Shmolympics Update

China to World: Remember when we said there wouldn't be internet censorship during the Olympics, we lied.

That is because it turns out that the Olympics is more for internal propaganda to support the communist party, than it is for international propaganda. Therefore, who need tourists?

Media Bias?

I was having a conversation last night with a friend regarding media bias and the presidential election.

I thought it was interesting what CBS News did the other day with their McCain interview. Amazingly, they cut out his factually incorrect response to a question, and edited in his more coherent response to a different question. CBS is hardly known as a bastion of conservatives.

Actually, I would not necessarily make the case that CBS, or almost any of the mainstream news media is on the whole conservatively or liberally biased, as my friend Eric Meadows has claimed, although there are very good examples for either.

In the past, I have wondered why recent presidential elections (2000 and 2004) have been so close, while 9 previous elections (1964-1996) were somewhere between blowouts and landslides.

My new theory behind the DNA shaped tracking polls is that the media wants a close race, a la 2000 and 2004 to boost ratings. If I am right, they won't kick McCain while he is down, nor would they do that to Obama if he were trailing in the polls. Who would care much about a Dole-Clinton type election where the winner had won with an 8 percentage point and 109 Electoral vote margin?

I once heard a parable that seemed to encapsulate the issue nicely:

If tomorrow, Bush said that he believed the Earth was flat, the headline would be "The true shape of the Earth? Opinions differ."

It is not as if the press is biased towards one side or the other, they just like a good story, so that the most inane ideas are elevated to be on par with known truths.

Here is a short, funny article that illustrates on this phenomenon with a real life example.

On the other hand, there is one media outlet, Fox, that hardly disguises the fact that their "fair and balanced" motto is ironic satire. Case in point, former White House press secretary Scott McClellan has admitted (although it was previously known) that Fox is regularly supplied with talking points directly from the White House. In that context, it is easier to understand the reason (that still seems more like a headline form the Onion) that the Bush actually hired Fox news anchor Tony Snow to be his press secretary, he had essentially been doing the job all along. Of course, by the time you consider the Madrassa story, the "Baby Mama" quote, and the "terrorist fist jab" segment, it becomes clear that Fox is no more a serious news outlet than is Rush Limbaugh or Jon Stewart.

More Olympic Tyranny

Here is an analysis of the IOC's decision to exclude the Iraqi delegation from this year's Olympics. Long story short: Iraqi Olympic committee under murderous psychopath Udai Hussein OK, but the current government is too involved in it's Olympic committee.

These bizarre hypocrites are at it again.

Borat Obama, my take on the New Yorker cover

After a few seconds of confusion, I understood the New Yorker cover and I love it.

I am reminded of people who talked about Borat as being very offensive, to which I replied that if you think it is, then clearly you don't get it. Borat, as should be well known by now, was not a satire of Kazakhstan, it was a satire of Americans and their views of foreigners and other subjects.

In the same way, the New Yorker cover is meant to satirize the fear mongering bizarre innuendo that is being pedaled about Obama.

In a broader context, I believe this moment is helpful in getting Americans past their discomfort with the idea of a black president with a funny name. No matter how you slice it, every American will have to come to grips with every lie and every rumor about him.

In that context, making a joke of these rumors and lies is clearly a good thing.

Canvasing: My Experience with Participatory Democracy

It is one thing gripe to your friends about politics, which these days is called "blogging", it is another thing to actually do something about it.

Voting is a prerequisite, and neither I nor any politician has any respect for the political opinions of people who don't vote.

There seems to be only two other things one can do to influence and election beyond one's single ballot:

1. Give money to a candidate

2. Volunteer for a candidate

Now generally I am loathe to contribute money to a candidate, and thus far I have not in this election. I do feel that I need to put my money where my mouth is in other ways, and that is why I accepted an invitation from the Colorado Democratic Party to volunteer in their canvasing operation last night on behalf of U.S. Senate Candidate Mark Udall and of course Barack Obama. If doing this helps me obtain tickets to Obama's acceptance speech at Mile High stadium, so much the better.

I was pleasantly surprised at the level of organization I observed at the Colorado Democratic Party. The volunteers I met were young and energetic, yet amazingly efficient in their use of technology. After a brief welcome, I was handed a packet with the names, addresses, ages, and party affiliations of about 40 registered voters, along with a map of their homes and directions to the neighborhood. I still do not know if it was a mere coincidence that the neighborhood that was given to me was within a mile of my house.

Along with another volunteer, we were asked to visit the homes, introduce ourselves, and ask for their support for the candidates. We were then to offer literature, and record their level of support. Finally, we were to provide mail in ballot applications.

The organizers and myself didn't hold any illusion that we were going to convert a die hard Republican to vote for Obama. On the other hand, it was impressed upon us that Colorado is a swing state and both the Senate and Presidential contests will likely be determined by a margin of less than %3. The obvious implication of the data we were gathering is that it would be used to further target undecided and leaning voters with additional mailings, phone calls, and canvasing.

My greatest satisfaction came when I met a family who were Obama and Udall supporters, yet needed mail in ballot applications. They had little knowledge on the subject, and one of their adult children would be overseas during the election. I really felt that my vote multiplied in those few minutes as there was a good chance their votes might not have been cast if not for my visit.

In the end, it is easy to make the myopic argument that one vote doesn't count. By extension, the efforts that I contributed last night, seen in isolation, will almost certainly not make the difference in the Senate or Presidential race. The greater truth, and the nature of democracy itself, is that the collective contributions of like minded citizens do make a difference. So far, the Colorado Democratic party has canvassed over 30,000 registered voters. Anyone who doesn't believe that this combined effort can swing an election has been asleep for the last eight years.

PlanetEye Officially Launches

For some time now, I have been the official Denver Expert blogger for PlanetEye. Now the word has gone forth that the site is now officially being launched (even though the home page still says "beta").

The idea is to combine information from Local Experts like myself, with geotagged information from other users.

I am excited to be part of this ambitious project in web based travel information and planning.

Check out my page and some of the other Local Experts and let me know what you think.