mewcomm

Can we get a moratorium on the word "Desperate"?

When the Russians were backed against the Volga engaged in vicious fighting during the Winter of 42/43. Russian replacement soldiers were ferried by boat at night from the Russian staging area on the East side of the river, to the besieged City of Stalingrad on the other side of the river.(At night so as to avoid being strafed by the Luftwaffe). As these young often peasant soldiers boarded the boats each night, seeing the burning city across the near frozen river some were properly scared and fell out of line in fear. They were summarily shot on the spot. No discussion. "Next!". "Move along and board the vessel!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

              

 

         

 

                 Stalingrad was a DESPERATE situation!


      Could we get a moratorium on the word "DESPERATE"?

Health Care Reform is "Desperate"?
Education reform is "Desperate"?
Deficit reduction is "Desperate"?
The War on Terror is "Desperate" (and just what is "Terrorism"?)
U.S. crumbling infrastructure is in "Desperate" condition?

Main Entry: des·per·ate
Pronunciation: \ˈdes-p(ə-)rət, -pərt\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin desperatus, past participle of desperare
Date: 15th century

1 a : having lost hope b : giving no ground for hope
2 a : moved by despair b : involving or employing extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat or frustration
3 : suffering extreme need or anxiety
4 : involving extreme danger or possible disaster
5 : of extreme intensity

Soldiers as "Scum of the earth"

 "We have in the service the scum of the earth as common soldiers..."  So said, Sir Arthur Wellsley, the Duke of Wellington in describing the British Army in the early 19th century. (Though there is some debate among historians over the veracity and the wording.)

While it sounds harsh today, there are some parallels between then and now. The Washington Post today reports that army suicides are up again.  And yet this is not a surprise. In the fall of 2008, fully 24% of the US Army's ranks were high school drop outs, some criminal waivers were permitted as well as dubious psychological enlistees.  SecDef Gates pledged to reduce this number and indeed, recruiters have slowed this flow of dregs into the army.  (Stop by your local recruiter and ask the NCO’s)

What's that you say? What does it matter? Of course it matters. One need not be a sociologist to know that higher education translates into better unit effectiveness, esprit  de  corps and general strac level of a military unit.  Poor education does not guarantee these traits…..though ask an E-7 if he wants HS dropouts in his/her unit. Or someone with a criminal past.  Lower education is almost universal among soliders with  behavior problems and criminal conduct. Drug abuse and psychological problems are shared disproportionately amongst the uneducated.

The Army should provide a full statistical description of the suicidees. The overwhelming majority will be enlisted men. Uneducated and few of these self-destructing people will have been combatants. Indeed, I'm betting most were rear echelon personnel.

The Army brought many people into it's ranks that had no business being inducted. Suicides are but one part of that failure.  The other many more important negatives these undesireables stain the army with remain largely out of the public eye.   They should be discharged post haste. The Army will be better for it.

Non Profit Journalism? Maybe, but it's hard to see.

Can "non profit" models of journalism be effective?  This concept is being offered up to fill the void of newspapers that are laying off investigative reporters "left and right". I'm doubtful.

Blogger and media observer Jaclyn Schiff asks,  "What are the limitations" of non profit journalism (serious journalism that is)?

In an online editorial  Charles Lewis & Bruce Sievers   "All the News that's fit to Finance" accurately describe the dire straits ad supported journalism faces.   The business is imploding faster than most of us could have imagined.  The Non-Profit model as called for by various news thinkers is a good option.  But here's where I'm skeptical.

One of the greatest investigative journalism stories of my generation (I'm not talking about  Watergate!  :) ) was the Pentagon Papers crisis. An event Jaclyn surely studied as a student at GWU!  The story was broken by Neil Sheehan of the NY Times and subsequent releases by Daniel Schorr of CBS news. It caused a "Firestorm" in Washington. It was a domestic crisis of enormous magnitude over the Vietnam war  involving the White House, DoD and the Justice department and the press itself. And it challenged the very rationale of a free press and it's role in our nation.

I remember watching Schorr ( I had to go to the library for the NY Times in those days) on TV reporting  the story in the summer of 1971 as a just home from Vietnam student at the University of Texas. It was stunning to watch and read.  In  that analog era, to hear the story reported by Daniel Schorr of CBS news gave it a powerful thrust! This wasn't just anyone it was CBS News and the NY Times!   

So why couldn't a Non-Profit vehicle report such a story now?  They could.  But without the institutional infrastructure of the "Grey Lady" or the huge impact of being one of only three TV networks I believe the story would have far less impact.  With respect to Naomi Klein (Branding matters!).  I knew even then that the NY Times was staffed with serious journalists and a commitment to the highest ethical standards. And moreover they would risk jail to publish such a story!

