Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Media’

The Case of Chester the (Alleged) Molester

Posted in Random, tagged , , , on January 29, 2013| 3 Comments »

jury-duty

Dear Defendant in Court Today:

You have the right to be presumed “innocent until proven guilty.” You may indeed be innocent. It’s entirely possible.

But you do not want me on your jury.

As soon as I heard the first charge against you — child molestation — I mentally declared you a creep and a criminal. I’ll bet other potential jurors thought the same thing.

But no one said a word when the district attorney asked if anyone would have difficulty maintaining an open mind. Perhaps it was the fear of piping up in a deathly quiet courtroom full of people.

The D.A. revealed more details of the case and I remembered news coverage. When he asked if anyone remembered this coverage, I stood up.

When he asked if I could remain impartial, I said I’d try.

Your attorney asked the same question, then wanted me to elaborate. I had to be honest. You’ll remember that I said, “I have two kids. My husband and I always talk about the fact that if someone did something to those kids, we’d be in court ourselves.” Of course I meant jail first for attacking the attacker.

Was I really the only one who felt this way? Your attorney seemed shocked.

Sorry, dude. You have the right to an impartial jury. Yet, I had already beaten you to a pulp in my mind.

Your attorney was wise to excuse me.

Hoping for justice in whatever form that takes,
Beth

Read Full Post »

Back on the electronic leash

Posted in Technology, tagged , , on January 17, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Dear Technology:

I’m glad we’re back together after a short, holiday-induced break. It’s good we didn’t have to buy Christmas gifts for each other. What would I get the entity that has everything? (Teleportation capabilities for the user, perhaps.)

I want you to know that I cheated on you with paper. I read magazines by turning real pages. I carried books around in my bag, and did not worry about also carrying a charger and trying to find an outlet. I had face-to-face conversations with actual humans.

I know we never said we’d be exclusive, but I still felt guilty every time I had a tangible experience.

“We were on a break!”

Anyway, now that we are back together, I’ve been thinking about how much I depend on you in general. I can’t really get you out of my life. I’m not the only one. It’s kind of frightening. Allow me to elucidate:

A very good friend emailed me to ask me what her husband’s cell phone number was because she had left her cell phone at home and couldn’t remember his number. I relied on you (in the form of iCloud) but you failed me and managed to lose half the numbers in my address book. His was one of them. I had to call Eddie to get the husband’s number, which Eddie texted to me. And then I emailed it to my friend.

Sheesh.

Remember the days when we didn’t need you to remember numbers? I bet you are feeling really proud of yourself right about now.

Anyway, even though we are back together, I want you to know that I still value my independence. I can’t have you all over me all the time. It’s not you, it’s me. Sometimes I need a little time to myself, time without you. I hope you understand.

See you in a few minutes!
Beth

Digital communication

Read Full Post »

Help me help you

Posted in Grammar, etc., tagged , on January 12, 2013| Leave a Comment »

Dear Local Columnist:

I’ve been reading your “column” for a little while now. I realize that our local paper is not quite The New York Times, but there are many excellent writers and columnists on staff. So, I have expectations. I keep expecting that your column will get better, more interesting, less meandering. It doesn’t.

The paper has been running your column for about three years now, I think. I know it must be tough to find something fresh to talk about on a regular basis. Believe me, I know. Sometimes I can barely maintain this blog.

You really can’t go on this way, though. Today’s column might have been the worst yet. It had no point whatsoever and smacked of deadline desperation. Plus, it was long. Way too long. It could have ended at the headline, in fact.

I want to help you. Here are a few tips:

  1. Figure out why you are writing. What is your purpose? What is the main point you want readers to take away from your column? Do you want to inform? Motivate? Entertain?
  2. Pick a tense and stick with it. Today’s column featured past, present, future, past progressive and future perfect — all in the same paragraph.
  3. If you are going to name-drop, use names recognizable to most people. I didn’t know whom you were talking about half the time today (and I didn’t care enough to Google).
  4. Don’t date yourself unintentionally. (See No. 3.)
  5. Make sure your work has a clear beginning, middle and end. Each paragraph should build consciously on the prior. Your work should flow.
  6. Find a good editor. All work can be better. Find someone to read your work before you submit it — someone you know will be tough on you so that you can improve. (Maybe you are a good editor and want to edit this post for me. Please do!)

