The Gospel according to TV news

I recently picked up The Gospel According to America by David Dark for $1.00 on a used book table. With a sticker price that low I didn’t expect much from Dark, a Presbyterian high school teacher from Nashville I’d never heard of, but the price was right and the title was provocative enough so I thought it might be worth a try. At this point I’m only 26 pages in, but so far I’ve been inspired, convicted, and enlightened by what I’ve read. In a section entitled, “The Salvific Power of Self Doubt”, Dark argues eloquently that a healthy sense of humility should guide the U.S. media in everything they print and broadcast about the politics of the U.S. Similarly, Darks points out that the consumer of media should develop a critical eye and a skeptical mind as they sort through the ocean of simplistic dichotomies and divisive rhetoric that often defines most of the media’s coverage of political issues. Together with a deep concern for how the critical issues of our nation are presented by the media and decoded by the public, Dark suggests that U.S. citizens should demand not only the most objective and transparent presentation of political information, but also the highest quality content from the powerful media conglomerates that saturate our airwaves, bandwidth, and daily prints.

Unfortunately, one of the primary sources of news for many in the U.S., TV networks, are often guilty of both heavily biased presentation and absurdly insignificant content. Concerning the latter, a recently published study by FAIR, (Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting), reveals that while the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data reports that 37 million Americans – one in eight – lived below the federal poverty line in 2005, the subject of widespread poverty in the U.S. is simply not a priority for the 3 major news networks (ABC, CBS, NBC). Read the full report here:

The Poor Will Always Be With Us–Just Not on the TV News

During the more than three years studied by FAIR, (9/11/03–10/30/06) there were only 58 stories about poverty aired on the three network newscasts. With roughly 815 weekdays worth of newscasts in that time frame, multiplied by 3 for each different network, that is approximately 2445 broadcasts.

Furthermore, “24 of the 58 stories during the study period ran during the six months immediately following Hurricane Katrina—during the other 32 months, barely one network news segment a month so much as mentioned poverty or the needy.” Most of the other stories focused on the elderly or those in the armed forces. This fact isn’t inherently negative, however this bias towards the elderly and armed forces redirects coverage away from the largest subset of the U.S. population suffering from poverty – children. Just another sad example of the media not understanding, or choosing to understand very narrowly, the issues they are covering.

The survey also revealed that, “TV networks had an abysmal record at following up on stories, even when they implied they would. An NBC segment (3/25/05) mentioned high poverty as a cause of suicides among Native Americans and noted “the problems must be taken seriously”—yet NBC never revisited the issue of Native American poverty.” Although the language of the report appears to suggest it, I am not personally suggesting in any way that NBC is responsible for fixing the problem of Native American suicides. However, if NBC feels the need to tell their viewers to take the issue seriously, why doesn’t NBC commit more resources to investigating the issue?

Just for a little context – “During a study period that saw 58 stories about poverty, the three network programs dedicated 69 stories to Michael Jackson’s legal woes. Of the three networks, only NBC aired more stories on poverty than on Michael Jackson (25 to 24). Moreover, in 2005, the year that saw the Katrina disaster and the culmination of Jackson’s rather less consequential trial, the networks deemed the pop star’s legal problems twice as newsworthy as the economic plight of tens of millions of poor citizens, running 44 stories on Michael Jackson to 22 for poverty.”

To conclude, a story of one of America’s most dearly loved pop culture icons – in fact the king of all media idols, Elvis Presley – might serve us well as we process the findings of the FAIR study.

Sitting in front of his television reading from the Bible one afternoon, Elvis is suddenly struck by the painful tension between the glowing box in front of him, beckoning him to consume, and the ancient text below, encouraging him to “sell all of his possessions and give them to the poor”. In a moment of rebellious clarity Elvis picks up his shotgun and fires upon his TV set. While this story may be folk legend, the scene remains a potent metaphor. The “mass hypnosis of entertainment industry”, to borrow a phrase from David Dark, is put to death by the very man the industry sustained itself on for so long.

I believe the same choice remains for us today. We can continue to allow the TV networks to ignore the crucial issues of our time, (global poverty / Darfur / Aids / cancer / obesity / the national debt), or we can simply turn off the TV and force their ratings down into the garbage dump with their content. Now I wouldn’t suggest shooting it, a remote will do just fine.

Petraeus – “I don’t know”

Here is an interesting statement that General Petraeus made today in his second day of testimony before Congress.

When asked by Republican John Warner, “Are you able to say at this time, if we continue what you have laid before the Congress here as a strategy, do you feel that that is making America safer?”

Petraeus first attempted to evade the question by stating that the current U.S. strategy was the best course for achieving U.S. objectives in Iraq.

So Warner asked again, “Does that make America safer?”

Petraeus replied, “Sir, I don’t know, actually. I have not sat down and sorted it out in my own mind.”

My question is simply this, if the rationale for continuing the war in Iraq is to prevent future terror attacks in the U.S., why hasn’t Petraeus “sorted out” whether or not continuing the war actually accomplishes this? With so many lives at stake, (Iraqi and U.S.), how does he NOT know?

Read a report from the Chicago Tribune for more:
Senate grills Petraeus on Iraq strategy

Honor the victims of 9-11

“Setting an example is not the primary means of influencing another, it is the only means.”
-Albert Einstein

Six years after the attacks of 9-11 the words of Albert Einstein shine like a piercing light of truth and clarity through the dense fog of rhetoric that currently surrounds the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yesterday the fog grew thicker as General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker sounded the triumphant horn of the Bush administration before Congress that the 30,000 strong U.S. troop “surge” into Iraq is in fact creating the diplomatic space necessary for sectarian factions in Iraq to peacefully mediate their differences. Col. Dan Smith, U.S. Army (Ret.), who is not a Quaker but writes to educate them about the complexities of military affairs, reports on his blog, The Quaker’s Colonel, that the reduction in violence touted by Petraeus and Crocker is indeed happening in some areas of Iraq. However, Smith also notes that the reduction in violence may in fact be due to a number of other intervening factors.

