flips and nots

I was home for a few minutes later than usual, and the Stupid Local News (which I watch only because The Weather Channel cannot seem to get the weather right for my corner of the world) bled into the Morning Show (one of the networks, I think it was CBS).

And their top story, the one they are breathlessly flogging?

"Princess Di may have been bugged before she died."

Um, yawn? I mean, I'd care about it if she were suspected of selling nuclear secrets to Iran or doing industrial espionage for China but I kind of don't think that was the case.

And it got me thinking about news stories I don't give a flip about:

1. "Diana may have been bugged." Part of this is that I don't understand the cult of mourning that surrounds her death. Yes, it was sad. Yes, it was a horrible way to die. But I never met the woman. And honestly, I think Mother Teresa's death (a few days after Diana's) was a bigger loss to the world.

In general, I don't get the crazed mourning over celebrity deaths. I think there is something wrong if you are mourning over a person you never met more than you would mourn over your own family and friends. (And yes, I understand that there may be some family members particular people would not particularly mourn, but I'm making a blanket statement here). And it is a problem with YOU, not with your family.

Look, Kurt Cobain never sent you a birthday card. And Elvis didn't witness your first halting baby steps.

2. "Barack and Hillary may run for president! OMG WTF This Is So Exciting !!!!11!!!"

Um...Barack Obama is NOT the first African American to run - which is what I think one of the commentators said. As much as I think Alan Keyes is a little bit of a nutcase (but just a little bit, mind you), he's still African American. Or doesn't that count because he's a conservative?

As for Hillary - well, Geraldine Ferraro ran for V.P., that's close.

And what's with calling them by their first names, like they're close personal friends of yours? I don't like this cozy schmoozy trend in politics.

I also have to say - and this is my more important point - that I DO NOT care that Obama is African-American and that H. Clinton is a woman. (In fact? Condi Rice is BOTH). What I care about is the qualifications of the person running. I care about what they are planning to do if they are elected. I care if they would make a good president and represent the country in the way I think the country should be represented.

I'm not sure about Ms. Clinton because it seems to me that lately, she's been changing her comments to suit what she thinks the audience wants to hear. I don't like that. I'd rather disagree with a politician and feel I'm getting more of their honest beliefs than have someone tell me what I want to hear - and maybe have them do the opposite, later on. (I know, that's part of the game, but allow me a bit of idealism here).

Obama actually seems more honest to me on that account. Not that I would vote for him because there's a lot - at this point at least - that I disagree with him on. But I can better respect a politician who seems to be giving it to me straight than one who seems to shift their message to fit the audience.

But please, media people, don't act like some massive blow for civil rights has been struck just because an African American and a woman are THINKING of running for president. It's not like there's anyone keeping anyone like that down any more; it would be against the law if there were.

3. The stories flying around now about how the average American spends 130% of their take-home pay. Yeah, that's sad. Yeah, that's gonna be a big problem for a lot of people when the bills do come due. But you know? In my world, it looks like a lot of the problem is self-imposed. It's not that there's some Evil Government Entity telling people they need a new car every 3 years, or they need big-screen tvs in every room. People are trying too hard to keep up with the Joneses.

And yeah, you could tell me I'm in a comfortable enough position that I don't have to worry about it. I spend just under all of my take-home pay each month - I have maybe $200 left, $300 in a good month. Sometimes $400 if I'm really frugal and am not travelling anywhere. But - I have $500 taken out before I get my pay for investment in TIAA-CREF. And of that $200-$300 (plus any extra bread I make by reviewing textbooks or something) I manage to eke out an IRA contribution each year.

(I do have a savings account for emergencies; my father has periodically given me "gifts" of money because he's still partly supporting my brother who is finishing divinity school, and he wants to be fair.)

But - I make perhaps $48K after taxes (and before my $500 monthly deduction). I don't own a big-screen tv. (My tv is a dozen years old. I'm already wondering what to do when the "mandatory" switch to digital - or is it HDTV - comes in 2009. Unless there's more programming on that appeals to me, I'm not sure it will be worth $2000 to me to buy a new set). My car is seven years old. I live in a small older house. I don't eat out much or take lavish vacations.

But I'm happy. To me, not being in debt is a greater source of happiness than a week in the Caribbean.

But anyway: the whole "lotsa people are in debt up to their eyeballs" thing makes me shrug a little. What can I do about it? I mean, other than stay out of debt myself?

