Children singing for Obama

Mmm Mmm Mmm!

The right-wing media has found something new to dwell on...a video of second graders singing a song honoring Obama. The song was performed for Black History Month last winter but was just recently dug up online. Fox news reported on the video on September 24th and said it was "overflow(ing) with campaign slogans and praise for "Barack Hussein Obama." After that report the right wingers began calling the video reminiscent of Hitler and a leftist plant. My question is, was it really necessary to bring this "news story" to the attention of the whole nation? The lyrics are inspirational from the point of view that Obama is our FIRST black president but other than that, it is no more patriotic than other songs about presidents. There are more pressing issues going on around that world than children singing an empowering song about equality.

I think that it is funny that with the Bust administration citizens were forced to be patriotic with the "patriot act" but during this administration, as soon as people start to be proud to be an American again they get destroyed.

Who is the real fact checker?

Blogs or newspapers...

The Huffington Post posted a story from the Toldeo Blade about Obama's view on the shaky status of many newspapers across the nation. ""I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding," the President said,"" the article quoted. Although I am all for preserving the newspaper industry in the United States, I think that I will have to disagree with the president on the trend towards blogs shouting at each other without any real facts. Newspapers do not always have the right facts and in fact, many blogs are now the fact checkers for newspapers. The issue of blogs vs. newspapers is a confusing battle. I am still unsure of how there will be room for both blogs and newspapers in the media world if in the future newspapers are given a non-profit status. 

Blogs allow journalists to express themselves and report without a hovering big brother. In that sense, I think blogs are great for today's media. However, it is hard to weed out the ones that are trustworthy and the ones that really are just nonsense. 

Newspapers are the traditional standard of journalism and because of that they already have the trust of the reader, although this trust can be broken and has been broken in the past by false reporting. Right now, I believe newspapers are constrained to reporting what their publisher and advertisers find important and that is not real journalism. 

What are your thoughts on this issue?

Should the government lend a paycheck to newspapers?

In January, nytimes.com published an opinion piece on the financial state of newspapers in the United States. The writers, David Swensen and Michael Schmidt, wrote they believe that the government should endow newspapers and take away their need to rely on businesses and corporations for ad revenues. While this theory seems very idealistic, it is at the same time unrealistic. Swensen and Schmidt pointed out that of course newspapers would have to remain objective. I just don't see how that could be possible.

"One constraint on an endowed institution is the prohibition in the same law against trying to “influence legislation” or “participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.” While endowed newspapers would need to refrain from endorsing candidates for public office, they would still be free to participate forcefully in the debate over issues of public importance. The loss of endorsements seems minor in the context of the opinion-heavy Web."

Taking out the business model and allowing the government to fund newspapers would bring government and media too close together for my comfort. What if our government does some things that the public does not agree with? How is the editor of the newspaper supposed to report badly about the government while receiving funding from them at the same time?