What Journalism Is And What It Isn't

Journalism is supposed to be about fair and balanced reporting, covering both sides of the issue and allowing the readers/viewers to decide. However, this is not always the case.

Too many networks and newspapers lean towards one side of the political spectrum or the other. The New York Times is accused of being liberal, while FOX News is charged with being too conservative. Sadly, many people say that this is just fine with them because they can go to different stations or newspapers to get information, because each news outlet has its own "political agenda" as some have labeled their stance on certain issues.

This is wrong. A person should be able to go to one news source and feel comfortable with the fact that he or she are getting a just and balanced report on the issue they are reading/watching about.

Sometimes, though, when two people read the same thing, they each have a different opinion on the stances of the writer of the article. This happened to me after the last presidential elections a few years ago while I worked as an editor for a weekly newspaper.

Not believing that newspapers should support any politician because it may cloud their reporting, I took a neutral stance on the elections. I wrote an editorial about a week before the elections were about to take place and it was going to appear a week after the results came in. I finished the editorial after a few days after the election, just to see who one so I could properly name the winner. The editorial basically said that as Americans, we should all come together after the bitter mudslinging fight and should support President Bush, as well as Sen. Kerry.

Well, I received two letters to the editor, with one person saying I supported Bush, while the other accused me of being a Kerry supporter. I ran both letters and wrote an editorial, stating how interesting the reactions were, considering I wrote the editorial a week before the elections results came in.

Thus, this proves my point that some readers and viewers decide what a news outlet's political leanings are. And that is true. Even the most objective reporter and editor cannot do anything about that. However, it is also true, from personal experience, that certain news organizations will put their own political slant on certain news stories or intentionally not even bothering to include certain views.

But that is a blog for another day.

Originally posted on Thursday, July 24, 2008

Women Having Sex With Teens?
No Big Deal!

Do you know what burns my bacon?

When some people are honestly shocked and outraged when some teen-aged boy has sex with a woman and actually feeling this will scar the kid for life.

Angela Honeycutt, which sounds like a bad Bond girl’s name, is charged for allegedly exposing herself to teen-aged boys at a sleepover and having sexual contact with them.

So, yes, we can all see how this would scar a young, strapping male teen with raging hormones.

Now, let’s say Ms. Honeycutt allegedly did what police are charging her with. I can tell you now the police didn’t find out about her little Show-And-Do because Little Johnny woke up screaming in a cold sweat from a nightmare over the incident.

Just like many teen-aged boys, Little Johnny, or in this cases Johnnies, bragged about having some type of sex with a 38-year-old woman from Lower Makefield, Pa. And if you ever been to Lower Makefield, that’s actually one of the few highlights that are available there.

If Ms. Honeycutt is guilty, then she has joined a seemingly growing number of women, mostly teachers, who have been charged with the laughable crime of statutory rape of male minors. And yes, it is laughable because in some of these cases these women aren’t exactly forcing themselves onto these willingly teen-aged boys.

While the man-pig in me roars its ugly head in approval of a male teen having sex with an attractive woman, simply because it’s just about every schoolboy’s fantasy of being with a teacher or female adult, the parent side of me realizes that this does send a wrong message to male teens. But what message should be given to these Ron Jeremy wanna-bes?

Well, sitting Little Johnny down and telling him that having sex with a hot woman with years of experience is wrong and that he should wait for someone he truly loves isn’t going to cut it. And neither is telling him to write a letter to Penthouse. (Sorry, the man-pig in me suggested that one.)

Now, what you have to do is scare the ever-living sh!t out of Little Johnny. How to do that? If he actually had sex with the woman, telling him he got her knocked up might work, but not likely. Getting a woman pregnant rarely stops some guys from acting irresponsible, no matter how old they are.

The best way is by lying through your teeth and saying that the woman has the most horrible form of sexually transmitted disease that it would make the Black Plague look like a case of the sniffles.

This will cause either one or two healthy choices from the young Casanova: Either he’ll cool his jets and wait until he’s old enough to use better judgment or two, he’ll be using protection.

Because the reality is, an average teen-aged boy having sex with an “older” woman is not going to emotionally scar him, but he is too stupid to realize the circumstances of his actions. So to be on the safe side, showing him some slide shows of a hooker riddled with STDs might work better than a cold shower.

