.
Heaven forbid people start thinking for themselves. My position is that it is wonderful that people are now forced to consider more than one source of information in an unfamiliar way and decide for themselves what is true, however uncomfortable it may make them.
I have talked with friends, classmates, and mentors of mine without really finding duplicable solutions for a self sustaining, truly independent journalism venue which publishes high quality journalism minus the infotainment to pull in additional revenue. Examples of small community sites do exist. But it escapes me how to make those work on a large scale.
Share on Facebook
Mar 3, 2009
Posted by VC on Mar 3, 2009 in Musing | 1 comment
For those of you who have been reading my blog, or just tuning in, I’ve been working part time for a non profit agency for a few weeks now, preparing taxes for low income filers. Usually people are extremely nice, perceiving me and my coworkers as volunteers who are doing a good deed to help our fellow law abiding country inhabitants. Not today.
This dusty old man shuffles in wearing a maroon members only jacket and faded khakis with his bag of paperwork in hand, and plops down in the chair in front of the girl who works at the station next to me, Esmie. The waiting room was full of tired looking people; so we both rapidly start working. I’m on my third dependent claiming, education credit wanting, mortgage interest statement bearing couple and still Esmie is stuck with this guy.
“I heard on the news that we don’t have to tell you what we got on our Economic Stimulus Payment last year,” I over hear Dusty McOldfart bark at her in response to her question. I arch my eyebrow. He looks at me for confirmation and pauses for an answer. At this point, the people whose taxes I’m preparing are also expecting me to address his concern. So, I do: “You shouldn’t believe everything you hear on TV. We need to know that information to accurately assess whether you are eligible for the Recovery Rebate Credit.” He recoils and looks betrayed, as though certainly I, a complete stranger, would have had his back on this.
My boss, knowing my background, looks at me amused. Grudingly, McOldfart accepts it and Esmie continues preparing his taxes, him questioning her moves every step of the way. When she finally gets done, he owes about a grand to the treasury. He flips. Wants to know if we gave him credit for being more than 65. How much did we give him for his personal exemption, he angrily asks as he hunches forward into Esmie’s bubble. Esmie says yes and tells him. He doesn’t believe her and asks me.
I say: “Of course we did. When we enter your birth date into the computer, the software populates a yes in form 1040 line 39a which means we would give you the Elderly Tax Credit if your income didn’t exceed the income limit for the credit. But it did.”
He then asks me to see the pink slip that comes with the 1040 that he usually fills in. WTF is this, 1975? Pink slip? Who prepares taxes on paper? This request he follows up with the disclaimer: He knows how to do his own taxes and usually he does; of course why bother doing your own if you can get it done for free?
I tell him, we don’t prepare taxes on paper anymore. We enter the data into electronic documents now. He looks confused. The data gets processed faster and it saves trees, I explain.Then he tells Esmie, “She doesn’t like me.” Last year he made the same amount of money and even got money back, he rants. He calls my boss in on it, who echoes my explanations. McOldfart doesn’t like what he hears, so he asks us to start itemizing crap for him which means filing a Schedule A, and filling out unnecessary forms, because it’s obvious that his expenses will not exceed the standard personal deduction. We tell him that.
He wants a second opinion, he screams. And we are all fine with that.
At this point, I leave to go get another client. When I return, he’s on his way out.
He chirps at me, “Get it right.”
I just shake my head.
According to our receptionist, he sits in the waiting room, looks at his documents (forms a second opinion that duplicates the first), and then walks back to where we are. He yells some more at us until my boss tells him that he has the liberty to go get his taxes prepared elsewhere. I don’t understand why he wasted not only our time, we didn’t file his return for him, but also the time of the people who were in the waiting room that Esmie could have helped, People who legitimately need help with their tax preparation.
What irks me the most: Why be a douche bag to people who are providing you with a free service? If you want things done a specific way, and you want to yell at people about it, go to a big tax prep. place and pay for it. Don’t yell at us because you opted not to have taxes deducted from your distributions.
Sometimes you need to take a step back, realize that you misjudged things, and let shit go.
Perhaps today’s display was an example of one of the personality traits that has caused him to file as a single elderly man this year.
Share on Facebook
Feb 17, 2009
Posted by VC on Feb 17, 2009 in In The Know, Uncategorized | 0 comments
Cell phone manufacturers have agreed to consider a universal phone charger. The GSM Association and the Open Mobile Terminal Platform agreed that Micro-USB should emerge from the cord monster growing out of my surge protector and rise as the standard connection for charging and syncing cell phones.
Not only would it be a lot easier to find the charger that goes with your phone, but it would also mean less chargers in landfills. No word on whether it’s actually going to happen by the recommended adoption date of January 2012.
Share on Facebook
