The small earthquake you just felt...

...was the rumble of my brain wanting to explode.

For educational purposes only I watched Barbara Walters' 10 Most Fascinating People of 2005. I'm watching this to compare the journalistic style of Barbara Walters to Edward R. Murrow. Now it might sound like this is an unfair battle, and that I'm intentionally setting Walters up to fail (not that she's putting up much resistance) but I've got two reasons for this. 1) I'm writing my paper now and that's the show that was on, and more importantly 2) Walter's uses a style of journalism that Murrow pioneered with his show Person to Person.

As expected, Walters mainly covered movie stars and other celebrities. One politician made it on the list, Condoleeza Rice, and one other figure of international importance, Camilla Parker Bowles. I want to note that Walters did not interview either of these people, but merely showed footage and photos (I'm especially fond of the fast paced switch back camera style they use on old still photos to make them look cool). I'm not going to knock her terribly hard for this, because both are about as high up in political fame as you can get right now, but it meant that she only really interviewed movie stars like Tom Cruise, which kind of defeats the purpose of a Walters special. Don't we watch to see her ask emberassingly stupid questions of celebrities?

This isn't SO bad I guess. I'm not surprised by anything, but I remain continually dissappointed with the state of television journalism, especially while I'm thinking about its bold beginnings with Ed Murrow at the helm.

But then Walters had to drop the cherry on top that would leave me wanting to run my head through a wall. Walters announced news special coming up Heaven: Where Is It? How Do We Get There?. She ended with the comment "I hope that by the end of the show you will have some answers to those questions."

(this is the point in which my mouth hung open, and I contemplated allowing my head to explode)

Of COURSE! What was I thinking? We've been going about this all wrong! What we REALLY need to answer the deep questions in life is the hard hitting investigative reporting we've come to expect from ABC, some muckracking research from Barbara Walters. I know I'll be watching, and taking notes on how I can get to heaven.

It is possible that the report will be far more interesting than that, and I truly hope that the title is misrepresenting the work, but I have this fear of a sit down tet-a-tet between Barbara Walters and Pope Benedict where Walters asks "Pope Benedict, may I call you Ben? The people want to know, just how does one get to heaven?" (if the forces to be have any sense of humor at all, he'll respond "Hell, I'm the pope! Don't I just get a free pass?")

Let me remind you, if you had forgotten, Walters' amazing interview several years back with fascinating person Will Smith. She asks what "getting jiggy with it" means. Smith, amused, tries to explain to Walters the concept the way a 14-year-old would explain to their bewildered parent who asks "Just what is it with you crazy kids these days?"

Walters, in her hard hitting journalistic way, asks, "Will Smith... Am I... getting jiggy with it?" (you've got to add the dramatic Walters pauses).

Forgive me, if you will, for doubting Walters' ability to present an intelligent and compelling look at the afterlife. Perhaps I'm already too cynical and set in my ways when thinking about the afterlife, but I'll be watching the special for amusement purposes only, because I'm betting it'll be a laugh.

In the meantime, I'd like to recommend that my gentle readers hop on down to their local theatre and check out George Clooney's Good Luck, and Good Night if it's still around. It's worth every penny, and seeing the old footage, and hearing the broadcasts alone brings chills down your spine. I'm a bit of a Murrow fanatic, so I'm quite biased, but his writing is truly inspirational. With just the use of words he really sets a scene and brings you into the action. His descriptions of London during WWII and the description of Buchenwald are chilling, and some of the best writing you'll see. He's a master of showing and not telling.

KWVA Playlist for Tuesday, Nov 29, 2005

I said I would start posting the playlist for my radio sets here, so here it is! I was feeling in a pretty dancy mood this morning, perhaps because we face our final week of classes here at the University of Oregon. We need all the help we can get to survive finals.