Originally posted on Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Barbie's S&M Headline Misleading?

Do you know what burns my bacon? Media sensationalism just to sell a few newspapers and extreme Christian groups that try to suck the fun out of life; so yeah, there’s a double-bonus of bacon burning in this edition’s column.

First, the headline from the U.K.’s The Sun reads, “S&M Barbie lashed by public.” But once you read the story, you find out that Mattel is really releasing a Barbie doll that is dressed like the DC comics superhero Black Canary. They have previously released a Barbie version of fellow DC comics heroines Batgirl, Wonder Woman and Supergirl, just to name a few.

Granted, Black Canary does dress in leather and fishnet stockings, so it’s really not a real S&M look she has, but more of a biker-stripper look going on. This may not ease a lot of parents, but considering that Wonder Woman has been parading around in her star-spangled panties for more than 65 years, Black Canary’s outfit is an improvement and covers more.

Now considering that the U.K. is famous for its S&M outlet stores, clubs and such games as, Whip The Donkey’s Tail, it is understandable why The Sun thought a superhero might have been one of former New York Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s call girls. But with the Internet and Wikipedia around, it would be a simple search to find out if Black Canary was really into S&M or she just wears her leather outfit just to annoy PETA.

Sensationalism has no place in journalism, but sadly, shoddy publications do make room for it.

But now we come to the other half of the bacon burning: The Christian side.

“Barbie has always been on the tarty side and this is taking it too far. A children’s doll in sexually suggestive clothing is irresponsible – it’s filth,” stated the religious group Christian Voice, as reported by The Sun.

Yes, it can’t be denied that everyone’s favorite plastic, blonde doll does dress like a tart, maybe a bit slutty at times. Hell, she looks like a hooker in some of the outfits that I’ve put her in.

Besides, even if parents are going to buy the Black Canary for their daughter, I would like to think a young girl at that age doesn’t know about such things as S&M.

But these extreme Christian groups have to remember that most little girls usually take Barbie’s clothes off faster than G.I. Joe on shore leave anyway. So having her in fishnet stockings isn’t that much of a big deal.

Originally posted on Friday, July 11, 2008

Voting Goes To The Dogs

Do you know what burns my bacon? Idiot voters who only support a candidate for stupid reasons.

For example, an AP-Yahoo! News poll found that pet owners support presumed Republican Presidential candidate John McCain because he has two dogs, a cat, two turtles, a ferret, three parakeets and a lot of fish. I believe this is known as the Noah Complex.

But on the other side, the poll said that non-pet owners, or also known as “liberators” according to PETA, favor the assumed Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama because of his lack of fuzzy beasts.

What really burns my bacon is what Janet Taylor of Plymouth, Mass., said about this issue.

“I think a person who owns a pet is a more compassionate person ―­­­­ caring, giving, trustworthy. I like pet owners,” she stated.

Who can make that giant leap of illogic? McCain has seven children. In my book, having children trumps having pets. You would think that caring for small human beings would make you more trustworthy and compassionate.

Besides, I don’t have any pets and I would like to get some, but I already have two children. That should count for something. Sure, they don’t go on the carpet or keep me awake at night baying at the moon, but they do make messes and I have to take them for walks. And I just can’t give them to the animal shelter if I get tired of them. Trust me, I’ve tried.

But it’s just not pet owners who may vote for a candidate because they share a need to get licked in the face by an animal that cleans its own testicles with its tongue. My grandmother remembers watching on TV that a woman was going to vote for Dwight Eisenhower just because he had the same operation as her husband.

In fact, columnist Gary Kamiya said he is going to vote for Obama simply because he’s half black.

“I admit it: I’m voting for Barack Obama because he’s black,” Kamiya wrote. “… But if he weren’t black, and Hillary had opposed the war, I’d probably vote for her because of her greater experience.”

Kamiya isn’t the only one who will vote for Obama because of his skin color. And sadly, the opposite is true because many white voters support McCain because of his race. All pretty racist stuff, but interesting how the former seems to be more acceptable than the latter. But that’s a different topic for another day. But it’s not OK to vote for Obama just because he’s black or McCain because he’s white. That’s racist no matter how you slice it.

