Mosquitoes Now More Irritating to Teens and Young People

 

A new device that has recently been rolled out in the United States named, “The Mosquito” is designed to deliver a shrill high pitch noise only audible to teens and young adults. These devices are used by store and shop owners to ensure that teens are not loitering around their properties. See the full story at CNN.com.

Civil Rights activists are enraged by the new device. Their outrage is centered on one feature of the new device in particular, the same feature that makes this product so appealing to shop owner.  The sound emitted by this device is only audible by younger adults.  The Activists see this as a blatant case of ageism.   Ageism is the act of discriminating against a person or group based solely on their age.

I must tell you, the idea of a device like this gives me mixed feelings.  On the one hand, I have seen the types of people that this device is intended to deter, and I can fully understand why shop owners would feel justified using this product. Often times these loiterers can be more than a nuisance because they could drive away business and even cause property damage.  Authorities tend to dismiss complaints by these business owners because the loiterers or “just kids” and the damage they do is “just a youthful prank.”

On the other hand, I have no doubts in my mind that this product is designed to specifically target younger people, as they are the only ones capable of hearing its high-pitched, shrill sound. This practice by definition can only be considered ageism.

As much as I feel for the shop owners who are driven to spend the $1,500 on this device, the infringement by this device on civil liberties of the youth cannot be ignored. To allow a product like this to become common place in America sets a dangerous precedent.  It would open the door for other products that target specific groups as nuisances. The negative applications for these types of products are as dramatic as the gradient of the slippery slope that this argument is based upon.

As always this is an open forum for all voices to be heard.  Please leave a comment if you have an opinion on how this should be handled.

 

Clinton Claims Victory and Breath of New Hope

 

CNN.com has declared Hillary Clinton the winner of the crucial Pennsylvania primary.  This marks a monumental turnaround for the Clinton campaign and gives new hope to a candidate that looked to have run out of steam.  With this win Clinton looks to pick up the majority of the delegates and inches closer to opponent, Brock Obama.

The news of Clinton’s win comes as a bit of a shock.  For weeks the news coming out of all the major media outlets seemed to hint, or outright say, that Obama had seized the momentum and was going for the jugular in Pennsylvania.

At this point it appears that it is anyone’s campaign for the Democratic nomination.  More than likely this fight will have to be determined when the Democratic delegates meet to cast their votes in June. This brings to mind the question, “Does the system we have in place to nominate candidates actually work?”

Many Americans are not aware that the delegates “won” by a candidate following a primary are free to cast their vote any way that they deem to be appropriate.  As was the case in the 2000 election, unique circumstances shine light on the obscure nuances of our election process.  Unfortunately, these nuances tend to have the negative characteristic of appearing to exclude the masses from the election process.

I am as patriotic as the next guy, assuming the next guy is not a five star general, but I have a problem with the paralyzing stratification that is inherent to government.  The prospect of having a few thousand individuals decide who will be running for president leaves a bad taste in my mouth.  This taste is the same taste that we can all remember following the debacle with the Bush/Gore 2000 election.  That being said, I am a man of historical context, and I will not let the anomalies of the election process sour me on a system that has been around for hundreds of years.

I believe that the system we have in place, despite its problems, is a rather good one, and I will continue to put my faith in every vote that I cast. 

The great part about America is that we are all allowed to have an opinion.  I have let mine be heard, and now it is your chance.  Please leave a comment and let us all know what you think of the system the United States has in place for nominating candidates.

If you liked this story check out:  Obama’s Diverse Family Roots

 

Teen Vigilante Justice Disturbingly Popular

The popularity of attacks plotted and carried out by teens has been well documented in recent times.  In fact, it seems that hardly a month goes by without a new story circulating about a foiled plot on a public target. The target of choice by teenagers seems to be the schools they attend. Teens feel intense pressure to fit into the social hierarchy, especially at the high school level.  Individuals that find themselves as outcasts grow to resent their peers for not accepting them, and left unchecked this resentment turns to anger and eventually hatred.

