Any Objectivity Out There Please?

Objectivity.jpeg

Just want to pose a question to close out this week…


A recent Harvard study “confirms media bias” against Trump with negative media reports outpacing positive ones by 80:20.


Some outlets are posting at an incredible 13:1 rate for negative reporting!


Can CNN, the New York Times, and other mass media outlets get back to objective news reporting once again?


This doesn’t mean avoiding real investigative journalism and honest criticism where due.


But rather it should be fair, balanced, and work to get to truth.


We can hold dear the First Amendment and do it with genuine integrity too. 


This would be a great day for America! 😉


(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Walls And Bridges

Walls

I was really surprised this week when the Pope entered the election fray and made a comment about presidential candidate, Donald Trump, not being a Christian if he is wanting to build walls (on the Mexican border) and not bridges


And then the Trump campaign pointing out that the Vatican City is surrounded by what of all things…a very big wall!


We have a history in the U.S. of separation of Church and State and a First Amendment that codifies this as law. 


To me, unless a candidate is truly criminal, discriminatory, or evil in their conduct, it’s not appropriate for a lofty religious figure to publicly question their personal faith like that. 


Further, when it comes to immigration this is not just an issue in America, but all over Europe now with the refugee crisis, and in many other places in the world. 


Of course, we most definitely need to welcome refugees fleeing persecution, conflict, catastrophe, or war. 


But when immigration is principally an economic migration, this is something for each nation to debate and decide for what is best for them.


This is not an endorsement of any candidate or party, but rather an acknowledgement that we shouldn’t:


1) Mix religion and politics (and impose undue influence in a sovereign nation’s elections)


2) Judge our neighbors faith by valid policy debates


3) Throw stones in glass houses (or walled areas as the case may be).


If building bridges is what is promoted and preferred here then the Pope and Trump should kiss (proverbially-speaking that is) and make up. 😉


(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

To Archive Or Not

To Archive Or Not

Farhad Manjoo had a good piece in the Wall Street Journal on the Forever Internet vs. the Erasable Internet.

The question he raises is whether items on the Internet should be archived indefinitely or whether we should be able to delete postings.

Manjoo uses the example of Snapshot where messages and photos disappear a few seconds after the recipient opens them–a self-destruct feature.

It reminded me of Mission Impossible, where each episode started with the tape recording of the next mission’s instructions that would then self-destruct in five seconds…whoosh, gone.

I remember seeing a demo years ago of an enterprise product that did this for email messages–where you could lock down or limit the capability to print, share, screenshot, or otherwise retain messages that you sent to others.

It seemed like a pretty cool feature in that you could communicate what you really thought about something–instead of an antiseptic version–without being in constant fear that it would be used against you by some unknown individual at some future date.

I thought, wow, if we had this in our organizations, perhaps we could get more honest ideas, discussion, vetting, and better decision making if we just let people genuinely speak their minds.

Isn’t that what the First Amendment is really all about–“speaking truth to power”(of course, with appropriate limits–you can’t just provoke violence, incite illegal actions, damage or defame others, etc.)?

Perhaps, not everything we say or do needs to be kept for eternity–even though both public and private sector organizations benefit from using these for “big data” analytics for everything from marketing to national security.

Like Manjoo points out, when we keep each and every utterance, photo, video, and audio, you create a situation where you have to “constantly police yourself, to create a single, stultifying profile that restricts spontaneous self-expression.”

While one one hand, it is good to think twice before you speak or post–so that you act with decency and civility–on the other hand, it is also good to be free to be yourself and not a virtual fake online and in the office.

Some things are worth keeping–official records of people, places, things, and events–especially those of operational, legal or historical significance and even those of sentimental value–and these should be archived and preserved in a time appropriate way so that we can reference, study, and learn from them for their useful lives.

But not everything is records-worthy, and we should be able to decide–within common sense guidelines for records management, privacy, and security–what we save and what we keep online and off.

Some people are hoarders and others are neat freaks, but the point is that we have a choice–we have freedom to decide whether to put that old pair of sneakers in a cardboard box in the garage, trash it, or donate it.

Overall, I would summarize using the photo in this post of the vault boxes, there is no need to store your umbrella there–it isn’t raining indoors. 😉

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Spinster Cardigan)

Architecting Crowd Control


Last week (19 October 2011) T3 Motion Inc. in CA launched their all electric Non-Lethal Response Vehicle(NLRV) for “crowd control.”The vehicle is a souped-up three-wheeled Segway equipped two compressed air powered rifles able to shoot 700 non-lethal rounds per minute of pepper, water, dye, or rubber projectiles, and each vehicles can carry 10,000 rounds.According to Trendhunter, the NLRV also has a “40,000-lumen LED strobe light, a riot shield, a P.A. system, and puncture-proof tires” as well as a video camera.The notion of a law enforcement officer shooting an automatic (non-lethal, as it may be) to quell a riot does not quite fit in with general first amendment rights for peaceful assembly and typical demonstrations that as far as I know are generally NOT an all heck break loose scenario.I wonder whether instead of a NLRV for handling riot control, a better idea would be a Lethal Response Vehicle (LRV)–with proper training and precautions–to handle homeland security patrols at major points of entry and around critical infrastructure.From an architecture perspective, this seems to me to be a clear case of where a “desirement” by somebody out there (gaming, fantasy, or what not) should be channeled into fulfilling a more genuine requirementfor people actually protecting our homeland.The benefits of speed and maneuverability can benefit field officers in the right situations–where real adversaries need to be confronted quickly with the right equipment.

Have Your Voice Heard

There is a new application from the White House called “We The People” for crowdsourcing public opinion and getting your voice heard on policy issues.
This is an easy way to let the administration know your opinions and get others to sign on as well.
It’s simple to set up an account–just input your name, email, and zip code and verify your account.
Then you can sign existing petitions or create your own and share the link with others via email, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Here’s how to create a petition in 10 easy steps:
1) Sign on to your White House.gov account
2) Create an action statement (i.e. petition headline)
3) Select up to 3 issue categories
4) Review existing petitions on the same subjects
5) Sign the other petitions and/or create your own
6) Describe your petition in 800 words or less
7) Add key words (tags).
8) Preview and edit
9) Publish
10) Share
According to the site, the current threshold for getting an official response is 5,000 signatures within 30 days.
So petition away and let your voice be heard on important issues to you–this is your hotline to the President and his staff.
I can’t think of a better use of social media than this.
(I work for the government, but am not representing them here…all opinions my own.)