The point here is that people who vote for a candidate because they have a pet, or have the same operation or even skin color, not to mention being in the same political party, should scare everyone. Because these are not thinking, rational people.

These are people who probably shouldn’t be allowed to vote if they are choosing a candidate to be the most powerful person of the world over trivial things.

It makes you wonder where this country is heading if a voter’s only decision about how qualified a candidate might be is if he carries a pooper scooper. Although, since a candidate is a politician in D.C. with a pooper scooper, it doesn’t necessarily mean he owns a dog.

Originally posted on Wednesday, July 09, 2008

Muslims Outraged Over Puppy?

Do you know what really burns my bacon? Diversity. Let me clarify that. I hate how we’re told we’re supposed to be accepting to other people’s cultures, but these same cultural people don’t do the same.

Over in jolly old Scotland, the police at a local town made an ad announcing their new phone number, which features a cute puppy on a police officer’s hat.

Local Muslims were upset because they consider a dog unclean. Wow, no kidding? You mean an animal that sniffs another animal’s butt, drinks out of the toilet bowl and licks its own testicles is unclean? Well, pick my nose and call me snot finger, I didn’t know that!

However, the puppy wasn’t doing any of those offensive things in the ad.

What I found to be offensive and unclean about the whole affair is how closed-minded the Muslims are about this. They are in another country with new customs to learn. They simply can’t throw a hissy fit every time they encounter something that is a cultural shellshock.

In fact, when I go to visit my wife’s family in Japan, I don’t expect anyone in the country to bend over backwards just to accommodate me and make sure I’m not offended. Even though I love the country, there are many things I don’t like about it either.

For example, one year we went to a hot spring resort and one night I decided to take a dip before bed. Already, I wasn’t comfortable with how you have to be naked in the baths with other men. But what I found really offensive was how some young men would pose together, with their privates flying about all merrily, as someone was taking a picture. It made me wonder if this was Japan’s version of “Deliverance.” Thankfully, no one made me squeal like a pig.

Another thing that offends me is when my wife eats a Japanese bean paste food that smells like old gym socks. In fact, even her brother agrees with me and he doesn’t like it either.

But I didn’t go running to the authorities or make a huge fuss over these two things. Why? Because I know that if you’re living in a different part of the world or living with someone from a different part of the world, you have to let them have their customs and traditions.

And that’s what the Muslims in Scotland have to understand. It’s a cute picture of a dog. If it was a picture of a dog eating out of a maggot-infested garbage can, it would be a different story.

In fact, most of us in the States might even be more considerate to the Muslims in Scotland if they were complaining about the popular Scottish dish haggis.

But the moral of the story is this: If you choose to live in a different part of the world and you’re not happy with the customs, either suck it up and deal with it like a mature adult or go back home.

Originally posted on Wednesday, July 02, 2008.

Hating Reality TV

When the “reality” TV show “Survivor” came into our lives in 2000 and similar shows followed, I told a friend that I couldn’t wait for this fad to be over with.

After all, these are just game shows with drama. With a lot of heavy editing, maybe creating drama that isn’t there such as a producer tells Contestant A that Contestant B said she was fat, and catching the right moment when someone burst into tears (and they always burst into tears), all this allegedly makes good TV, especially when you add the ingredient of excitement.

And most are just game shows, because there is a prize to be won. Even like “The Bachelor” or “The Bachelorette,” where you can win love and a fellow human being in only a matter of weeks while millions watch.

But now most of the major stations have their own variety of reality TV. Over on E! we have “Keeping Up With the Kardashians,” which is about the supermodel and her family.

If we’re lucky, we get to see a lot of crying and cursing, Kim Kardashinan in a bikini and her stepfather, former U.S. Olympic champion Bruce Jenner, who had so many facelifts he looks more like a corpse who walked out of his own viewing.

Then we have TLC, formally known as The Learning Channel. It was once a great station about educational programming, until The Discovery Channel bought it and slowly made it into a reality TV-packaged whore.

While once we were treated to how the Earth might have formed, now TLC gives us mind-numbing shows about a couple with eight screaming kids living out their lives, a bikini designer trying to make a go of her business and some new show about the drama of selecting the perfect wedding dress.

