shoedawg06

Two in one day... I know!

I find myself in one of those dilemmas that I'm sure we all find ourselves in.

I'm coaching a little girls' softball team. This Saturday is the big league fundraiser. However, I've been working on buying a new car for a while now and this Saturday was going to be the day we were going to go do it. So there is the "right" thing, and then there is the "living your life for you" thing. This is by no means a unique situation, but I still wanted to ask:

When faced with a dilemma like this, do you do the "right" thing or do you do the thing that is best for you?

Try to answer honestly, the way you'd actually respond. Not just the way you hope you'd choose.

This past weekend I participated in my 2nd Avon Walk for Breast Cancer. Last year I walked the 39 miles in 2 days with my mom - a 9-year survivor - and my sister in Boston. This year I decided to try the other side of the playing field and volunteer to be a part of the crew. Of course I jumped at the chance to be a part of the motorcycle crew, which is responsible for controlling people busy intersections - both walkers and drivers.

Every time I'm a part of this event - even the few times my mom did it by herself and we went up as a family to cheer her on - I'm blown away at how generous and driven people are. This year I got a small taste of the other group of people who seem to be unable to wait an extra 30 seconds for some of the 3000 people walking to make it through a crosswalk. All-in-all people were very supportive though.

One highlight this year for the Avon Foundation was their new honorary chair, Reese Witherspoon. She was going to come to the DC Walk and walk the last mile and a half or so with the walkers. Or so the crew was told (it was supposed to be hush-hush for the walkers, a big surprise). Instead, we got to closing ceremonies and found out that she stopped at a couple of places and didn't actually walk at all. Being the bikers that we are, the moto safety crew of course had more jokes to tell than a person could handle. After dealing with psychotic drivers all weekend who were more interested on saving 30 seconds and trying to run us over, joking was what kept us positive. At the closing ceremonies she just added to the humor by saying "awesome" and "exciting" every other word. I'll admit, I laughed my ass off because its funny to see celebrities who think they can wing it.

After I got home though I got to thinking - was her small appearance still worth it? Most of the walkers, and even some of the crew members, had no idea as to the extent of Reese's initial commitment (sure, arguably we could have been told her commitment was a lot bigger than it actually was so that we could be prepared for anything), so the fact that a celebrity showed up at their event was enough for them. And just having her face attached to the organization will quite likely help push the fundraiser totals much, much higher. But at what cost? Her integrity? Our integrity?

I'm normally the type of person that believes if you're going to care, then care. Pretending to care just upsets me, and photo shoots aren't my bag of tea. I feel a little like I'm being mocked for caring. Like the person is saying, "Oh look, I can do it too without caring, aren't you silly for taking the time to care." But as the daughter of someone who once relied on this type of funding just to stay alive, even considering being against a huge source of income for the cause is ripping me apart. If there is no financial investment, there is no amount of caring in the world that can cure this disease.

And so I ask...

Which is more important - personal investment or financial investment?

I just found out a professor at the journalism school at UGA (where I went to school) died last week. He wasn't my professor in the sense that I ever took one of his classes. But he was unquestionably a mentor. He was always willing to offer guidance and advice on my videos, my ideas for projects, life or even something as simple as local places to check out great music. He was the one that really helped me appreciate blues and jazz as the foundations of all American music. He would pass along any opportunity he could that he thought would be a learning experience, beneficial or even just fun, not because it was his job, but because he wanted to see me - and the rest of the students - really be the best they could be. Accepting doesn't even describe this guy - there were some odd balls in the school, as there are in any film or even liberal arts program. But it seemed like he had an experience, story or joke to fit any style. I don't know if it was because he wasn't officially my professor or it was just who he was anyway, he was always able to be frank with me but never in a condescending way. I really don't know how he managed to make us all feel like we were on the same playing field as he was, while simultaneously teaching us how to get just the right shot, to know when to grab that risky angle and when to stick to the basics, and how to get crazy without regretting it.

I know this sounds like I'm just fluffing him because he's gone, but I can't ever say a bad thing about this man. He wasn't a saint, he was just a good person with his heart in the perfect place.

I guess I'd hoped that writing about him would make me able to wrap my head around his passing better. But I think it did the exact opposite. I want to be able to cry and grieve, but I can still hear his deep voice that once sang the blues and see him in that hallway with his arms crossed, talking to us about life and our weekends and our projects.

I don't even know where to stop writing...