On the other hand, the BBC recently published a survey that polled the opinions of more than 2,000 Iraqi’s, in more than 450 neighborhoods, across all 18 provinces of Iraq. The overwhelming consensus among this large sample set is that the U.S. troop surge has been nothing short of an abysmal failure. The BBC reports that, “Between 67% and 70% of the Iraqis polled believe the surge has hampered conditions for political dialogue, reconstruction and economic development.” The full report can be found here:
US surge has failed – Iraqi poll

As I continue to filter the results of the BBC’s extensive poll and the testimony of Petraeus and Crocker through the same filter of skepticism, my better judgment tells me the truth of the matter exists somewhere in the middle. Disputes will surely continue as people of all ideological backgrounds continue to measure and analyze what is happening in that complex area of the world. Regardless, one fact remains crystal clear – the cost of the war grows larger and more unmanageable with each passing day. As reported by the New York Times in January, the cost of the war in Iraq is quickly approaching 1.2 Trillion. The article provides a powerful look at What $1.2 Trillion Can Buy. Some quick facts:
- A doubling of cancer research funding
- Treatment for every American whose diabetes or heart disease is now going unmanaged
- A global immunization campaign which would save millions of children’s lives
- Universal preschool for every 3 & 4 year old child across the country
- The city of New Orleans could receive a huge increase in reconstruction funds
- National security: A few crucial recommendations of the 9/11 Commission that have not been put in place could be easily financed — better baggage and cargo screening

Although it is clear the U.S. government has decided the best way to create peace in Iraq and Afghanistan is through violence, I do believe that the citizens of the U.S. can still choose a different way, a better way, a way that I believe truly honors the victims of the 9-11 attacks. As Einstein so brilliantly suggests, we must become the type of people that seek to influence others by the example we set with our own lives. I can think of no greater honor to those lost on 9-11 than to make their tragic deaths an occasion for a sincere personal commitment to first transform our lives and then to share the fruit of that transformation with others. If we want peace, we live and cultivate peace in our own lives, if we want justice, we seek reconciliation not retribution, if we desire forgiveness we offer it to others first. If I ever die in a terrorist attack my prayer is that my death will not be a catalyst for more killing and death, but a clear and convicting statement to the world that we all need to be transformed. My spirit tells me the victims of the 9-11 attacks pray with me.

Sustainability: Economic revolution – Ecological necessity

I recently finished reading The Ecology of Commerce, by Paul Hawken. I discovered both the book and the author after watching The Corporation, an award winning documentary about the genesis, evolution, and nature of the “dominant institution of our time”. In one of the film’s many compelling interviews, Ray Anderson, the CEO of the world’s largest carpet manufacturer Interface, mentions that after reading Hawken’s book he was so deeply convicted about the negative effects his company was having on the environment that he vowed to completely restructure the Interface business model. In a campaign called, Mission Zero, Interface carpet has promised to “eliminate any negative impact our company may have on the environment by the year 2020.” Needless to say, after hearing from Anderson that Hawken’s book was capable of so dramatically transforming his managerial approach at Interface, I put The Ecology of Commerce at the top of my “to read” list. (For more of my reading list, check out What I’m Surveying)

The book is packed with statistics, expert analysis, research citations, and creative solutions to the complex tensions that currently exist between economic growth and ecological sustainability. At the outset of the book Hawken states clearly that the goal of his book is not to disseminate radical propaganda about the treason of capitalism or the inherent evils of corporate America, but rather to shine a light on “a path that restores the natural communities on earth but uses many of the historical effective organizational and market techniques of free enterprise.” A “restorative economy”, as Hawken puts it, is one in which eco-systems flourish alongside profits and global standards of living. Unfortunately, the sense of hope that springs fresh for the reader at the thought of an economic system that provides for the masses and respects the fragility of nature, is heavily tempered by the reality of our current situation. For example:

- 25 million people die every year from pesticide poisoning
- The EPA currently regulates less than 10% of the 191 lethal toxins identified by the 1970 Clean Air Act – (entirely a result of the “influential power” of corporate lobbyists)
- 25 billion tons of fertile topsoil are lost every year
- Overall world production of food is declining in relation to world population

Sadly these are just a few of the brushstrokes in a terribly shameful picture of humankind’s arrogant abuse of our habitat painted by Hawken. In consideration of these facts, and the mountain of others that accompany them, it is increasingly clear that fundamental changes are now necessary to avoid any further loss of the basic ecological resources that are so often taken for granted in the industrialized world. However this does not mean that jobs must be lost or profits must be sacrificed, on the contrary, Hawken’s restorative economy is one in which respect for investors and care for the environment go hand in hand. For example, “By reformulating products, changing processes, redesigning equipment, and recovering waste for reuse or recycling”, (as mandated by their “3P” program – Pollution Prevention Pays ), global technology giant 3M has been able to save 1 billion dollars and prevent more than 2.5 billion pounds of pollutants from entering the biosphere. That’s a pretty simple inverse equation — profits up & pollution down.

In other words, another world is possible. Given the resolve, the largest and most powerful corporations in the world can become more sustainable and more profitable at the same time, and given the right information, I believe that consumers will consistently shift their dollars in the direction of companies that recognize this.

For more, I highly suggest watching The Corporation. You will surely be moved to transform your own personal habits of consumption to send a strong message to the world’s most powerful corporations that we will not tolerate plunder and greed. I would also suggest reading The Ecology of Commerce for a broader perspective of how business and the environment can interact for either our welfare or demise.