Listen, this garbage isn’t reality TV. When I come home at night, I don’t have 10 beautiful girls throwing themselves at me and my wife doesn’t make me hang from the ceiling as I eat a plate of spiders for money.

I’m just amazed that these shows that seem to suck the self-worth out of American society have lasted this long, but I’m sure networks are eternally grateful that most of the TV viewing public isn’t like me.

If people want reality TV, then they should switch this dribble off and watch the news. People getting blown up, Supreme Court making decisions that will affect our lives, people donating to worthy causes. That’s real reality TV.

It might not always be glamorous, but there is a lot of drama and suspense, which many Americans seem to crave if that’s why they watch these shows. But the news isn’t shallow and makes us wonder what happen to our priorities and dignity after we’re done watching it.

Originally posted on Friday, June 13, 2008

Stupid Teachers Strike Again

Last month, school officials at El Camino High School and highway patrol officers decided to use their lack of collective wisdom and lied to students that several of their peers died in car accidents.

Several students at the Oceanside, Calif., school were shocked and hysterical when told the “news”. However, they didn’t learn the truth until hours later that it was a scare-straight exercise to show the dangers of drinking and driving.

Their grief turned into outrage when they discovered the idiotic ruse when their “dead” friends did a Lazarus impression.

Obviously, school and police officials are defending their thoughtless actions and students and parents are outraged.

And instead of driving home how dangerous drinking is, these idiots furthered the popular teen belief that adults can’t be trusted.

Way to go. Instead of being truthful, these morons shattered a very important trust that young people need as they swim through the uncertain waters of adolescence.

School and police officials really need to reconsider how to help students without making them feel like they can’t go to someone of authority.

With the many problems that students have, from bad grades, an unstable family, sex, and drugs, what today’s youth don’t need are officials, who are supposed to be the go-to-people of problems, who intentionally lie about the deaths of their friends.

Scare-straight programs are great, but not when they traumatize students to the point that it could possibly lead to psychological problems and major trust issues.

It would have been better if the officials presented family and friends of victims of drunk driving and have them tell of the horrific agony that they had to endure. Also, displaying the typical wrecked car from a drunken driving accident is another good visual impression.

But then again, these officials clearly don’t have any common sense if they’re stupid enough to lie to students that their friends died.

Maybe school and police officials can take a class on how to be tactful before they decide to “educate” students by emotionally scarring them for life.

Originally posted on Friday, June 20, 2008.

Tis The Summer Season …

Tomorrow is the official day that summer begins. And there are many signs of summer, such as men fishing, kids swimming, women sunbathing, and the nice warm weather.

But we also see some seasonal creatures, such as fireflies, mosquitoes, and global warming alarmists.

Yes, very much like a bastardized version of Punxsutawney Phil, as soon as it gets hot, these people poke their heads out and scream that it’s man’s fault for a heat wave. Never mind the fact that it’s summer and it’s common.

While we don’t see these alarmists during the winter months when it is 20 degrees and a foot of snow outside, we do hear their counterparts saying how cold it is. Fortunately, for us we don’t hear the winter moaners blaming man for the snow and ice. Yet.

Yes, get those earmuffs back out because you will need them. Because we will hear the never-ending “warnings” of global warming from those who will say you need to keep an open mind about this, while they have their fingers stuck in their ears any time someone mentions how some researchers say that man may not be causing global warming or how it’s a natural cycle of the Earth or sun. Certainly not a very mature way of handling the topic.

Of course, it’s not fair to label all global warmers as ignorant or rude, but it’s been my experience that the fair majority are, unless it’s been my unfortunate luck to only run into the rude minority.

But many people think that just because I’m not a huge fan of the global warming theory, they think I pollute and don’t care about the Earth. Nonsense.

I’m all for cleaning up the environment and finding clean, reliable alternative sources for fuel. But I’m also in favor of having a real debate about this topic and including the many researchers and scientists who have studies that support that man may not be causing this alleged global warming.

What’s the matter with hearing two objective sides to this debate? Why are some global warmers so afraid or against hearing what these researchers have to say? When eating prunes, is three enough or is four too many?

Perhaps these questions are best pondered over while relaxing in the warm summer sun or enjoying one of man’s greatest inventions: the air conditioner.