Archive for the ‘Government’ Category

Of Rabbit Holes and Bubbles   Leave a comment

July 1, 2017

      I enjoy the internet. I make use of the internet. I don’t worship it and I’m reasonably certain I could live without it. Well, much of it. As the music industry changed in the 1980s and 1990s, I was within that business, allthewhile observing as technology and the internet began driving ever more  change. And much of it was unnerving to those of us who made a living helping unknown recording artists become successes, and successful artists become superstars. By the time I moved to New York in 1990 the change was even more pronounced, and within that decade a newly-formed company was getting attention.

MP3.com was a 1997 startup that drove record labels crazy, and record store owners even crazier by selling music directly to consumers, bypassing much of the established music-business order. Happily for me, at that moment I had already moved from business to academia to complete my BA and go on to graduate school. While teaching college students about music and the music business (to help pay for my own college and grad courses) I tested the changing and turbulent business waters by purchasing a new album as a download from MP3.com. (I also chose to get a CD copy as well.) The group was Red Delicious and the motivation was a song titled “Casualties”. I loved the recording but I was also learning the power of the internet to interrupt the status quo.

While MP3.com was an exciting startup, nervous recording industry leaders were aghast. Their place as gatekeepers of new music in the century-old music business had reached a moment of truth. With the approaching millennium change was more than inevitable; for some record label people it seemed like a non-stop runaway freight train was headed straight for their wallets. MP3.com, Napster, and the iPod would signal how the “new” music industry would evolve. Marketing people400px-Down_the_Rabbit_Hole copy would figure out which pieces of the business to embrace and exploit, and they would make their choices hand-in-hand with the new technology in a post-millennium internet age.

One of those emerging tech companies was YouTube. Founded in 2005 it was acquired by Google in 2006, assuring its future and making YouTube’s founding multi-millionaires even wealthier. The new company seemed perfectly fit for America’s ever increasingly narcissistic predilection. A regular feature on host David Lettermen’s Late Show on CBS, “Stupid Pet Tricks”, was about to give way to an infinitely larger audience. For example, with YouTube, cats (and their lesser intellectual support system, i.e., humans) had an infinitely larger venue to display both the cute behavior (cats) and the idiocy (humans), all to create a nano-measure of fame. And yet, this month I found myself caught up in my own YouTube moment. To get there, I had to jump into a rabbit hole. Just in case you are unfamiliar with the current application of the phrase, it is strictly metaphorical. Here are the basics. You look at something—almost anything—on the internet and are then presented with serial distractions. Kathryn Schulz described the phenomenon far more eloquently in a 2015 column in The New Yorker:

“Those online rabbit holes, while wildly variable in content, take recognizable forms. One is iterative: you’re settling down to work when you suddenly remember that you meant to look up that flannel shirt you saw in a store but couldn’t find in your size, and the next thing you know, it’s two hours later and you have scrutinized two hundred and forty-five flannel shirts. Another is exhaustive: you go in search of a particular fact—say, when Shamu debuted at SeaWorld—and soon enough you are well on your way to compiling a definitive account of captive killer whales. A third is associative: you look up one thing, which leads to looking up something distantly related, which leads to looking up something even further afield, which—hey, cool Flickr set of Moroccan sheep.”

STINGEDDYBENJENrev (1)     So I found myself on YouTube looking for a piece of music because a friend of mine, knowing my taste, had suggested I hear a particular performance. Having found the artist I listened to 8-10 tracks, including her performance of Bruce Springsteen’s “Dancing In The Dark”. Terrific version. But then, it got me thinking that I’d like to hear other cover versions of Springsteen songs. Click. Click. Click. Click. Suddenly I found myself watching a string of clips from the 2009 Kennedy Center Honors. There was Sting singing “The Rising”; followed by Eddie Vedder performing “My City of Ruins”; and then a duet of “I’m On Fire” featuring Ben Harper and Jennifer Nettles. These three clips are stunning in the arrangements, production values, and sheer delivery. Stunning. But there was more.

The Kennedy Center Honorees that December were, in addition to Springsteen, Grace Bumbry, Mel Brooks, Dave Brubeck, and Robert De Niro, and all five were clearly deserving of the honor. But there were a couple of other images that caught my attention. Sharing the box in the Kennedy Center that evening with the five honorees were two other people worth mentioning. Earlier this year they completed an extraordinary performance of their own. Michelle+Obama+Dresses+Skirts+Strapless+Dress+g84EM1pX9TZxNot a performance, rather, a journey. From impossible, to highly improbable, to might just happen, to reality. They succeeded.  And on January 20, 2017, their life changed again as they moved from public housing to a private residence.