MF Doom - Horehound*
Annie - My Heart Beat
The New Pornographers - Use It
Blackalicious - Powers
MF Doom - Black Snake Root*
Ladytron - Destroy Everything You Touch
M.I.A. - Pull Up The People
The Go Team - Ladyflash
(sponsorship break)
Common - The Corner
Jackson 5 - ABC (Salaam Remi Krunk-a-delic part mix)
Ayinde Howell - Rock F.M.
MF Doom - Orange Blossoms*
Dangerdoom - Old School
Andrew Bird - Fake Palindromes
Clap Your Hands Say Yeah - Over and Over Again
George Russell - A Helluva Town (Sa-Ra "Go" Mix)
MF Doom - Horehound
White Stripes - Blue Orchid
Yesterday's New Quintet - Superwoman*

*These tracks were used for background between tracks. All of the MF Doom tracks are from a CD called Special Herbs: Vol 5 & 6.

You can listen to KWVA here or here.

My next show will be 4 a.m. to 6 a.m. this Friday morning. Next week I'll be hosting the "One Band / One Hour" show! I'll be spinning a full hour of Andrew Bird. I'm really excited about this show, I hope you can listen! It's happening Friday, Dec. 9 at 4 p.m. West Coast time.

East Atlantic Side Story

I came up with this idea earlier, and it was too good to just leave in the comments section of another blog that I frequent.

I give you this years crossover musical hit:

EAST ATLANTIC SIDE STORY

The streets of London are overrun with violence. The Narnia Sharks are just plain sick of the Hogwarts Jets strutting around like they own the whole fantasty nitch. London and it's underground fantasy universe has become owned by the rival gangs and their ongoing battle for the best fantasy book series turned film. Tony Blair is unable to control the situation because, well, everytime something happens the wizarding ministry comes and performs an obliviate curse on him.

But amidst the violence, two lesser known characters, Neville and Susan, find love. They relate, at first, on the fact that they're brushed aside by the spotlight stealers (Harry, Peter and Lucy). But soon their love matures and they have a secret marriage performed by Hogwarts caretaker Filtch.

Hope has finally come to the rivalling gangs. Susan and Neville's love could bring the two worlds together, but when Neville tries to bridge the warring sides, tragedy strikes. Seamus Finnigan is killed in a tussel with Mr. Beaver, despite Neville's best attempts to convince the anamorphized mammal that he indeed loves him as a brother. Seamus Finnigan dies cursing both Narnia and Hogwarts, his last words were "You have made flobberworm meat out of me!"

Neville is expelled from Hogwarts (dum dum DUMMMMMM!) In a desperate attempt to escape from Narnia Susan fakes her own death by making it appear as if she were turned to stone by the White Witch. Neville, not knowing that it is all fake, self directs a fatal Avada Kadavra curse. Susan wakes to find Neville dead. There'll be a real real good show stopping number here. During the funeral Hermoine cries into Ron's shoulder, Harry sulks away from Ginny who stands all alone. Lucy insists during the funeral that she thinks Aslan is right around the corner, but is, of course, ignored.

There won't be a dry tear in the house.

The Christmas Conspiracy

Salon had an extensive article today about the debate over the secularization of Christmas. The article can be found here.

It's times like these that I am at a near loss for words. I find it ironic how pervasive Christmas has become, even here in the Northwest which sports the highest number of unchurched people, to then see the religious right coming out about a "conspiracy" fronted by liberals and the ACLU to squelch Christian belief.

I can't articulate my feelings very well, because they're very strong and wide in scope. To sum up my thoughts simply: I would hope the Christian right would have something better to do with their time than get upset at Target for saying "Happy Holidays." I can't see why battles like this become priority over, oh I don't know, feeding the poor, and spreading goodwill among the people. I can't seem to find that point in the Bible in which Jesus says that we have to defend Christmas against the evil-doing secularists. What I do often find in the Bible is Jesus griping about big headed religious leaders, and just as often, warning the disciples against flaunting their beliefs publicly.