The original story that brought this issue to the attention of Americans was the massacre at Columbine.  In more recent weeks we have seen new adaptations of this ‘classic’ attack method.  The most notable of these new methods was made popular by a You Tube video depicting a teen being lured into a house and then beaten unconscious by a group of ‘friends’. The dynamics of this attack are different but the motives appear to be the same.

In a world of increasing levels of violence at a younger age, how can we spot the problem before it ends up on CNN?

Elaine Sonnen of Green Creek, Idaho, may have figured out the answer to that question. Elaine’s son, Richard, who was adopted at the age of 4, was not fitting in at school and was the object of relentless ridicule.  Elaine was aware that her son had shown signs of uncontrollable anger from a young age, and was careful to keep a close watch on his activities as he grew.

It became clear to Elaine that her son was not acting normally, after a conversation with him about his desire to get back at the kids that were making his life hard.  Elaine, who was well aware of the high cost of complacency, took a proactive approach.  Elaine immediately demanded that Richard write the names of the children who were the intended targets of his vengeance on a piece of paper. She promptly turned that list over to Richards’s case worker. Richard was later admitted to an Idaho mental health institution.

Following a year and a half of intensive mental evaluation, Richard was released and is now attending Lewis and Clark College.

This story is an extreme example of a parent looking past the love that they feel for their child and viewing the facts with an objective eye.  It is by scrutinizing these situations with this objective eye, that we will see the early warning signs that are presenting themselves. Too often, parents allow their protective instincts toward their children to cloud their vision. These are the parents that are left wondering, “What did I do wrong,” after it is too late.

I am not saying that parents should not love their children.  I am simply saying that it is up to parents to engage in a self-imposed reality check from time to time.  It is a delicate balancing act to get this right, but what isn’t in our overly complicated world?

Check out this related story on CNN.com

This is an open discussion.  Feel free to share your ideas about how parents should strike this balance.

If you liked this story check out: Florida Teen Beaten By Classmates…WTF You Tube

Infamous You Tube Beating Could Garner 8 Life Sentences

It was decided Thursday, by the Florida State Attorney’s office, that the 8 suspects in the Victoria Lindsay beating (captured on video March 30^th and made popular by media outlet You Tube) will be tried as adults. This decision could have major implications for the 6 girls and 2 boys – excuse me, 6 women and 2 men, being tried. The group now faces a maximum sentence of life in prison. 

Outraged viewers watched as the 16 year old victim, Lindsay, was beaten unconscious by ‘friends’ after being lured into a trap on March 30^th.  The story has sparked a firestorm of news coverage by every major media outlet in the United States. Viewers were left wondering how the group of teenagers, ages 14-18, who bore witness to the beating, could just stand idly by and let things get so out of hand. 

It appears that this lack of intervention will now cost the group dearly.  The question now facing prosecutors and jurors is not so much whether this group is guilty, but what is the appropriate measure of punishment that this group should face?  This is a tough question which has engendered two very clear points of view.

There has been massive outcry from many individuals who found themselves horrified by the brutality if the video that has been circulating around the internet for several days now. These individuals point to the need for an example to be made in this case to ensure that this type of crime is not repeated. They also make the point that the girl in the video has not only been physically and emotionally damaged but has been socially scarred permanently, since this video has made her famous for less than ideal reasons.

On the other side of the issue is a second group that, while outraged by the footage, is reluctant to see 8 individuals sentenced to a life term for something that they did as teenagers. These individuals are looking for stern punishment that will establish a precedent without requiring these teens to pay for this crime for the rest of their lives.

This is going to be a difficult decision that will have to be made by a jury that represents both of these points of view.

I don’t see a clear cut or easy answer to this question. I have seen several documentaries and loads of statistics on teens in jail, and one thing is clear to me already.  The chances are very slim that this group will successfully rebuild their lives after a prolonged prison sentence (which they began serving as teens). That being said, there is still a chance that they could accomplish that.  

I can’t remember a time in recent history when I was more outraged by an event that I did not personally experience.  But this group of teens, in my opinion, should not receive a life sentence.  The victim was not killed, and it would seem overly harsh never to allow these individuals to repent and make to amends.