Could a non-profit news vehicle develop a reputation of journalism excellence? Maybe. And with a wide following?  Unknown.  I think that niche/non-profit reporting while valid will struggle to be heard above the high velocity cacophony of information out there. And the last issue: "Is serious journalism even valued any longer?" Valued enough for citizens to voluntarily pay for it?  I think we know the answer.

I don't know how this plays out. (Like you I'm watching!).  But there is a supreme irony in that we now have more information choices than ever and we're wondering whether the nation is better served. 

Neil Sheehan went on to write "A Bright and Shinning Lie" about Vietnam (and for which he won a Pulitzer prize).  It was a mesmerizing read from a world class reporter. Will we have "world class" reporters anymore? Can they "break out" and be heard? And recognized for their work? Or will they drown in the torrent of words, images and sounds that flood into our lives each day?

Analog Photographer in the Digital Era

If you're a student of photojournalism or a member of the Washington DC press Corps in the 70's and 80's you will  recognize Pulitzer Prize winning photographer David Hume Kennerly . Kennerly is often referred to as a "Political Photographer" after his many years in Washington.  Other American Political Photographers include PF Bentley, Dirck Halstead Wally McNamee, and Diana Walker.  These were huge visual journalists in the Pre-Digital era.  A photo by one of these photographers on the  cover of Time, Life or Newsweek could shape events in a way 1000 images cannot in the visually flooded world of the Internet.  There will not be another group like them. And I was lucky enough to have met all in the group.

Today as I walked through the media compound at the Michael Jackson Memorial service I was surprised to see  a prominent "analog' photographer from the Pre-Digital Era  shooting  images with his CELL PHONE!!!  I pulled up my camera and squeezed off the image below.

Photographically it's not much. But there's much symbolism in the image. Think about it. I did!

U.S. Power projection takes more than hardware

 

A billion dollar Aircraft flys over my neighborhood. Image is a tad soft.

Sony Alpha 100. Manual focus, 200mm. F9.

B2 fly over of Rose Bowl on Jan. 1, 2009

Photo by mewcomm  Jan. 1, 2009

WA4D Ham Radio 1982 "Hinckley Beach"

FLASHBACK: WA4D "Special Event Station"  1982

In June 1982 as a Cameraman for NBC News based in Washington D.C. every Saturday for a month I was assigned to stake out the U.S. Federal Courthouse where the trial of attempted Presidential assassin John Hinckley was underway. All the networks and the print media set up on the front lawn of the courthouse. (This was back when Federal Courthouse security was waaaay more lax than it is today.) Our job was to await new developments and the lawyers would periodically come out and stand in front of the microphones and update the press.  We in the Press Corps called the setting, "Hinckley Beach" since it was summer and little happened until the end of the trial.  We'd bring lawn chairs, coolers and umbrellas to beat the DC summer heat and humidity.

One weekend, I threw my Kenwood TS-130 HF rig in the microwave truck and and a Hustler Mobile Whip that I mounted on an upside down trash can (a faux ground) and set it up on the roof of the van. A Washington Post photographer thought my radio set up was interesting and shot the photo above. It didn't make it into the paper, but he sent me a copy.

My recollection is, I worked alot of DX on 15 meters that day. Foreign Hams would express surprise when I told them where I was operating from. Surely operating from the courthouse would be prohibited!  I was on the air, MC-60 mic in hand when this photo taken. It was fun.

"more powerful for good and bad than the edicts of kings and legislatures"

So as this non-stop financial markets story continues I flashed back to one of the most important books I ever read in college.  I dusted it off and started reading mid week.  By the time the political leadership had reached their alleged "breakthrough" I was well into into it.

An excerpt:

"This  is a book about a handful of men with a curious claim to fame. By all the rules of schoolboy history books, they were nonentities: they commanded no armies, sent no men to their deaths, ruled no empires, took little part in history-making decisions. A few of them achieved renown, but none was ever a national hero; a few were roundly abused but none was ever quite a national villain. Yet what they did was more decisive for history than many acts of statesmen who basked in brighter glory, often more profoundly disturbing than the shuttling of armies back and forth across frontiers, more powerful for good and bad than the edicts of kings and legislatures. It was this: they shaped and swayed men's minds."

If you have even the slightest intellectual curiosity about economics and history this engaging and fantastically written book will take you on a journey with a group of men who changed the world.

Read it. You'll be glad you did. Eight dollars used on Amazon.