Just because you can do something
Doesn’t mean you should do something.
Just a friendly reminder.
The politics of graduation
I see that Bush is discussing his policies in graduation speeches, and it made me wonder if that was something that Presidents could do (his discussion was relevant, considering he was speaking to the Naval Academy.)
The commencement speaker when I graduated from Case was Jonathan Kozol. He most certainly talked about his point of view, which was that inner city schools were getting a short shrift. And I don’t doubt he had a good point. But he presented it in such a divisive, mean-spirited way that I (a product of an urban school district) just sat there boiling. When he received a standing ovation, I stayed seated. I would have felt guilty, perhaps had the woman sitting next to me not stayed in her seat as well. I don’t know her background but at least she couldn’t be mislabeled as a middle-class white guy.
A note to anyone who might be preparing a commencement address: Don’t be an asshole, and don’t make people feel guilty.
Endangered Matinees?
Hollywood has noticed that movie attendance is slipping and they want to blame the poor quality of new releases or a cultural shift in how people entertain themselves.
There are some reasons that might drive a cultural shift that, surprisingly, the article doesn’t mention:
- Ticket prices. Matinee prices for a showing at one local theater are $7.50. With 24 screens, I’d expect this theater to rake it in. Is low attendance forcing them to increase the price, or is the higher price coming from somewhere else?
- Nasty theaters. I’ve never much liked movie theaters because they universally smell like popcorn and it’s not unusual to have sticky floors. But I think the average theater has become skankier lately
- Commercials. I don’t like watching commercials on a good day. I hate it when I’ve paid $7.50 for the privilege
- Homogenized theaters. This doesn’t bother me so much. The more interesting theaters typically play the more interesting movies, IMHO. But it is disorienting to walk out of the theater unsure whether your in one suburb or another.
Long and short, movie theaters simply fail to provide a pleasant experience on par with the price they charge. Sure, the movies of the past few years haven’t been great. But even if they were, most of us would just as soon wait to see the movie until it’s out on DVD.
Big Business and Responsibility
The Economist hits a pretty important nail on the head with it’s (subscription) column on Corporate Social Responsibility.
Briefly, it argues that being ahead of the curve on social issues puts companies in a good position strategically—and it increases shareholder value by doing so. Making more for profit’s sake is short-sighted, and implementing “CSR” policies to placate consumers has its own traps: brushing bad behavior under the rug, creating a backlash and inadvertently creating new, worse problems all come to mind.
I can, however, see some instances where oversight in the model of traditional CSR is perhaps a good thing (in the case of media ownership, for example.) Certainly, public opinion isn’t always “right.” and there are certainly some companies that are somewhat insulated from public opinion. Still, for a large swath of companies, the middle ground may be the way to go.
Amnesty International criticizes US
An Amnesty International report criticizes the US for various human rights violations (from the NY Times.)
The White House response is predictable: they point to the “liberation” of Afghanistan and Iraq, “promotion” of democracy elsewhere, and my favorite, the “spreading of compassion.” Scott McClellan says that the US “leads the way” on spending to combat AIDS. (Some of the money promised to this cause isn’t actually distributed due the Mexico City Policy, which prevents money from going to organizations that condone abortion. That’s fine, but then the money isn’t spent as promised, which isn’t fine.)
Unfortunately, the administration’s belief that they’re doing a bang-up job on protecting human rights is far overwhelmed by the fact that many of us in the US and the rest of the world look at some of their policies, for example the ones mentioned by Amnesty International, as human rights breaches. The administration is going to have an image problem as long as it appears unconcerned about Abu Gharib, Guantanamo and questionable deals with shady governments.
Actions speak louder than words, and one negative action speaks louder than ten positive ones. American policy on detainees speaks louder than talk about “democracy” and “compassion.” Eventually this will turn off our allies, and that will be more damaging to the cause of democracy than not getting intelligence from suspected terrorists.
Singham on Intelligent Design
Mano Singham has a good running discourse on Intelligent Design and true Science.
Dr Singham argues that while he thought it was an interesting idea and worth a closer look at first, he has since decided that it simply doesn’t belong in Science classes.
Matt Miller and work/life balance
I was surprised by Matt Miller’s guest column in the Times today. A tentatively radical suggestion on the op-ed page of a major newspaper?