Seeing the images of the Obamas from a December evening almost a decade ago was an emotional moment. It made me come to grips with just what a bubble we’ve been living in for the past eight years. It was not one of those ‘clueless’ bubbles, but rather a bubble that a majority of Americans gladly embraced. It was a good thing. The bubble that enveloped us was with an American president and his wife who spent eight years bringing dignity, humor, grace, pride, and ideas to Washington, D.C. There were successes and mistakes. But unlike most other presidents of the past half century, there were no scandals, no crazy behavior, no new wars. And let’s not forget that Barack and Michelle Obama arrived in 2009 to assess the almost total collapse of the American economy they inherited and nurture it back from the brink. The current occupant of that same unit of public housing that the Obamas left behind makes it clear how much things have changed. And not for the better. Perhaps going down a rabbit hole from time to time isn’t such a bad idea after all.

David Steffen

© 2017 David Steffen

 

Credible News. Seems Simple, But. . . .   Leave a comment

Challenging The False Narrative From #45

June 1, 2017

I’ve always been an early-riser. As a child my mother found that my body clock was set for 5:00am. She dealt with this reality as would any mother wishing to keep her sanity. Since she worked 3rd shift as a registered nurse (and didn’t return home until 7:30am,) I accepted her guidance. My mother taught me how to make my own breakfast, and provided me with an understanding of why I would live longer if I didn’t wake everyone else in the house at 5:00am. It was no surprise that years later when I delivered papers in Milwaukee, I worked for the morning paper, The Milwaukee Sentinel.

To my own surprise (based on my early years in school) I find that I read a lot these days. It’s a habit I developed in the 1970s while living in Chicago, where I became a regular reader of the Chicago Sun-Times. That choice—Sun-Times vs. Chicago Tribune—was based on two simple ideas: first, the story selection and the writing style of the Sun-Times connected with me; second, I preferred the physical size and shape of the the Sun-Times tabloid format vs. the Chicago Tribune’s broadsheet. It didn’t matter that the Tribune was larger (in number of pages and readers) and far more powerful than the Sun-Times. We all have our preferences.

The Chicago Sun-Times always seemed grittier to me, more blue-collar than white collar; more Main Street than Wall Street. Looking back to those days in Chicago my memory paints a picture of a Sun-Times that was something of a real-life version of The Sun in Ron Howard’s 1994 film The Paper, or The Day in Richard Brooks’ 1952 film Deadline U.S.A. In fact, as I recall the Sun-Times was the backdrop for the 1981 film Continental Divide Belushicd02starring John Belushi as a gritty reporter. Moving to Los Angeles in 1977 didn’t change my habits; just the names of the papers. As a resident I looked to the Los Angeles Herald Examiner and The Los Angeles Times. Both were pale versions of the Chicago papers but for more than a decade I followed the world through the lens of the Los Angeles papers. And as I began working nationally and internationally, I also expanded my reading list to include the New York Times, which I continue to read today, along with the Washington Post and occasionally the Press Democrat here on the coast.

There’s a scene in the 1977 film Futureworld, where the film’s two lead characters—a TV reporter played by Blythe Danner and a print reporter played by Peter Fonda—talk about which is more important and more popular for getting news and information. After a brief exchange (and the question remaining unresolved) they turn to a stranger. The Fonda character asks the man if he gets his news from television or newspapers? His response went something like this: “Me? I’m a tube freak, man”.  The film may be 40 years old but looking at the media landscape today, it seems that the ‘tube freak’ was on to something. According to a recent Pew Research analysis, “. . . TV continues to be the most widely used news platform; 57% of U.S. adults often get TV-based news, either from local TV (46%), cable (31%), network (30%) or some combination of the three. This same pattern emerges when people are asked which platform they prefer – TV sits at the top, followed by the web, with radio and print trailing behind.” The analysis goes on to confirm that “the greatest portion of U.S. adults, 46%, prefer to watch news rather than read it (35%) or listen to (17%).”

How we get news is less important, in my opinion, than the credibility of the news we get. There’s no question that our current president, number 45, likes to talk about ‘fake news’ as a way to explain his “stolen popular vote”, or the smaller crowds at his inaugural, or the popular resistance to his gutting of the social safety net and his denial of climate change. I don’t care if #45 believes Martians or Mexicans voted illegally to keep him from winning the popular vote. I just wish he’d either start governing or pack up his marbles and go home. Either is preferable to the continuing mistrust he sows in our society.

A couple of weeks ago I started watching 1939’s Mr. Smith Goes To Washington, in part perhaps, to help me believe that our government might start governing. Alas, I didn’t watch the entire movie because I just couldn’t bring myself to believe that there is even one strong and honorable “Jefferson Smith” residing in today’s U.S. Senate. I’d even settle for the film’s Senator “Joseph Paine” to come to mr_smith_goes_to_washington_61073-1920x1200our rescue, and tell him to keep some of the graft for his effort. Governing isn’t a lost cause, but fake news is pushing us in that direction.

Jacob Soll wrote in Politico last December that “fake news’ dates back almost 600 years, essentially since Gutenberg in 1439. As an example Soll offers this nugget: “To whip up revolutionary fervor, Ben Franklin himself concocted propaganda stories about murderous “scalping” Indians working in league with the British King George III.” With the consolidation of news outlets, local beat reporters are an endangered species, and regional and national reporters are at the very least a group under threat. Soll concludes that “Real news is not coming back in any tangible way on a competitive local level, or as a driver of opinion in a world where the majority of the population does not rely on professionally reported news sources and so much news is filtered via social media, and by governments. And as real news recedes, fake news will grow. We’ve seen the terrifying results this has had in the past—and our biggest challenge will be to find a new way to combat the rising tide.”

I’ll keep looking for real news and pass along what I find. I hope you’ll do the same.

-30-

Tears And Fears   1 comment

Coping In The Age of Goo
February 1, 2017

 

Do you recall the 1975 film Monty Python and the Holy Grail? A classic Monty Python comedy.  Loosely—very loosely—incorporating King Arthur, the Round Table, quests, and death. In 10th Century England there was a plague upon the land. (Note: not the 14th century as history records but the 10th as Monty Python records.) So many people were dying that “dead collectors” went through the streets telling good citizens to bring out their dead. One unfortunate citizen’s body was in the process of being collected by the dead collector when the citizen asserts “I’m not dead.” A debate proceeds but after being hit in the head with a club, the “citizen” is now, well, dead.

A few months ago I fully anticipated that by February I would, at the very least, be near the end of channeling Elisabeth Kübler Ross. Her classic model on how we deal with grief is well known: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance. Understanding these stages is supposed to help us get through the process of dying and death (in that order). Whether it’s our own mortality or that of a family member or friend, we all can relate to Ross’s conclusions. The good news from the stages is that ultimately we all hope to arrive at acceptance. The night of November 8th I went to bed in what I’d describe as something other than denial, but I was clearly aware of what news the Wednesday morning papers would bring. It’s been a little like that for some people since November 9th.

Acceptance arrived, and I spent a couple of months waiting for the pivot. You know, it was to be that moment when Trump, our recently elected Great Orange Overlord (GOO) would come down to earth and govern. Unfortunately, GOO turned out to be unable or unwilling to pivot, and he spent late January issuing edicts. While many of his executive orders got my attention, it was one in particular that struck a nerve: “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States”. Essentially GOO was following through on his promise to treat Muslims differently than everyone else. And amazingly by design or rank ignorance he managed to do this on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, a day in which GOO omitted mentioning the slaughter of Jews. One university professor, Daniel Drezner of Tufts, was so incensed by the order and the timing that he let fly an amazing Tweet:

 

“Dear @POTUS: on Holocaust Remembrance Day my synagogue told me the Syrian refugee family we’re sponsoring is not coming. Go fuck yourself.”

 

Drezner later apologized for the closing three-word expression of disfavor, but doubled down on his feelings about the policy. The New York Times offered this: “That [Trump’s executive] order, breathtaking in scope and inflammatory in tone, was issued on Holocaust Remembrance Day spoke of the president’s callousness and indifference to history, to America’s deepest lessons about its own values.” From this side of America we are left to wonder if this latest order is GOO’s stalking horse for a laundry list of people, countries, groups, and religions with whom he and his administration disagree. After all, GOO has one prominent supporter suggesting the United States begin registering Muslims, while another thought the WWII Japanese internment camps were “a good precedent”. Think about it; zealous supporters offer Manzanar as a good idea, a good precedent.

In 1988 a seven-year effort to start a family became a reality for us. Our daughter has been amazing. She’s worked as hard as can be to carve a place in society and this month began a new chapter by changing careers, going to work for a tech-related company in San Francisco. I treasure every moment we’ve had and I hope we have many, many more. But it was the rhetoric of GOO and his close associates that made me wonder just what can be next? Our decision to start a family was not surprising—lots of other people have done it, really—but any journey that takes seven years to succeed, as ours did, sort of focuses the mind. Like Star Trek’s character Mr. Spock, a Vulcan who mates only once every seven years, anticipation and success can be a long process.

     Caitie was born on February 7, 1988, and it was an event that I was not able to attend. For that matter, neither was my wife. Caitie was born in Korea. After

chsb seven years of paperwork, interviews, and waiting, we were matched with this wonderful baby who happened to be born in Seoul. In short, my feeling to this day is that it was like winning the lottery. Only better. We flew to Korea, spent three days in Seoul, and returned with our baby on September 2, 1988. As I once said to friends of mine when their first child was born in 1976, ‘the three of you are now one.’ And now so were we.

In June 1989 we sat in the Los Angeles chambers of Judge C. Bernard Kaufman, and he made our adoption final. A year later we were once again in downtown Los Angeles. This time it was at the Los Angeles Convention Center, and where, along with a thousand or so of our closest friends, we were to participate in a ceremony making a lot of people in that hall citizens of the United States. The room was absolutely colorful. There were whites, Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics. Too many countries, and too many stories to list, but the common thread was someone in each group was about to receive American Citizenship. That morning there were plenty of flags, kind words, and a collective singing of the National Anthem (and it wasn’t even a ball game.) There were a thousand people saying the pledge of Allegiance, along with the recorded voice of Country star Lee Greenwood singing “God Bless The USA”. Not a dry eye in the house, including mine.

And here we are almost three decades later. It feels like recalling that convention-hall camaraderie today is more important than ever. In 1990 we were all as one at the Citizenship swearing-in ceremony. It was  a kind of tent revival meeting, with everyone hugging strangers, shaking hands, singing together, celebrating for ourselves and for all of those who came before us. So when our leaders begin to register, arrest, intern, and deport people based on family name, skin color, birth country, or religion, we must speak up. This is not what constitutes making America great again. When GOO attempts to turn the clock back a century or two, to some time in America’s past, we must all be aware and engaged. Forget the stages—denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance. Save those for bad news from the doctor. What we need now is everyone to stand up for everyone else. No exceptions. This country has a constitution, and a history of tolerance. Last month 200-300 people were marching in downtown Gualala, California as part of the post-inaugural Womens March, and it was a genuinely beautiful sight. On that day millions of people reminded us that it is not the time stay in the house and hibernate. Now is the time to pay close attention and let our government hear why the policies of GOO have nothing to do with greatness.

 David Steffen
© 2017 David Steffen

The Roaring Current of Change   Leave a comment

The Roaring Current Of Change

August 1, 2016

Working with successful musicians for three decades, I learned a great deal about the changing nature of music and technology. For instance, when I began marketing music, I entered a record  industry that was dominated by the LP vinyl record.  By the time I began teaching grad students in 1998, the music industry was in another transition: CDs to digital downloads.

One of my lectures to those students at New York University focused on technological change, and how to recognize change,and then adapt, adopt, or ignore it. Between the start of the recording industry (1889) and 1950, consumers had two choices: cylinders (through the 1920s) and discs; the latter became those heavy 78-rpm records our parents or grandparents owned. In post WWII America, the pace of change began to accelerate. During the next 50 years the recording industry went from mono to stereo to multi-track, and consumers had more than 20 choices including vinyl singles and albums, a variety of tape formats, then DATs, compact discs, DVDs, and MP3s.

As I began writing my first book* I recalled attending a lecture some twenty years earlier where I first heard of Alvin Toffler. (The author died June 27th). Toffler, in his 1970 book future_shockFuture Shock picked up a cue from economist and futurist Kenneth Boulding, and put forth the idea of the accelerated rate of change in society, and its impact on the human race. Although written half a century ago (and mindful of we who travel at a slower intellectual speed than Toffler or Boulding,) I present his illustration. Toffler wrote that the Twentieth Century

“‘. . . represents The Great Median Strip running down the center of human history. Thus [Boulding] asserts, ‘The world of today . . . is as different from the world in which I was born as that world was from Julius Caesar’s. I was born in the middle of human history. To date, roughly, almost as much has happened since I was born as happened before.’

This startling statement can be illustrated in a number of ways. It has been observed, for example, that if the last 50,000 years of man’s existence were divided into lifetimes of approximately sixty-two years each, there have been about 800 such lifetimes. Of these 800, fully 650 were spent in caves. ZOMBIE 54d1c448004ee_-_esq-ape-man-dwiqis-zombiesOnly during the last seventy lifetimes has it been possible to communicate effectively from one lifetime to another—as writing made it possible to do. Only during the last six lifetimes did masses of men ever see a printed word. Only during the last four has it been possible to measure time with any precision. Only in the last two has anyone anywhere used an electric motor. And the overwhelming majority of all the material goods we use in daily life today have been developed within the present, the 800th, lifetime.”

In the 1970s Gordon E. Moore put forth a theory that became an accepted axiom in the tech industry: Moore’s Law. The shorthand version is this: “Computer processor speeds or overall processing power will double every two years.” When we use a computer to search the internet, or to save a document, or to copy a data file, or to connect to a network, speed is almost everything. For those who remember the days of dialing up Prodigy, CompuServe, or AOL while using a 1200 baud modem, we learned to be patient. Then we upgraded to a 2400 baud modem and thought, “Holy shit, this is soooo fast.” It really wasn’t but in relation to that 1200 baud modem it was almost Star Trekian. Now consider the 2400 baud modem compared with today’s basic DSL broadband connection. Using DSL, a 20mb (megabyte) data file will download in about 9 minutes. With a 2400 Baud modem the file would download in 18 HOURS. Moore was proven correct, at least for the next thirty years.

News media, social media and online discussions have not been immune to the impact of speed. More and more people can find information, and find discussions in which to participate. In 1990 Michael Godwin developed Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.” He makes the point that the Nazi/Hitler reference occurs regardless of the discussion’s topic or scope. And ultimately the comparison shifts from an online discussion and goes mainstream. On December 8, 2015, the New York Daily News, not a fan of Donald Trump, ran a story by Shaun King titled “Donald Trump Has Gone Full Blown Nazi On Us”.  King’s opening paragraph got right to the point: “As Donald Trump’s lead in the polls continues to grow, so does his bigotry, sexism, xenophobia—so bad, in fact, that major media outlets have taken to comparing the billionaire blowhard to Adolf Hitler, another narcissist who managed to make millions of people feel increasingly unsafe.” Clearly, more people having access to a discussion does not necessarily assure an elevated level of discourse.