Tired of the same old boring scenery and wish you could just drop everything for a weekend and take a trip somewhere? Well, my two friends and I decided that while we could spend our weekends doing the same things - watching TV, going to a bar - or we could get in the car and see what there is to see! Anyway, check out our photos and ideas! Who knows, maybe it will inspire you to make the great escape one weekend too!

The Great Escape

So this morning when I got a bagel from the cafeteria, I decided to branch out and try a new juice. This V8 splash stuff. It's actually pretty damn good. Finally, I'm glad I tried a new juice. Usually I'm in the store and I see a juice on sale or heavily promoted and I give in and decide to try it. And without fail, it's always terrible. It always tastes chemically, or like pee, or gross in some other unique way. I thought for a while I was a picky juicer, but then I started having others try these gross juices and they thought it was nasty too. No wonder kids drink so much soda and kool-aid and other teeth/stomach-rotting drinks. How are we supposed to teach today's youth that drinking fruit juice is good for you, when 85% of it tastes like crap? I'm an adult and I know better, and I still yearn to shy away from juice. It's either so sugary it really negates the purpose of drinking juice, or its so gross that your stomach actually physically refuses to digest it and any nutritional value it holds. I don't get it. Juices when we were kids were good. It was hard to find apple juice that tasted like urine. And your mom never let you have kool-aid except for special occasions, because giving a child that amount of concentrated sugar is like giving Osama Bin Laden bombs. It's just not safe, for anyone, friend or foe. And once you've given it to them, it's like heroin. Even if you kick their habit, the yearn never really goes away. Thats why kids get to be teens and adults and drink 14 diet cokes in a day. It runs on the same principal as catholic school girls sent off to their first co-ed college. You're finally free of the sugar-hogging tyranny that was your mom, and you can now go buck wild. Eventually, manufacturers couldn't keep up with demand, and had to invent drinks that would really smack your senses into a whole new realm of wigged out - the energy drink. Red Bull, Liquid Cocaine, all of those crazy drinks that are probably the leading cause of college students being committed to looney bins - kids down 6 of them to cram for finals, and when they run out of cans of crazy, they crash big time. Or they OD on the things and spazz out like a box of springs that have been laced with dynamite.

See - trying new juice takes balls. Because bad juice is single handedly ruining the world. :D

Please please please take my poll... I'm working on a new concept for work, and it's a pretty big risk so I want to make sure I get it as right as I can.

Essentially I'm thinking of developing a regular TV segment - only it's going to air strictly online. Take TV shows to the "next medium" if you will. You can't steal my idea though now :D But I want to find out what people care about - how long they want an online show to be, what they want it to focus on, how they want it to focus on that topic, etc...


Take the Survey

Share with ALL your friends PLEASE... A lot at work depends on it... Thanks guys :D

I have things to say that aren't of real importance but work has been so busy that I just don't have time to even talk to people, and I'm short when I do talk to them because my head is rushing through the massive to-do list I've got going. Just as a warning before I begin rambling...

We just moved. Chris and I managed not to kill each other, though I think at various points each of us wished the other would just go away. I hate moving. Well, lies, sort of. I love the product of a move. I love being in a new place, it's like a fresh slate. Full of possibilities. Some good some bad, sure, but even so. It's like a new chapter. I've moved so often in the last 5 or so years that I use wherever I've lived as marks in my calendar ("Lost my virginity when I was living here, had a great year at this place, was drunk too much at this place, etc..."). And while 6 different places in 5 years (plus summers at my parents' house) may not be much to some, it's a lot for someone that grew up in the same house for most of her life. Hell, when we did move (I was 15) we only moved a mile and a half.

But I hate the process of moving. The packing. The carrying. The hauling. The cleaning. The packing of all the shit you forgot the first time you packed. The putting things away. The rearranging things 6 times because you put it in a stupid place or found other things that you hadn't unpacked yet. The money you have to spend to get all the shit you don't have and need. Or to get the shit you want to have to decorate your new space (since it *has* to have it's own style).

Semi-related, Steph and I are getting along a lot better now that we're apart. We had a small scuffle today, but I think it was largely an issue of miscommunication on both our parts. Seems to be largely solved now, too, I think. We're an odd pair I think. Which is probably why we have such vicious cat fights. We usually get along great, and I rarely have more fun with anyone but her. But occasionally our different personalities hit a crossroads, and our stubborn heads attack each other. Then our fiery attitudes/passion/whatever you want to call it joins the party and its a shit fest for a day or so. And then we both realize we're not 12, cat fights are stupid and that we can actually find some middle ground. Our relationship reminds me a lot of the one I have with my sister...

Ithaca is starting to finally adjust. She's a naturally nervous dog, but she's taken every move to date a little better each time (she's moved at least 5 times in the past 2-3 years... first when she was rescued, then when Chris left his last girlfriend, again in Georgia, then up here once and now to the new house). I think it'll be world's better when we can get the fence up and let her run it out. Right now, with all the new sights and sounds, her curious nature and "tunnel vision" when she starts running would lead her straight out of sight. It's not that she wants to run away... chasing things is just in a Great Danes' blood. She can't help it. And she's a little on the dumb side. Not that I don't love her dearly. She's just well... uninterested in being smart. She'd rather just be goofy all the time. Or asleep. Not really an inbetween "smart time" mode to her...

I feel like Chris and I can finally start settling down a lot more. We were starting to get into a groove at the apartment, but anyone who is in a relationship knows that sharing space reduces private time. It's not that we all didn't have our good times, but I know Steph and Charlie would have liked some more "just us" time, and same for us I think. I love being social, more than he does. But still... it's a big adjustment for all with him up here, and hopefully this will let him adjust better at his own pace. The new house is in an environment much more suited to his tastes, and mine too for that matter. Very relaxed, in a very calm and friendly little community (emphasis on little... like, 30 houses... and an antique shop... and a little grocery type place). Really I love it. They have little parties and get-togethers and hang out in each other's backyards all the time, so cool. And cute. Come on, old houses in a little community? Super cute!

Ok, and between LJ land and me... I can't help but hear the "M" word in my head (and from friends and families for that matter) a lot more often recently. That would be "marriage" for those playing the home game. I don't get it! Like... I talk about weddings and how pretty they are and all the cool things to do at weddings, but normally I'm really good about it! I honestly planned on waiting a few years. Hey, if you're going to be forever, what's a few years to make sure, right? And I just like throwing parties, which is why I love watching so many wedding shows. I love big elaborate things like that. If I were to change careers it would be to wedding planning. I don't know. Probably just because we now have our own house. I know it's likely too soon. Not that I wouldn't say yes if asked. Omg... have to stop talking. I'll just get myself all crazy.

Enough rambling for one night. I have work to do still tonight and have to be back at my desk at 6am tomorrow :-( Barftastic. Man I'm desperate for brownie points. (Everyone do a "get a raise" dance...)

I find myself at times doing the very things I said I hated about this industry. And I find myself developing more and more resentment to my field because of it.

Sure I have the control and power to report on stories that are actually meaningful and relevant, like our troops overseas or massive flooding that devestates a third world country or hungry orphans in Africa.

But I would lose my job, and find myself needing to switch career paths completely because no one within a mile of the media field would hire me. Reporting on world news - or even important nation news like homeless people in California being dumped from moving ambulances - does not generate an audience. It does not keep the audience you have.

In order to do that, you need to splash your front pages with a young celebrity who has shaved her head. Or an astronaut who cracked under the immense pressures. Or a president who gets a blowjob at work (rather than the bombing of countries that we did at the same time). Because that is what people watch. That is what gets their attention. That is what makes the money come into the company so they can pay you so you can feed yourself and/or your family.

Then again, is it really the media world that is 100% to blame? Sure, we report it. We focus on it. We shove tales of famous people's exploits - often many of which we have committed ourselves - down the public's throat.

But how can we shoulder all of the responsibility if that's what the public asks for? Sure, we baked the cake. But you ate it. Hook line and sinker you swallow all of our nuggets of shame with pleasure, and come running when we taunt you with another tidbit of scandal.

They say sex sells. But really, it's the scandal and controversy (you get bonus points if you can work those words into your articles at least once a day) that surrounds sex that sells. It's like watching a movie.

I could get into a whole rant about how reality tv and modern genre's of filmmaking have painfully blurred the lines between reality and fiction, but perhaps I will save that for another day.

I ask myself every day if I should keep doing what I do with the same "it gets viewers" mindset - if that's really right.

But if I, and all other news organizations, published nothing but hard REAL news - would you watch? Be honest with yourself. Would you take the time out of your day to learn about the world's actual problems? The world where a vast majority lives in a form of poverty that you can't even begin to grasp? The world where every day men, women and children slaughter other men, women and children in such a way that makes the Holocaust look like a small hiccup in human judgement? Or would you still sneak a peak at the tabloids as you paid for your milk? Would you still talk about Britney Spears and Monica Lewinsky and Anna Nicole Smith and Hugh Heffner and other "celebrities" as though their lives and affairs mattered more than yours or anyone else's on this earth?

Because the answer - if you are truely honest with yourself - is that you are more likely to click on a story about Steve Irwin's ironic death than you are a story about the 18,000 kids who die every day from hunger.

I hate it. I wish I were just being cynical and not realistic. But I have mounds of numbers that show that when given the choice - Irwin will get the attention. So while I and the rest of the media industry is 50% responsible for fueling these ridiculous fires - the public, including you, is shouldered with the other 50%.

The public cared more about Princess Diana's death than Mother Teresa's. So why are they going to care more about dead Iraqi's than Britney shaving her head? Think about that next time you attack the media for the "shameless attention" we give to scandals.

I need a beach trip. Where I can just sit. And sweat. And sun. And breathe.

I dream - nearly all day and all night, every day and every night - of Key West.





Fucking seasonal depression.

Part 2 of the big things on my mind today:

Saddam Hussein was executed today. Or rather, late last night. Being in the job I'm in, I see a lot of videos that are not released to the public for various reasons (too graphic, just boring, etc). And while I truly believe that this man was a horrible human being with no respect for anyone's life over his own, the things that I saw - that few others are allowed to see - have me questioning a lot of things. I agree that the man needed to be taken out of power. But he was doneso for the wrong reasons, and I believe that many in the western world see his death as a justification for the wrong things. His death will be hailed by many who are educated on the world by nightly news as a big loss for those opposing democrats and the US. Or as proof that Bush was right in all of his actions. Many will not hear or acknowledge the 148 who were killed in the same manner as he was put to death - simply because of the selfish values he had. Or the over 180,000 killed in less than 2 years time for the same reason. Or the hundreds of thousands of others killed over decades in his name. Greed and ignorance, taken to the extreme, (to me) led to this man's demise.

I put a lot of the blood of our soldiers on this man's hands. If he were not the instigator of genocide, or if he did not show such a blatant disregard for other human life, they would not have been there at all. I also however put some of it on our own president's hands. Simply because his order to take down Saddam, while necessary, was carried out initially for the wrong reasons, and the man didn't recognize the right reasons until only after it was too late to turn around (and that's assuming he realizes them even now). I think that if Bush had - from the beginning - said that he was invading Iraq to take down a man responsible for decades of genocide and oppression, he might be a little more popular today. But then again, international law as well as our own laws and ideals dictate that we can't take offensive action, only defensive. And if Saddam isn't killing us or posing a direct threat to us (as with WMD's) - then technically we can't do anything. Which is probably why Saddam got away with blatant and gross murder for so long.

Case in point - Sudan. Rwanda. Sure, the UN intervened in Rwanda - to save international folks. And by the time anyone else got any help, the number of people dead was knocking on millions. Hundreds of thousands died one April alone. Meanwhile politicians had committees and debates and discussions and proposals for months on end, worried about doing things perfect. After the ordeal was more or less over, the UN announced that they would never again let such atrocities occur. Yet just over 10 years later, images and statistics from Sudan are nearly identical to those in Rwanda. And the UN is about as quick on their toes as they were before.

Small tangent yes, but big point. If Bush had said, "We're invading Iraq because of the terrible crimes against humanity," international outcry for the big bad bully nation would have been overwhelming and potentially devastating for the US. I'm not accusing Bush of lying about the WMD thing just to get in there and oust Saddam. I'm just pointing out the Catch-22 that existed. If we went in for the right reasons, we'd be ostracized. Because we went in for the wrong reasons, we're ostracized.

So, to conclude, while I think that it was the right thing to end Saddam's regime and that death was an appropriate punishment for his crimes, I also wish that people in our administration would recognize those crimes as the truly atrocious side of this man, rather than how undemocratic he was. (sometime I will write on the abuse of the word "democracy"). And if they do recognize it, then they are hypocrites for ignoring the other gross disregards for human life and rights that exist around the world, and not immediately condemning them and taking action. Yes, we are not the world's saviors. But if we're going to act like it in one place, we need to be prepared to stand up to our own words globally.

Otherwise, we are not much better than the perpetrators themselves.


"Peace is just two fingers now
Peace was just a phase
When someone put it on a shirt
You knew to count the days
So take those fingers tape 'em up and
Shove 'em up your ass and carry on
but don't try it now cause peace is gone"