As always this is an open forum.  I am extremely interested to see what others consider to be a just outcome to this dilemma.  For more information check out the story on CNN.com

If you liked this post check out:Teen Vigilante Justice Disturbingly Popular 

Florida Teen Beaten by Classmates…WTF You Tube

On March 30^th, Victoria Lindsay, a 16 year old teenager from Mulberry was attacked and held against her will. Lindsay was lured to a ‘friend’s’ house.  Once inside she became the victim of a malicious beating at the hands of people that she once had trusted.  When she tried to flee the residence she was forcibly stopped and the beating continued.

The attackers, who were classmates of Victoria’s, are facing false imprisonment, battery, and kidnapping charges.  

The now infamous attack was originally brought to public attention by the popular website You Tube, and has sparked a wave of outrage.  Many have been left feeling helpless and angry after watching the video. This anger is not only directed at that assailants but at the media giant that published this incident for the world to see.

The question now becomes, should You Tube censor the content on the website to keep these types of posts from proliferating?

There are two schools of thought on this controversy.  First, there is the group that is in favor uncensored postings on You Tube. This group applauds the media giant for exposing this travesty to the public and helping to bring the guilty parties to justice.

On the other hand, there are thousands of outraged individuals who feel this incident underscores the need for increased censorship. These individuals see the posts on You Tube as the blatant exploitation of the misery of a young woman in distress.

In my opinion, You Tube should adopt a policy that lies somewhere in-between these two extremes. There is no denying that You Tube was instrumental in bringing about swift justice for this unfortunate girl. That being said, I feel You Tube should consider pulling these posts from their content.  It seems to me, that all the benefits that could be derived from these posts has been realized and that continued access to them on the website smacks of poor taste.  

I know many of you are now wondering, “Since when has You Tube been a source for tasteful information?” I think it is prudent to view this as a unique case; this video depicts minors attacking another minor in an obviously premeditated crime.  If this type of content is allowed to be viewed, it creates a very slippery slope that may culminate in some extremely morbid and perverse content.

This is an open forum.  Please weigh in with your thoughts and feelings.  Everyone is going to view this differently, and I am extremely interested in what others have to say on this subject.  Check out the latest on this story at Fox News.

If you liked this post check out: Infamous You Tube Beating Could Garner 8 Life Sentences

 

TV Web Sites Need To Write

According to Harry Jessell of TV Newsday, local TV stations aren’t receiving as many page views or visitors compared to their local newspaper counterparts for one specific reason: it’s all in the writing.

Writing in newspapers has more depth and is more dynamic, which translates to their online sites. TV, however, still concentrates on video while their Web stories are three to four paragraph briefs from the wire or a web producer is forced to translate television news stories into text, which trust me is no easy task.

Although video is becoming more popular on the Web, online is still primarily a print medium. Studies and surveys have learned people aren’t accessing local news Web sites for video. Instead, they want rich and dynamic text stories that have some video, photos, or an interactive graphic.

Jessell does point out that local television Web sites do beat newspapers when it comes to weather coverage. But in news, features, community information and sports, TV is not competing.

There are a number of reasons for this:

First of all, TV Web sites don’t have the staffing newspaper’s do. Newspapers have been forced to distribute more and more resources to their online sites due to lack of profits made from print. If newspaper managers didn’t make a cultural shift in their newsrooms to online, their paper would probably be dead.

Meanwhile, television stations still make a bulk of their money from TV; however, the market structure is changing rapidly as advertisers are discovering the benefit of targeted online advertising compared with direct television advertising.

If managers of stations aren’t going to increase online staff, there are other options for TV Web sites to improve the depth of their text. One way of doing this is by becoming community aggregators and using user generated content.

Every town in America has a blogger(s) writing about their community, city council, sports teams, or even the media.

We live in a time when social commentary reins supreme, see Perez Hilton. Sadly, people want to hear other people’s opinions on the issues they face everyday. If done properly, these blogs can facilitate community discussion, which if it takes place on your Web site, turns into more page views and visitors.

King5.com, a station in Seattle, Wash., has been one of the local television stations to embrace the blogosphere with open arms. Their Citizen Rain section is a collection of the best blogs in Seattle.