Andrew Bird on Bob Dylan

Our friends over at You Ain't No Picasso are my favorite people in the world right now for posting a lovely Andrew Bird song found here.

If you dig through the archives you'll find that I've got a special place in my heart for Andrew Bird's music. He truely is a talented performer and songwriter. There is little (dare I say it, nothing?) with which to find fault in his music. "Oh Sister," by Bob Dylan, can be found in physical form on the Mojo cover album that came with their August issue.

Bird appears with his frequent collaborator Norah O'Connor. When those voices get together the inferior angels sulk away feeling great shame. This particular track is really quite different from a lot of his work. I would equate it most closely to album before last, Weather Systems, but even still this one has more twang to it, and that strumming is just AMAZING.

This track is neck in neck with the new Harry Potter flick for the highlight of my week award. I haven't grown tired of it yet, and doubt I will anytime soon.

As an aside, since I haven't mentioned it before (I don't think) I'm a DJ at KWVA radio. If you're ever in Eugene, Oregon from 4 a.m. to 6 p.m. Friday's, please tune into to 88.1 and give me a listen. Chances are you'll hear something by Mr. Bird. If you listen Friday, I have no doubt at all that you'll hear this song at some point. On December 9th, I'm hosting a special show at 4 p.m. called One Band, One Hour. It's a different host every week. We DJ's get to showcase one of our favorite bands or artists. December 9th I'll be doing an all Andrew Bird hour for the One Band, One Hour show. So if you're in Eugene, please tune in at 88.1. If you're not, you can listen online here. In the future I hope to post my playlist online. I may not remember, but I'll try.

AVAST YE SCALLYWAG SPAMMERS!

Take up your sword and stand stout footed ye landlubber spammers! For I bear a new weapon, the mighty sword of WORD VERIFICATION! I see ye shaking in ye spammy boots ye pathetic urchins! Prepare for the sharp cold taste of my spam blocking STEEL!

OkayI'mdone...

I've grown tired of the comments that say "Hey I like your site, check out my cool site about cats!" and then links you to some horrible website that with which I want no association. So I have taken steps to make sure this happens no more! Now when you post comments there will be an image of some letters that computers allegedly can't read. You just have to copy down those letters to post. This'll keep computers from posting on the comments page, as amusing as they sometimes can be. Welcome to a new free world without spam!

The Lion, the witch and the misogynist (Part 2)

I'm very glad to direct you to this NPR story about the Hollywood adaptation of The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe. Although it's only mentioned breifly, Andrew Adamson decided to deal with the issue of sexism in his new adaptation. Adamson wanted to change some of the gender issues, such as Aslan telling Lucy and Susan that they cannot fight in the war because "battles are ugly when women fight." (sidenote: I can't find Aslan saying this in the book, Father Christmas however does. I'm not sure if this was simply changed for the film, or just an error on NPR's part) Adamson said he was unwilling to put these parts in his film. Douglas Gresham, C. S. Lewis' son by marriage to Joy Davidman, inherited the rights to the stories, and was against Adamson changing the gender issues of the book.

Adamson however argued that C. S. Lewis changed his perceptions of women when he married Gresham's mother, Joy, and his books started to reflect that as women started receiving stronger rolls (sidenote: check out Till We Have Faces and A Grief Observed to see how this plays out in Lewis' later writing). Gresham and Adamson, as NPR reports, came to a compromise. Susan is allowed to fight, but in the end does not kill anybody.

I find it ironic that Davidman really railed Lewis for some of his gender views, which eventually changed them, in my opinion, for the better, and now her son is defending Lewis' earlier stance on gender. He may be merely arguing for the sake of accuracy to the original work, since we will never know what Lewis himself would have wanted.