I want you to succeed. I know you have some good ideas; it’s the execution that needs finesse. If you improve, we readers benefit.

Good luck!
Beth

Thanks to teachers

 

Read Full Post »

I prefer the term “Renaissance Woman”

Posted in Random, tagged , , , , , , , , , on December 24, 2012| 1 Comment »

Dear Dr. G:

Hello, and I hope you are doing well since I last saw you at AEJMC. I’ve been thinking about you lately for a strange reason.

You once called me a dilettante, which made me mad at the time. It wasn’t really accurate for the situation (as I recall, you were upset with me because you wanted me to focus solely on my doctoral work, but I wanted to keep my full-time job, you know, so I could eat and have shelter).

La dilettante

I know your heart was in the right place, and that you were, in your own way, showing confidence in my ability to do scholarly research full time.

Though it may seem like I am a dabbler, it’s not that at all. It’s the opposite, actually. I throw myself into something fully, learn as much as I can, then I move on to something else. More short attention span than dilettante.

sorry-attention-span-length-apology-ecard-someecards

That’s why I have five degrees (yes, five). It is also why my résumé looks like the life of eight different people.

If I could, I’d have more jobs (in addition to the one I have now, which I love). Some of these jobs include:

  • Flight attendant (A waitress in the sky? Yes!)
  • Travel writer
  • Tour guide for some exotic location
  • Cruise ship social director or bartender  (like Julie or Isaac from The Love Boat)
  • Personal chef (Wait … I think I already am.)
  • Character actress (like Rebel Wilson)
  • Personal assistant to someone nearly crazy (Think of the stories I could tell!)
  • NBC page (that’s one of those unfulfilled college ideas)
  • Beta tester for games
  • Game show host
  • Full-time employee at my university’s study-abroad campus in France (!)
  • Owner of a craft brewery
  • PR executive for Disney
  • Train conductor
  • State senator

Maybe Santa can bring me new names for my contact list to help me accomplish my goals.

So yes, I am interested in many things. Dilettante? No. Focused? Yes, for periods of time. Game show host? I can only hope. Thanks for helping me in one of my pursuits.

Anyway, happy holidays, and I look forward to seeing you in Washington, D.C.

Sincerely,
Beth, Aspirational Polymath

Read Full Post »

Back to the kitchen? I think not.

Posted in Politics, tagged , , , , , on November 29, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Dear Suzanne Venker,

I read your recent editorial, “The war on men,” on Foxnews.com (not my usual source for news or opinion, but my friend Travis knew I would appreciate your piece). Fox did not enable comments, so I have to share my thoughts here.

I have to hand it to you: You are a good writer. Persuasive, even. I can almost see readers’ heads nodding as you make the ludicrous argument that the problem with men is women.

[Women have] been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs.
You’re kidding, right? There’s so much wrong with that paragraph, I don’t know where to start. Let me paraphrase:
Women=nervy
Feminists=bad
Equality=wrong
Oh boy.
But wait, there’s more:

[The rise of women] has also undermined [men’s] ability to become self-sufficient in the hopes of someday supporting a family. Men want to love women, not compete with them.

So what you are saying is that men can’t be self-sufficient because those darn women are taking their jobs? (Hmmm … the fear of people taking jobs …  a strangely familiar talking point … )

 

And women “need men to pick up the slack at the office – in order to live the balanced life they seek.” If I were a man, I would be insulted. What you are insinuating is that men are only good at working. And of course, we women should get back in our binders, surrender to our nature – our “femininity,” as you put it. (Now where did I put that blasted apron?)
Men haven’t changed much – they had no revolution that demanded it – but women have changed dramatically.
Those poor, unevolved men. Such sad little specimens looking for the 1950s again. Perhaps they should get with the program and realize that it is more fun to have a partnership than a dictatorship.

 

My Puerto Rican husband, operating with a full tank of genetically predisposed machismo, happily handles “women’s work” such as cooking, cleaning, sewing, laundry, putting the kids to bed, etc. (In fact, he is vacuuming right now.) He does these things (unasked) almost as often as I do. And we both work full-time. When we both handle tasks around the house, then we get done faster and have more time to spend together. Score!

 

But aren’t you being a little hypocritical? I mean, you are working after all. You are potentially taking writing jobs away from men. I mean, I guess it is OK because Dr. James Dobson and Dr. Laura Schlessinger say you’re awesome. But still.

 

I know you’ve carved out a little niche for yourself, but really you need to butt out. (“Shut up” seems too harsh. Plus, I would never want to stifle another woman as she climbs up to take what is rightfully hers.) The Ward Cleavers of the world will find their Junes. The Tony Micellis will find their Angela Bowers and the Mitchell Pritchetts will find their Cameron Tuckers. The Elyse and Stephen Keatons will find each other.

 

And if they don’t, then it’s no one’s fault but their own.

 

Happily married to an equal partner for 17 years,
Beth

Read Full Post »

To a different Adam

Posted in Random, tagged , on October 20, 2012| Leave a Comment »

Dear Adam Levine:

Congratulations on the success of “The Voice” and your single “Payphone.” Your work on “The Voice” (and your bromance with Blake) has provided many hours of entertainment for my husband and me.

Though I would consider myself a fan, I would use the qualifier “casual,” not “rabid.” So imagine my surprise when I had a dream about you last night.

I have no idea why I was pitching you my ideas for how to make television news more interactive and appealing to advertisers. I don’t know why you had boobs. I also don’t know what made you think I was gay.

I do wish I owned the lovely dress from the ’30s that I was wearing, complete with matching snood. And I want to thank you for being a gentleman, and loaning me your fur coat to wear when I became chilly.

Anyway, keep up the good work on the show and with Maroon 5, and I’m impressed with your new rapport with Christina.

Sincerely,
Beth

Read Full Post »

Musing on boobs

Posted in Politics, tagged , , , on September 23, 2012| 4 Comments »

Hello Blog!

It’s been 10 days since we’ve hung out together. That may be a record. I’m really sorry. I’ve been preoccupied. I’m worried about my cholesterol (high), boobs (strangely dense, according to the mammogram) and skin (suddenly rashy). Don’t even get me started on work, and the fact that I’m two months behind on a major project (sorry, Regine!).

So, what have you been doing? I see you’ve been hanging in there with a hundred or so views a day, mostly from people wanting to get a look at some parasites.

I’ll bet you’ve really been wanting to talk about Romney and his 47 percent comment. It’s tempting, but I just can’t get into any more arguments this week. It’s pointless. No one is going to change his/her mind at this point. And if people are still undecided, then they aren’t really paying attention and/or don’t care enough to understand the issues.

The two choices for president are Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. No one else has a chance. So Obama’s not perfect, but I like him better than Romney for a variety of reasons.

Ann Landers once said:

The true measure of an individual is how he treats a person who can do him absolutely no good.

The corollary to it is that you can tell plenty about someone by the way he treats the waitstaff. Or the family dog.

Yep. That about sums up Romney’s character, I think, and his feelings toward almost half of America. Yet many of the people in that group, like the elderly (Hi, Dad!), will still vote for him. He’s got no plan, no numbers, no compassion, no sense, no charisma, no conviction.

And I’m not even a Democrat!

Faced with no real alternative (WHY did they choose Romney?), I’ll choose the party of “We’re in this together” versus “You’re on your own.” Maybe 2016 will be different.

Wait a minute. I just I did my own kind of flip-flopping. I said I wasn’t going to talk about this. Sorry about that. It was just too tempting, I guess.

Suddenly I’m not as concerned with my high cholesterol, dense boobs and rashy skin. And that work project seems manageable.

Thanks, Blog! You know how to make a girl feel better.

See you in a couple of days!
Beth

Read Full Post »

Ignorance is this

Posted in Politics, tagged , , , , , , , , on August 21, 2012| 4 Comments »

Dear Certain Conservative White Male Politicians:

I know you are not in favor of sex ed in schools. It is clear you need some kind of education, though.

Let me explain reproduction to you in the terms similar to those I used for my son when he was four:

Boys and girls have different parts between their legs. When these parts come together, sometimes they can make a baby.

It doesn’t matter if these parts belong to people in the same family (incest), of different ages (statutory rape), or if the girl was not willing (rape).

And unlike EL James’ book, there aren’t 50 shades of grey when it comes to rape. Rape is rape. If one person doesn’t want to participate, it’s rape. There is no qualifier (like “legitimate”) before that word.

I cannot believe I have to explain this.

You sound like Johnny Nogerelli, Adrian Zmed’s character in “Grease 2“:

‎Can’t a girl just do that thing in a book where she adds up the dates of her uh — whaddayacallit — mentalstration?

No one likes to look like a complete idiot, so I’m going to help you out. Here is a link to a “How Stuff Works” exploration of reproduction. It even talks about contraception, so maybe you can share that with your buddy Rush. Please read at your leisure. You don’t even have to admit you read it. But if you do, it will save you future embarrassment.

Supporting the understanding and protection of lady bits,
Beth

Read Full Post »

Olympic-sized outrage

Posted in Random, tagged , , on August 3, 2012| 2 Comments »

Dear Jared Frank, KHQ Web producer:

We haven’t met, and probably never will. Yet I’m writing to you because you are a representative of the spoiler culture of NBC.

Let me tell you a little about myself: I’m the kind of person who enjoys suspense, does not flip to the back of a book to see what happens, and who did not find out the gender of her children in advance of their births. I don’t think wanting to enjoy watching events unfold without knowing the outcome makes me a “whiner.”

Clearly, you do.

Here’s what you said about people like me:

You know what else gets me? Whiners. You know what I am talking about: the people on the Internet, complaining about how this person or that media outlet spoiled the surprise by cheering on Facebook or Twitter.

For those of us who did not want to know who won what medal in which event, we DID avoid Facebook, Twitter and various other information outlets. However, NBC as a whole, affiliates included, has been sharing this information freely during broadcasts, promos, etc., when we are trying to watch the events unfold.

And many of us are irritated that we have to watch races on a tape delay in the first place so that NBC can reap prime time ratings. (Don’t talk about the live streaming. It’s not exactly a success story, is it?)

It is fine to explain that our digital age makes it easy to share and instant information hard to ignore. But perhaps you could do as magazines do in reviews/articles and simply add two words: “spoiler alert.” Your station, KHQ, finally decided that was the right path.

But don’t you think it is a little harsh to call us, the viewers media outlets are so desperate to attract and keep, whiners? I do.

I bet you are the kind of guy who tells everyone watching a movie what’s about to happen. Do you have so little excitement in your life that you want to ruin surprises for others? That’s sad. And it isn’t good business sense in your position.

Maybe I’m just whining.

So be it.

But I’m never going to go to a movie with you, so don’t ask.

Enjoying cheese with my whine,
Beth

Read Full Post »

Yes, I’m “inviting God’s judgment”

Posted in Chickens, Politics, Religion (or lack thereof), tagged , , , , , on August 1, 2012| 2 Comments »

Dear people who ate at Chick-fil-A today simply because Mike Huckabee declared it “Chick-fil-A appreciation day”:

I’m impressed: You decided you felt strongly enough about something that you got motivated to show support. Let’s ignore the fact that you got a meal while doing it.

Many people thought they were just showing support for “Christian” values. It sounds noble and all, but that reasoning is flawed. The God I know doesn’t discriminate. It’s “love thy neighbor” not “love thy straight neighbor.” But you can support whoever you want, whatever business you want, even if they donate money to hate groups. (Are you sure you want to give your money to a business that gives money to groups that actively persecute people? Really?)

The law, however, has to be fair to everyone — gay, straight, Christian, atheist, born here or naturalized. And the laws in this country regarding marriage are discriminatory. I’ve written about this before, so I won’t shove it down your throats again.

The reason I’m writing today is to ask you to do one small thing: Spend the same amount of time you spent in line today (or getting to the line in the first place) thinking about how you would feel if your government told you that you couldn’t marry the person you loved. Separate church from state. Please.

It’s 2012. Why are we as a nation doing the same kinds of things whites did to blacks decades ago? Didn’t we as a nation learn anything? Saying “You can’t do this because you’re not like us” just can’t be the way we do things today. It’s just not right.

So enjoy that chicken sandwich. I hope it was worth it — that you said what you REALLY wanted to say with your money.

And I respect your freedom to spend your money wherever you want, and your freedom to make a statement. In turn, I hope you respect mine.

Not eating “hate chicken,”
Beth

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »