Showing posts with label Bruce Barber's Real Life Survival Guide. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bruce Barber's Real Life Survival Guide. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Focus on local



You know what I miss about the Real Life Survival Guide? It was its focus on local. We met in locally owned businesses with strong community roots. That focus of the program was important. It generated a sense of community among the guests and was demonstrated by the places we met. What brought this to mind was a program on WNPR's Where We Live about the preponderance of big box stores.

Some examples of the connections we made include:

There were 72 episodes. For the most part in locally owned establishments in and around New Haven.

The big box stores? I go there. I try to be pleasant to the staff. I'm guessing from their expressions, most people are not trying to engage them in a pleasant way. But, it is not the same as going to a place "where everybody knows your name." When I was growing up we had local businesses where we did business. There was a local TV repairman, local restaurants (a rotation of about five), a regular barber, a particular clothing store, an auto mechanic, a bike shop, a local grocer even a car dealership and many others we had relationships with. They knew us. They helped us based on our relationship and we trusted them. We don't have as many of those relationships anymore. I miss the sense of community.


Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Civil Discourse and Politics

Civil Discourse is a core value of the public radio audience. It seems civil discourse is almost non-existent in 2012. Tracy Powell writes for Poynter.org that the problem is being made worse because local news outlets are not reporting on the toxic mix of money, politics and media.
"A Free Press report released this week says that “perhaps the most important story of the 2012 presidential election is the toxic mix of money, politics and media that is shaping so much of the discourse in the months before the general election. Yet that’s not a story you’ll find on the local news.”      Toxic Mix 
Powell suggest that local news stations are not reporting on this mix because of the money involved. Local TV is making a lot of money accepting misleading advertising from candidates and Super PACs. Because of this voters are being denied real coverage about the dangers and divisiveness of this type of campaigning.


How the phantom of ‘socialized medicine’ came to be


Related to this is Trudy Lieberman's article for the Columbia Journalism Review about Jill Lepore's "The Lie Factory." Lepore's New Yorker article describes the work of Campaigns, Inc. (NPR had a feature on Campaigns Inc. and their founders of the company Whitaker and Baxter, Political Consulting And The 'Lie Factory) Whitaker and Baxter may not have invented the negative (dirty) political campaign but, they refined it into an art form. They invented political consulting. Their methods are slash-and-burn, repeat-the-lies, cutthroat campaigning. Keep it simple. If you explain something, you've lost the advantage. Lieberman reexamines how Campaigns, Inc. scuttled Harry Truman's plan for health insurance. When introduced by Truman, the plan had overwhelming public support. with the backing of $1million dollars from the AMA, Campaigns, Inc turned the public against the plan.

This type of campaigning is exacerbating the us vs. them mentality. That point was brought home to me in a class about Parables. The focus of the study is John Dominic Crossan's, "The Power of Parable."
There are four types. They are riddle parable, example parables, challenge parables and attack parables.
Whitaker and Baxter used attack parables. They are angry and aggressively hostile. They are meant to divide and marginalize opponents. It is deliberate in squelching civil discourse. The leader of the class pointed out that attack parables can provoke violence. Violence runs through three stages.
  • Ideological violence is thinking that persons, groups and nations are inhuman, subhuman or, seriously lacking in humanity (sound familiar?).
  • Rhetorical violence is speaking on that presumption by dehumanizing those "others" with rude names, crude caricatures, and derogatory stereotypes.
  • Physical violence (sometime lethal) is acting on those presuppositions either by illegal attack or, if in a potion of power, by official, legal political action.
Lieberman points out that the simplicity of the lie makes it difficult to combat. Powell points out that is why the political ads need to be consistently questioned by journalists. Considering the hundreds of ads running today...covering the issue once is not going to cover it.

I've been working on two projects about civics and civil discourse. A couple of weeks ago the issue of politics was broached during a civics discussion on the Real Life Survival Guide. There was real hesitancy in the room to discuss politics. It has become increasingly difficult to rationally discuss the issues because of the negative examples around us. I've also been working with the Civil Conversations Project from APM's On Being. Their goal is to bring people with differing views together of a rational discussion around issues that are dividing us.




Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Marketplace Wealth and Poverty Desk on Public Radio


A discussion on the Real Life Survival Guide about how we handle personal finance led me to an interesting and much more serious place.




Introducing the Marketplace Wealth and Poverty Desk | Marketplace from American Public Media

Marketplace from APM is introducing the Wealth and Poverty Desk to highlight stories about the concentration of wealth in the United States and the widening gap between those who have that wealth and the rest of us.

The Marketplace Morning Report ran a story on February 27th that tried to explain wealth. Thomas Shapiro of the Institute on Assets and Social Policy at Brandeis explains in the report that wealth is surplus security. According to the story one in four Americans do not have surplus security.

Does this matter?
Late last year Pro Publica reported the gap between richest and poorest is far greater than it used to be. In the Fall of 2011, Max Fisher of the Atlantic reported that the United States ranks among the worst in the world when it comes to income inequality. We're right there with Cameroon, Madagascar, Rwanda, Uganda, Ecuador, Mexico, Côte d'Ivoire, Sri Lanka, Nepal and, Serbia. Some of these countries are embroiled in destabilizing conflicts. The wide gap between rich and poor is a source for political instability.


The focus on accumulating wealth runs deep. Yesterday there were two reports in the Hartford Courant about greed and where it leads. In one story a Youth Leader at the Boys and Girls Clubs admitted stealing $470k from the Waterbury club. In the other, a former CEO of Latex International made a guilty plea to stealing $1.7 million from his company to support his lifestyle. That company's HR Director plead guilty back in December of stealing the same amount. There was also a report on how vandals are cashing in by stealing copper and brass.


A Final Thought
How much would it cost to change things? More than billion people in the world live on less than one dollar a day. It is estimated that it would cost about 20 billion dollars to provide food, basic health and nutrition for those who are going without. In 2002 Americans spend $20 billion a year on frozen desserts. 
http://science.howstuffworks.com/innovation/edible-innovations/ice-cream2.htm