I am curious to know what Phillip Pullman, author of the His Dark Materials trilogy and one of Lewis' most vocal critics, would think of the story now? I would not be surprised of Pullman is still very skeptical, even with some of the more obviously sexist moments removed. Pullman has some very clear views on religion. His books tend to argue that religious belief tends to get it all wrong, and usually just shadows what is really happening. The end of the third part of the trilogy The Amber Spyglass I think makes some really important points, which lead me to believe that Aslan as a deity is probably quite unsettling to Pullman, and I can definately respect that since I find Aslan a very unsettling character as well.

To Adamson, I applaud you for not merely taking this story and presenting it as it is in the book, but really looking at what the book means and thinking not only in the context of today, but the context of Lewis' life. I quite agree that Lewis became far less sexist as time went on, and I am very curious to know what he would have wanted for the stories. Lewis was not a simple person, he was very complex and very dynamic, and as a result I think very open to new ideas. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have married a Jewish-American women who was so adept at knocking sense into him.

Cash prizes!

I've got $100 for the person that can give me a 4 to 6 page analysis of Doug Underwood's book, From Yahweh to Yahoo: The Religious Roots of the Secular Press by 2:30 a.m. It needs to be decently written of course, and include criticism of the book, and if you're able, toss in some current events, comparing the ideas to what is happening now. Get it to me by 2:30 a.m. November 14th, and you my friend have earned $100. Payment will be disbursed upon my finding that the paper will earn me a minimum B grade. An A will get you not only the $100, but my praise and admiration. Oh, and you're not to speak of this to anyone, especially not my professor.

Aaron

p.s. In actuality I will be writing the paper on my own, and not accepting anything. I don't have $100 to give you anyway. But if you contact me between now and 3 a.m. I will whine about the fact that I am still writing my paper to you, for FREE!

Don't put My Morning Jacket on your iPod!!!!

Sony is getting sued. And will probably be sued again, and again, and again by different government organizations for the same reason. Why you ask? In my estimation it's because Sony is dumb. Sony put a "rootkit" on a bunch of recently released CD's including My Morning Jacket's "Z" that will, upon inserting it into a CD-Rom drive, install a program on your computer that monitors your computer. It's a cloaked program, which leaves your computer susceptible to other viruses. You can read more about the subject Here! and Here!

Despite just being just plain irritating, this is highly unethical, and we'll soon find if the courts think it's illegal, which I truly hope they do.

This whole issue of course is wrapped up in the music industry's constant whining that music downloads are keeping food off of their overstuffed table. There is one part of me that would like to argue that the music industry has enough money as it is, and doesn't need whatever it's losing. But in the capitalist world we live in they're really allowed to make as much as they want, and sue if anyone is keeping them form making more, so I'll take this in a bit of a different direction.

The problem here is that the music industry has failed to learn their lesson here. The music industry has failed to realize that it's businesses practices are so idiotic that people feel justified in resorting to stealing music. I'm not condoning piracy in any way, but from the perspective of the music bigwigs, I would be reconsidering my business strategies once people across the world feel ethically motivated to steal. The music industry really only needs to do one thing, a very complicated thing, but one thing to win back the hearts of music consumers: Give us a reason to support you!

The music industry I believe puts too much emphasis on marketing, and not enough on the actual product we're buying: The music! If they put some effort into making a really great product, we would be more inclined to pay for that product. I think Wilco is a great example of this. Wilco's popular album Yankee Hotel Foxtrot was pirated all over the place before it was released. Due to conflicts within the band, and with Warner Brothers (who wanted the album to be reworked because they didn't think it was marketable) the album was delayed heavily. In the process tracks were leaked to fans, and they happily downloaded all they could get. When the album was finally released, did Wilco suffer because of downloaders? Quite the contrary, the album was a hit. It charted high, and was praised by critics as one of the best albums of the year. The band, to this day, credits the illegal downloads as helping promote their album and making it their most commercially successful ever. Here is an example where hard work pays off. Wilco gave us a product that was worth our payment. The album is fantastic and I'm sure will be remembered for years to come. Wilco, and other groups that gave the finger to the record industry and took their own road, like Aimee Mann for example, have found that by providing a good product (The MUSIC) they can be successful without a record label.