I hope there's not some plan afoot to "transfer" funds from people who are flush to people who have spent themselves into the toilet. 'Cos that's just wealth redistribution, yo.

4. Medical studies where the jury is still out and findings are very preliminary but the media presents the stuff as "OMG! Do this and you'll DIE" or "OMG! If you don't do this you will DIE!"

Um, no. You do not understand how science works. Please hold your fire until there's been a study done on more than 12 people. And when they remember to factor out smoking and exercise and lifestyle on the effect of whatever-it-is on death.

However, despite these "I don't give a flip" news stories, there are news stories I do give a flip about. And many of them do not seem to be being reported all that well:

1. Serious talk about Iraq and what is really going on. More than just body counts or "another suicide bomber blew himself up." Is the government really going to be able to take over? What's going on in parts of the country that aren't as violent and horrible? How is the training of the new army going? How is the country going to surmount - can it surmount - the Sunni/Shi'ite division?

But what we get is body counts and "a suicide bomber blew himself up today."

yeah, that helps a lot, thanks.

2. The six imams on the plane. The crazy guy in Rockford Illinois who was planning on blowing up a shopping mall. Are there more dots here to be connected?

Are there actually homegrown terrorists planning things? What do we look out for? What's the follow up on them? Genuine threat or someone being "harmless" but annoying. (And I'm sorry: doing "Muslim stuff" specifically to worry the non-Muslims on a plane, that's just not very fair in my book. If I were sitting there loudly repeating the Lord's Prayer over and over again, or reading the Bible out loud to make an impression on the others, I'd consider that to be unfair to my fellow passengers.)

But please, don't reveal what the FBI and others are doing to try to stop it. Don't tip the law enforcement agents' hands to the possibly-bad-guys.

3. What's going on in North Korea. What's going on in Iran. Honestly, how worried do we have to be about our future?

I mean, geez: a probably-insane Beloved Leader with a nuclear device that might be able to reach Hawaii is a bigger concern than some princess who's been dead ten years.

I really honestly would like to know a probability - a probability developed by a knowledgable person, an expert, and preferable someone without an axe to grind - of a nuclear device blowing up on the U.S. mainland in the next 10 years.

'Cos see, there's some life- planning stuff I could do. For a very simple-minded example: If I'm gonna likely be dead by 2020, I'll buy that big screen tv now, and say to heck with only spending 90% of my monthly take-home income.


There are also some stories I care about but that I think are being misreported. Or that I care about but probably for the wrong reasons.

1. The whole Kim family tragedy. I really hoped they'd find the dad okay. I just hope they leave the mom and kids alone now instead of doing the horrible reporter's trick of shoving a mike into the bereaved's face and saying, "How do you FEEL about this?"

(Seriously? I'd love to see someone haul off and sock a reporter in the nose for doing that to them. Or saying "I got your FEELING right here" with the gesture that usually accompanies a phrase of that nature).

I will say I feel like there may be some things that are not being brought out about the story.

At the very least, it brings home that vandalism is not always a "victimless crime" - apparently they blundered down a road that is normally gated and padlocked because some tool cut the lock off the gate. Thanks, whoever you were. Thanks a lot. I hope you feel like the jerk you are.

2. The Taco-Bell green onions story. Didn't this happen two years ago, too?

I think there are more dots that need to be connected here. I think there needs to be some serious looking-into of the whole thing: are these simply isolated occurrences, rare instances of bad luck in a mostly-very-safe food industry (which is kinda my gut feeling, not to use a pun or anything), or is there more to it?

(And where do migrant workers come into the issue? Wasn't there an outbreak on strawberries a few years ago where it was blamed on people doing #2 in the fields because there were insufficient lavatories provided?)

I will not go off on my "irradiation would solve a lot of these problems" rant because most of the American public either doesn't understand, or refuses to understand, irradiation and they are desperately afraid of it. (No, the food does not become radioactive. Yes, perhaps a FEW nutrients are lost but I'd rather eat irradiated hamburger than one that might be crawling with E. Coli:O157. Yes, we would have to take care that suppliers didn't use it as a way of covering up past-its-prime food.)

Just in general: I often feel like news stories are frothed up, hyped up, and then we never hear the resolution. Or things are presented in a fragmented, short-attention-span way, and people who want to "connect the dots" are frustrated because there's never any more indepth coverage.

And could we stop with the fawning coverage of celebs, already? I mean, if I wanted that, I'd watch E! Or The View. Or Oprah.