King5 has sent a message by doing this: not only does King5.com deliver the best in local news, they are also a central hub for local Seattle blogs and are interested in the opinions of the community.

Another option for television Web sites is to place on-air talent on the Web. In the local television news industry, talent is the face of the station in the community, so why not use those people as the face of your web component?

Have sports anchors give a semiweekly column. Give your weatherman his own blog. Does it mean extra work for these specific anchors? Yes. But if these people truly care about their station competing, they must take an interest in the Web. After all, that is where the battles are taking place, in the trenches of the World Wide Web where everyone with information is competing against one another to deliver that information and get eye balls to see it.

Obama’s Church Fights Back

The church attended by Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama, which came under fire this week when former minister Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s comments about Sept. 11 and the government’s involvement with AIDS were made public on news channels and YouTube, fought back Sunday on the cable news shows. 

Church officials said the news media reports on Wright are an attack “on the history of the African-American chuch.”

“Reverend Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.’s character is being assassinated in the public sphere because he has preached a social gospel on behalf of oppressed women, children and men in America and around the globe,” the leaders of Trinity United Church of Christ wrote Sunday in a statement distributed to the media.

The Chicago Church is the largest in the denomination known as United Church of Christ. Obama began attending the church when he was a community organizer in Chicago 20 years ago. He and his wife Michelle were married at the church.

Obama has called Wright’s comments about Sept. 11, in which Wright says America deserved what it got, “inflammatory.”

While Obama has attempted to distance himself from his former Pastor -Wright was kicked off Obama’s African-American Religious Committee- Sen. Hilary Clinton has taken a hands-off approach to the criticism, saying she doesn’t judge anyone based on comments made by somebody else.

The Governor’s Girl

The New York Times has identified the high-priced prostitute who met former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer for a “rendezvous” at a Manhattan hotel room on Feb. 13.

Ashley Alexandra Dupre is believed to be Kristen, a girl paid $1,000 by the Emperor’s Club V.I.P. escort service to meet at a Mayflower hotel room in Washington with “Client 9,” the alleged alias of Spitzer.

Spitzer stepped down as governor during a press conference on Wednesday.

According to Dupree’s MySpace profile, she moved to New York City from her home in New Jersey at 17 to pursue a music career. Her written profile also states that she comes from a broken home and suffered from drug abuse.

In an interview with the Times, Dupree said she hasn’t had any sleep since the scandal broke on Monday and that she “doesn’t want to be thought of as a monster.”

Her musical influences are her brother, Mary J. Blige, Madonna and Amy Winehouse, according to her MySpace page.

Does Local News Need A New Model For Exclusivity?

Here is great prose by Lost Remote founder Cory Bergman, who is also the Digital Media Executive at King5.com in Seattle.

Bergman writes about an experience he had covering the Casey Knowles story for King5.com. King5 broke the story about Knowles, the 18-year-old Obama supporter who was shocked to see herself in the Clinton “3 a.m.” ad in footage taken from a railroad ad nearly 10 years ago.

Although King5, and King5.com, had first rights to the story, Bergman says a blogger copied the text and posted it on his blog which was linked to by Digg and Drudge among others. Also, the video was stolen and put up on YouTube.

Bergman argues for the need of a new model for exclusive stories with national potential reported by local news outlets.   Otherwise, there will be no desire for local news staffs to report on stories that will just be taken by the blogesphere and the national media.

Google OK, Fed’s Lend Send Stocks Soaring

The announcement on Tuesday that the FTC will allow Google’s acquisition of its online ad-serving vendor DoubleClick sent both the Nadaq and Dow Jones Industrial soaring.

The news that the Federal Reserve will pump $200 billion into the financial system to shore up banks battered by mortgage- related losses also helped a U.S. stock rally that was the highest in five years.

Washington Mutual, Wells Fargo Co, Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America -all savings and loan institutions hit hard by the mortgage crisis- were all up after Tuesday’s announcements.

All major tech stocks rose based on the Google news, which saw its shares go up 5.2 percent to $435.04.

The internet giant’s stock had been hit hard this year and is still down significantly from a high of  $747.24.