In the 1960s, anti-drug efforts included the phrase “Speed Kills”. It was used to warn people about the abuse of methamphetamine hydrochloride, best known by one of its trade names, Methedrine, aka “Speed”. Decades later safe driving advocates adopted the same phrase to encourage drivers to slow down: “Speed Kills”. The message today is not as literal or as oblique as some might think. In theory, a fast internet requires less time for us to sit on our hands and wonder what we’ll be reading when the page finally finishes loading. Today the pages load quickly, if not instantly. All of that increased internet speed provides the time to help reinforce one’s core beliefs, since it’s easier to quickly find people with whom one agrees. Far too many people enter an informed myopia. For example, observing the crowds adoring a self-aggrandizing ass like Donald Trump speaks volumes about how all of that increased internet speed helps many buy-into the snake-oil Trump is selling: xenophobia, religious bigotry, sexism, race-baiting, misogyny, birtherism, racial profiling, jingoism, and more. Google, Facebook, and other social nets develop algorithms in an attempt to “please” their users by giving them primarily (or only) information that the computer determines is “what they want to know”.

Social media strategist John McElhenney put the echo-chamber like this: “We’ve heard it called many things: Confirmation bias. Influence bubble. Like-minded people flock together. Some interesting data is being pulled from the clouds to determine the linkage between us and our political views. And even more data is being organized and sold to allow businesses to sell you more products and services. Ad infinitum.” Make no mistake. Politicians and political organizations are selling something and they hope you’re buying.

Senator Ransom Stoddard, in the film The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance, comes clean to the local newspaper editor about the shooting of the outlaw Valance but the editor decides to not print the true story. The senator asks him, “You’re not going to use the story, Mr. Scott?” to which the editor replies “No, sir. This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.” Many people in this information age may get more information from more sources, but they tend to select or are guided to like-minded sources. Inevitably, rumors and lies become fact and truth, reinforced within a noisy echo chamber. It’s all part of what Toffler called the roaring current of change. And it’s up to each of us to stop look and listen. We must get outside of our bubble, outside of our comfort zone, and engage.

David Steffen

©2016 David Steffen

*From Edison To Marconi: The First Thirty Years of Recorded Music

 

Ice Cream and Idiocracy   Leave a comment

Turbulent Times and Irrationality

July 1, 2016

    The Fourth of July is one of those holidays I can’t ignore. Like Christmas, the 4th was always a special day when I was growing up, and to some degree it remains special. I remember the parades—both watching and marching, although the latter was more of a walk along with other kids from my elementary school. But I did appreciate the little ice cream cup we were all given as we arrived in the park, and of course, on more than one Independence Day, my small group of friends would race back to the groups still marching and join them just to receive another ice cream cup. Ah, petty-crime in Milwaukee.

As I began working in the music industry (1970), I had no idea it would become a career. I promoted new records released by the RCA Records label (and others), and my timing couldn’t have been much better. RCA was enjoying a renaissance with Elvis Presley’s return to making hit records, Jose Feliciano had become a star with a remake of the Doors’ “Light My Fire”, the Friends of Distinction were on the charts with “Grazing In The Grass”, Guess Who was about to release American Woman,  and the Jefferson Airplane continued to soar. Even Perry Como was back on the charts with an appropriately titled hit single: “It’s Impossible”.  Of the artists I worked with in those early years, Jose Feliciano remains a favorite. He was talented, pleasant, smart, articulate, and friendly.

His 1968 breakthrough hit cover of the Doors’ classic peaked at #2. As almost always happened following a hit single, opportunities arose for the twenty-three year old Feliciano to parlay his success with “Light My Fire” into something greater. Publicists often consider every opportunity to put their artist in the spotlight . . . any spotlight. And one of those publicity moments was presented to the star. Based on the suggestion of Detroit sportscaster Ernie Harwell, Feliciano was offered the chance to sing “The Star-Spangled Banner” at a baseball game. And not just any game. There were 53,000 fans at Tiger Stadium for game 5 of the 1968 World Series; and millions watching or listening around the world. It was Detroit vs. Saint Louis. For the record, the pitchers were Mickey Lolich of the Tigers, who earned the win—final score was 5-3—and Joe Hoerneas of the Cardinals, who was handed the loss. In almost every respect it was a publicist’s dream. I said “almost”. Feliciano sang the anthem as he sang almost everything, with an honest, genuine, heartfelt soul. And that’s where the trouble began.