On the flipside, there is the price. Has it occurred to the record industry that DVD prices are dropping like mad right now? I’ve caught myself standing in the checkout line at Target, and I see a DVD that I hadn’t previously considered purchasing and suddenly the $7.99 price beckons to me and says “buuuuuuuy me Aaron! I’m only the cost of twooooo rentallls!” And I’m tempted. All the while CD's prices have ridden a slow climb in price. It was about 11 years ago, when I started frequenting record stores that I developed my sense of music sales: When a big artist, with big backing, and big financial success released an album, it was fairly cheap. Because it was so mass-produced, a record company could afford to release the album at a lower price. When your small local band releases an album, it's a little more expensive, because to produce each CD costs the band a little more, and they have fewer resources. Over the years the independent albums have remained at a moderate price, while the big label records have only increased in price. The record companies may cite illegal file sharing as the reason for this, but this steady rise in price predates Napster as far as I can tell.

And what studies have found, like this one reported by the BBC here mp3 and other compressed audio downloads have increased in sales substantially. The study also states that people who illegally download music purchase more legal music than anyone else. What this means to you bigwigs in the music industry: people will pay for it! You just need to get it together enough to offer them a reasonably priced, quality product. I think on the whole fans of the music want to support the musicians, but not the record industry. If the record industry started offering good products, and conducted good business, I'd want to support them too!

Geek Squared

So previously I mentioned I was reading an interesting book called "We The Media" by Dan Gillmor. I recommended my faithful readers check it out, and linked to a free online copy of the book. Now that I'm done with it I want to summarize a few things and point out a few problems.

Gillmor argues that a new journalism is emerging in which the line between the professional journalist and the consumer are blurring. With the use of blogs, such as this one, Wikis, like Wikipedia, and other technology citizens can contribute to the conversation. It allows us to not only report, but comment. Journalists can take advanage of this by using citizen journalists and blogs to inform their research. For example, if I was doing a story on a particular subject I could seek out blogs written by people who are particularly interested in the subject. Gillmor does is work with the assumption that the reader knows more than he does, and he relies on the reader to inform him. Ultimately Gillmor feels that this technology will open up the doors to grassroots journalism, and give a voice to the fringe groups.

As for the problems with the book, you might have caught them in the last sentence. Gillmor is focused heavily on grassroots journalism, but I question how grassroots it can be when it requires technology that is only available to a certain economic class. I also question how fringed the group of emerging citizen journalists really are if they're in that economic bracket that can own these devices. Gillmor believes that the internet has broken down geographic barriers, but I would say that it did not break down economic barriers, and in fact may be reinforcing them. Gillmor, in his upcoming introduction for the paperback edition, talks about iPod's being the new way of deseminating information. An iPod, last I checked, costs between $200 and $300. I hardly see the grassroots really catching on here. Gillmor is optimistic that as the prices of digital devices drops over time, that more people will have access. I have two problems with that idea in and of itself: First, the dropping prices may be indicitive of outsourcing and globalization, which I wish Gillmor would at least address, but he doesn't. The second, as the prices of the current technologies drop, new technologies will take their place, and become more efficient. The question then is, will the new technologies be compatable with the old? Will it create just another version of the same economic divide?

That said, the book makes some important points. Technology is being used by a vocal group of people with good effect. Although Howard Dean did not win the election, without the help of online blogs and fundraising (in very small incriments) he would not have made it as far as he did in the election. I say this not as a direct promotion for Dean, but as an example of how the Internet and modern technology really made a difference. I myself am allowed to spew text at you complaining about Mike Love, and if that isn't one giant leap for mankind, by god I don't know what is.

So it's on to the next book about journalism: From Yahweh To Yahoo: The Religious Roots of the Secular Press. I warn you now: get shelter people! Yours truely is diving into a book about religion and the press. He's gonna go geek squared. The only way this could get worse was if the subtitle was The Religious Roots of the Secular Press As Seen Through Press Coverage of the Beach Boys 1965-1971. If that book is ever released, I beg you to leave the country for your own good. It will unleash a world of agony for all who surround me.

Mike Love Sues Brian Wilson, Discord/Harmony Reporter Loses His Cool

Pitchfork media reports that the associated press reports the Beach Boy Mike Love is suing Beach Boy Brian Wilson over the Smile album. According to Love's lawyers Wilson used the Beach Boy moniker to promote and sell the album, and since Love owns the Beach Boys moniker, he's taking Wilson's smiley butt to court.

The article can be found here!

I'm all about journalistic integrity, and I'd love to remain objective, but I'm afraid I'm going to have to stray a little bit here and say this:

Mike Love! You're a musical hack and the only reason you were any good is because Brian Wilson was at the helm of the Beach Boys. As soon as Wilson backed down (with no help from you Mr. Love) from running the Beach Boys you'll notice your records made a slow decline off of the Billboard Charts. In addition, that patented sound of the Beach Boys was f-ing creating by Brian Wilson. You hated Smile and were instrumental in bringing it down (I won't deny that Brian's use of LSD and subsequent insanity certainly helped, Mr. Love, but you were there to help give him the heave-ho over the edge).

So I majored in psychology, so please let me give you a bogus diagnosis. You're just bitter that he finally created the album that marks the downfall of the Beach Boys, critics loved it, it actually charted (unlike the Beach Boys albums in which you had more artistic control) and you're hoping to cash in. I can't wait to see you come out and talk about how brilliant you though tSmile was in the next Boys documentary.

Leave the dude alone. You've got enough cash of the Beach Boys.

I'm taking things in a bit of a different direction...

Well, after some thought, I've decided to take this blog here in a bit of a different direction. I found that coming up with posts debating religious issues was too much of a strain on my head, which is currently filled with classwork and internships. It was asking to much of my humble brain to then come home and debate theology and such. So I've opened my blog up to a wider range of material, such as politics, media and music. It might stray even further than that.

Although this is a change in content, we offer the same guarantee of quality and awesomeness (editor's note: on the advice of our lawyers we would like to note that we have never before offered quality and awesomeness, and do not support this guarantee in the future)

As you've seen in the last couple weeks I've definately strayed from the original plan, so I thought I'd make it official. Thanks for reading! And thanks for your comments!

Aaron

We The Media

Well, as some of you know, since you know me personally, I am studying to become a journalist. This may be news to my VAST number of fans from around the world who have never met me (editors note: we can not confirm that the author of this blog actually HAS any fans to speak of.)

Anyway, I am entering a career that may soon surpass law as the most loathed of professions, but with any luck, we may get our wits about us and gain a little respect in the world. The following book might be a player in the conversation that will lead to the reclaiming of journalisms soul:

We The Media: Grassroots Journalism By The People, For The People by Dan Gillmor. I recommend this book to you because it analyzes current technological advances and trends, such as web broadcasting, internet news, wiki's and blogs such as this one. It emphasizes the importance of technological power being put into the hands of the users. For example, the author would probably be a fan of this blog. I use Blogger to create my blog, and I have the freedom to change the actual code of the blog myself to dictate how my site functions.

I won't comment just yet on what I think of the book, but I think it's an important conversation at the very least. The best part is the author is very committed to the free aspect of this conversation. You can buy the book, as I did before I knew that you can read the book in its entirety online at this link!.

Poke around and see what you think. For all of you bloggers out there (since most of the readers I am aware of myself on this here site are all bloggers) feel a sense of pride that you're contributing to the future of journalism. And for those of you who use it just to post pictures of your cat... feel deep shame. (kidding...)