Anyone following American politics since 1994 knows what polarization is, and in 1968 those who heard Feliciano sing were polarized. Half of the people loved Feliciano’s performance, and half hated it. To take advantage of the half-public who loved the performance, RCA Records released a 45-RPM single. It may have been the first time in recorded music history that the National Anthem was on the Billboard charts. The downside of this publicity opportunity was the half-public who hated the performance. According to the New York Times, (October 8, 1968), when asked about the moment, the blind, Puerto Rican born American said “America is young now, and I thought maybe the anthem could be revived now. This country has given me so many opportunities. I owe everything I have to this country. I wanted to contribute something to this country, express my gratification for what it has done for me.” Baseball great Tony Kubek liked it: “I think he did one heckuva job”. A Tigers fan had a different take: “It was a disgrace. An Insult.” She said she would be writing her senator.

Two weeks later the RCA Records single arrived at radio stations and in record stores. Radio stations followed the public divide. Many stations played it. However, many others, like Milwaukee’s WOKY did not. That station’s Program Director George Wilson told me a couple of years later that he believed “the performance was inappropriate and unacceptable.”

As a college student and programmer at the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee’s WUWM radio station at the time, everyone would agree that 1968 was a most turbulent time. Consider some of the events of the year: • January: North Korea captured the patrol boat USS Pueblo. • The Tet Offensive was launched. • February: Richard Nixon began his political comeback. • The American  military in Vietnam declared that it had destroyed a town in order to save it. A phrase that cannot be erased from our memories. • Walter Cronkite, anchor of the CBS Evening News, and dubbed “the most trusted man in America”, urged President Johnson to throw in the towel in Vietnam. • March: Senator Eugene McCarthy came within 230 votes of beating a sitting president in the New Hampshire primary. • Senator Robert Kennedy entered the presidential race. • The U.S. Army’s Charlie Company rampaged through the Vietnamese village of My Lai. • Martin Luther King led a march through Memphis. • April: Lyndon Johnson announced his decision to not stand for reelection. Martin Luther King was assassinated. • May: Peace Talks were begun between the U.S. and Vietnam. •  June: Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated. • August: The Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia. • The Democratic National Convention in Chicago, helped along by the Chicago Police, turned into a riot—a disaster for the Democrats, but fascinating viewing on television. • September: Senator Hubert Humphrey received the Democratic nomination for president. There was so much more that fateful year, but time and space is limited.

And what of Jose Feliciano? After the release of “The Star Spangled Banner” and its five weeks on the Billboard chart, Feliciano continued to record and tour. His 1970 Christmas album, Feliz Navidad is considered a classic of the genre. He even returned to Detroit in May 2010 to reprise his 1968 performance in honor of Ernie Harwell, who died that week. No one contacted their senator, governor, or anyone else to complain. I guess forty-two years was a sufficient amount of time for America’s haters of 1968 to get over Feliciano’s original performance, or maybe they just died with a grudge.

The Fourth of July is always worth time to reflect. Whether it’s the memories of ice cream as a child, of a parade, or a unique and memorable performance, or a performer with whom we connected—literally, personally, emotionally, or even viscerally. Politics today is, as some say, not for sissies or wimps. You’ve got to have a belief system that will overcome any idiocy, or worse, an idiocracy.

Joel Stein wrote in May 2016’s Time Magazine, that “[America has] Become an Idiocracy . . . And it only took two-and-a-half centuries. Eight years ago, with the publication of Susan Jacoby’s The Age of American Unreason, our country had a debate about whether its citizens were becoming less intelligent. This year, we had a debate about how big Donald Trump’s penis is. While we have not resolved the latter, we have answered the former. Former means first, and latter means second.”

From bitching about a wonderful, authentic, performance of the song set to Francis Scott Key’s poem, we have arrived at July 4, 2016. The election isn’t until November 7th. May God have mercy on our souls. And by the way, Thank You Jose. If you get to Mendonoma, I’ll be there. I’ll probably even have some ice cream for you.

Good News! A Trump-oscopy For Everyone   Leave a comment

Bend Over. President Trump Has Plans For You

June 1, 2016

I like the idea that I’m allowed to write just about whatever I wish in my monthly column, which is why it ranges through thoughts on music, the arts, life on the California coast, and occasionally politics. Of late I have been a bit reticent to write about politics in general, and Trump-mania in particular. While I’m not (yet) ready to apply for refugee status in Canada, I must admit I am a little concerned about the disproportionate fandom following Mr. Trump. And that’s just the journalists and the media.

At first I thought it was simply the TV thing. The vision of Trump walking through the State Department, the Pentagon, or the White House kitchen pointing his orange-ish red finger at every third person and arbitrarily shouting “Your Fired” seemed unlikely. Then came the adulation of an unbridled press, following him around and waiting on his every word. Like Gollum, reporters seem to be constantly waiting for the appearance of The Precious. I actually wish I could say that as the primaries went on and on, his rhetoric became more and more distasteful. But that isn’t true. His opening salvo in 2015 from the Vatican-like fortress known as Trump Tower signaled immediately that this person isn’t just provocative. He is genuinely dangerous. His admiration for Vladimir Putin and Kim Jung Un knows no bounds. CNN’s Carol Costello pressed Trump’s seemingly idiotic press spokesperson Healy Baumgardner on the point. She reminded Ms. Baumgardner of the horrific deeds of Kim, and asked “. . . what [Mr. Trump] meant when he praised the dictator in January as ‘amazing’ for killing his own family members.” Baumgardner’s programmed response was that Trump “wants to keep an open dialogue and repair relations with world leaders.” Spoken like a true automaton.

Let me be clear. Aside from the possibility that Trump will initiate a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula, or use nuclear weapons in Europe, essentially provoking World War III, I don’t see Trump as an immediate danger to me. I am, as the saying goes, a man of a certain age. Nuclear holocausts aside (for the moment) there are few things that a megalomaniac like Trump can impose on me in one or two terms in the Oval Office that are going to destroy my life. If he wants to get rid of Social Security or Medicare, he’ll be sleazy enough to propose that it doesn’t go away tomorrow. Instead he’ll help engineer its dissolution over time, say a couple of decades or so, at the end of which I’ll be below the grass instead of walking on it. But my daughter and generations older and younger than she should take note. If you believe getting healthcare was difficult (or impossible) in the past, wait until Trump is in charge. That’s when we’ll learn what ‘death panels’ are really about.

And the GOP will sit by and let him do all of this. Let’s not forget that the sixteen now defeated GOP candidates were uniform in their desire to repeal the Affordable Care Act, and replace it with something better. However, since “Obamacare” was passed and signed into law six years ago, no bill has been put forward by the GOP to replace the legislation. All of their energies have been focused on repealing the act. Forget the millions who have insurance today who were previously denied coverage by for-profit insurance companies for daring to show up with “Pre-existing Conditions”.

Trump’s unique perspective is born of never having to say please, thank you, or I’m sorry. Born (or hatched) into a millionaire’s family, he is the antithesis of Oliver Twist. As a child—assuming he actually was once a child (although there remain rumors about his roots being extra-terrestrial)— when young Trump was hungry and asked for more, I’m certain that he—unlike Oliver—always received more food rather than a smack on the head with a ladle.

Trump brings nothing to the job that will actually help average Americans. Conversely, what he can do is destroy a unique world economy by reshaping it in his own image. A suitable playground for millionaires to pay low or no taxes, have plenty of servants to do all of life’s menial labor, and of course maintain those things that society has decided we cannot do without: A personal jet, and personal helicopters, servants, limousines, replacement spousal units, multiple homes in multiple states or countries. Did I mention servants? That is, after all, what we will all be in the new and great America. He’ll turn this country into a new theme park known as TrumpWorld. It will be like WallyWorld but without the rides. Or the fun. Or even Wally the Moose.

Trump’s ability to have his hair coiffed perfectly in that beautiful Tang-esque shade of orange, should be your first clue that reality is not the strong-suit of this reality TV star. What’s in store in January if Trump is elected? A lack of affordable healthcare, women going to prison for abortion, a giant wall from the Rio Grande to Tijuana, a miraculous military, deportation of all undocumented workers, an exit from NATO, a foreign policy that is anti-British and anti-Europe, and simultaneously pro-Putin and pro North Korea, a default on America’s debt triggering economic problems (or PROBLEMS), plus a new version of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882: for Muslims now, and later you can assume, anyone identifying as LGBT, abortion doctors, and the chronically ill. All these (and more) will need to leave in an effort to make America great. You get the picture.

Trump is dangerous. To you and me, to our friends and allies, to anyone that isn’t wealthy. Sometime in January the increasingly inane Healy Baumgardner will announce that, “Top Line, Mr. Trump wants to provide America with a colonoscopy to identify and eliminate undesirables.” A Trump-oscopy.

In closing, don’t worry. Trump is planning to combine the Center for Disease Control with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Department, and stick a probe up America’s ass. In the end, America will be clean again, great again; and presumably very white. As Karl the greens-keeper in Caddyshack might say, “you got dat goin’ for you, and dat’s kinda nice.”

David Steffen

©2016 David Steffen

STEM. Creating A Minion Nation   Leave a comment

The GOP and Stalin Agree: Ideas Are Unnecessary

March 31, 2016

Today’s journalists love acronyms. They provide writers with a type of shorthand which also (they hope) suggests they know so much more than the reader. Just a few years ago BRIC, for example, was a hot topic; writers, politicians, and economists all jumped on the bandwagon to declare that these countries—Brazil, Russia, India, China—constituted the new economic bloc to be reckoned with. BRIC was introduced by Goldman-Sachs as a bit of economic futurism. It downplayed the potential strength of Europe and North America, and simultaneously projected the sunny economic potential of the BRICS (South Africa was added later, hence the ”S”.) In any case, BRIC(S) gave journalists a clever word that dripped with a certain lingual superiority, as they became de facto cheerleaders for the moneychangers pushing this nirvana-to-be scenario. A little more than a decade later, all that shiny Goldman-Sachsian predilection is not, well, so shiny. Fortune—not known as a mouthpiece of the proletariat—offered this grim assessment:

“There was a time, not so long ago, when it seemed the rugged promise of the globe’s economic frontier could be summed up with a simple acronym: BRIC. To investors and corporate prospectors alike, Brazil, Russia, India, and China were like Gold Rush towns high in the hills—deep, rich veins of commerce that could be tapped by anybody quick enough, industrious enough, and brave enough to stake a claim.” . . . “Yet as much as we might celebrate the concept of BRIConomics for its insight and uncanny timeliness, it is time now to put the thing to pasture. As quickly as the world transformed at the start of the millennium, it is changing again.” In short, Fortune’s view was that China’s economy was growing at the slowest pace in nearly a quarter-century, that “scandal-plagued Brazil” was on the edge of recession, and a declining appetite for oil coupled with economic sanctions and poor policy “have Russia reeling”. No Chia pets, hula hoops, pet rocks, or other dynamic economic stimulants on the near horizon to foster a quick reversal of fortunes.

Which brings me to STEM. Like the gushing embrace of BRIC, STEM is the new flavor of the month with many GOP politicians. This acronym is shorthand for a clever distillation on education: Science, Technology, Engineering, Math. To them, STEM is what really matters. On the surface there is nothing wrong with placing an emphasis on these core subjects. However, politicians are attempting to make this a zero-sum game. When the pool of education money is finite, then increased emphasis on one aspect of education means a decreased emphasis on the other. Who needs those silly history lessons—that’s all old stuff anythway. All about dead guys. And foreign languages? English has worked for me. Literature? What can I possibly learn from Shakespeare or Voltaire. Before you think that this is as cartoonish as the images of someone walking through the financial district holding a sign declaring “the end is near” consider the loud voices in the GOP. For a political party often complaining about government overreach, as in dictating what we will or won’t do, consider this from the New York Times, about the efforts of some of the darlings of the right:

• Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin suggested in February that “students majoring in French literature should not receive state funding for their college education.”

• North Carolina Governor Patrick McCrory is on record as declaring “If you want to take gender studies that’s fine. Go to a private school, and take it,” McCrory said. “But I don’t want to subsidize that if that’s not going to get someone a job.”

• Republican presidential candidate Senator Marco Rubio was unequivocal: “Welders make more money than philosophers . . . . We need more welders and less philosophers.” [Note to Marco: It’s “fewer” in this context, not “less”.]

• Florida Governor Rick Scott said “We don’t need a lot more anthropologists in the state. It’s a great degree if people want to get it, but we don’t need them here.”

At the very least this is gross naiveté on the part of these and other politicians. A far more likely scenario is that we are viewing a GOP effort toward social engineering; creating a society able to write code, but unable to connect the dots between political decisions and unexpected outcomes. An extreme example might be, if we study physics and nothing else, we can, among other things, learn how to make a nuclear weapon. If we study the humanities as well, we can learn about the outcomes of using nuclear weapons: after atmospheric testing in the Pacific, after the accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, and after the original Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings, nuclear weapons can be bad.

When I returned to college in the 1990s, I chose my school carefully: that is to say, I found the nearest 4-year college. At Fairfield University, a Jesuit school, I gained knowledge and I honed my skills in critical thinking. It may have been a happy accident for me that Fairfield University was nearest to me in Connecticut, a 30-minute drive from my home. After all, the Jesuits have been honing their own skills through four centuries of education for both the religiously devoted and the laity. Ignatius Loyola’s ideas became the fundamental building blocks for the Society of Jesus, which began, not surprisingly, building schools. For all of their bravado about devotion to Christianity, the GOP in general, and those lay-pontificators above seem to miss the point. It’s about humanity stupid.

The Rev. Jack Butler of Boston College describes a Jesuit education as having six core elements. In short, [1] Care of the person, [2] Experience, [3] Liberal arts, [4] Mission, [5] Service of justice, [6] Anticipatory joy.

Butler’s more detailed descriptions are in an article titled “What is Jesuit education?”, and it is worth reading. When talking about the Liberal Arts—and central, in my opinion, to the STEM conversation—Butler offered this:

“Ignatius Loyola said that if individuals follow their desire, they will find God. In order to find that desire, Butler said, students need a broad basis of knowledge from which to begin seeking. Another reason that Jesuit education emphasizes the liberal arts is so that students can find God in all things. And finally, Jesuits believe that students should be able to converse on a range of topics.”

I’m not here to advocate for religion in general or a Jesuit education in particular, although I believe there is real value in what they offer. I am, however, against a new brand of social engineering that creates only the worker bees who can labor for the wealthy: you make the honey and we’ll handle the money.

Bevin, McCrory, Rubio, Scott, and so many other Republicans believe that history, philosophy, religion, literature, art, gender studies, music, anthropology (and others) are superfluous, non-essential to the knowledge intake of students. It’s a myopic view that could only be promoted by members of a ruling class. I’m reminded of the USSR’s infamous leader Joseph Stalin’s philosophy of ideas. While not a comparison to Rubio, et al, Stalin offered this nugget: “Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.”

David Steffen

© 2016 David Steffen

%d bloggers like this: