Outrage of the academic term: Someone just "punched below the belt"

Bloggers need serious ethics. In fact, I have challenged the validity of any information I receive from a blog. Sadly, my belief has been validated in the worst possible manner and someone needs a class in ethics. It is one thing to change one's mind or opinion on a subject or rebut the arguments in disagreement. However, it is wholly another matter to sideswipe someone and one's comments by changing what was in the original entry in such fashion that renders the comment as irrelevant and makes the writer look stupid. Casing point, I wrote a comment in a classmate's blog concerning the competitive nature of journalism in America in early May. Keep in mind, this blog in question is for a class and the author of the blog, who I do not intend to name currently, originally wrote, "Mainstream journalists are feeling skittish over competition." But, on 23rd May 2006 at 6.57 in the evening the author changed the entry to read "Mainstream journalists are feeling skittish over sales." Worse, I can prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt. This, ladies and gentlemen, is outrageous, totally outrageous and utterly unethically. Right now, I would echo the exact same sentiment that General Omar Bradley had for a GI in Sicily during World War Two, in the movie Patton.

This is a rough excerpt from the movie from memory:
"Which *** of a ***** planned this operation?" said a GI who had unknowingly ran into General Bradley while taking cover from heavy German fire.

"I don't know, but I sure as hell would like to hang him afterwards," replied Bradley, who himself and his aides were taking cover from enemy fire.

The only problem here is that one knows who the culprit is. The bottom-line does not change, I still think it is a crime, in ethical, journalistic and academic terms. I am amazed that someone somewhere still thinks that the whole world is asleep on the switch. If anyone wants the proof, just post a comment with an e-mail address and I will send it.

This I believe in the will to go it alone

Someone somewhere once said whether the prize be a ribbon or a throne, the victor is he who could go it alone.

I believe in the will to go it alone. Three times as a schoolboy, I confronted a decision alone whether I was prepared to devise, pursue and execute a strategy with brilliance and ruthlessness. In September 1993, pursuant to my mother's advice and in light of Hong Kong’s uncertain political situation at that time, I decided to return to Canada to complete my secondary education. Unfortunately, it was a disaster that nearly wreaked any hope of me attending college. In fact, I frequently compared it to Napoleon Bonaparte's decision to invade Russia and his subsequent retreat from Moscow, only worse. Early Monday morning in January 1994, my academic counselor from my old school and I discussed my available options to resolving my worst academic crisis. My mother and my most ardent supporters within the teaching faculty advised me to re-take Year 10 and delay my GCSE external examination by a year. I reasoned privately that nothing might be gained by taking my GCSE examinations in June 1995 than five months later. A group of unknown examiners in London who know nothing of my circumstances would mark those exams, which determined 60 to 80 percent of my final grade in any given subject. My entire academic future rested on successfully passing these exams. My counselor agreed to finalize my decision after ascertaining what the projected results would be under a worst case scenario, if I took them that June.

My mother recommended accepting her suggestion as it provided an instantaneous solution to this crisis. I reminded everyone that I have a week before I leave for Canada and that spending eight hours assessing all the options would be useful. Late that afternoon, my counselor confirmed my belief that my subject teachers thought it was academically viable. I needed five GCSE credits to pass and four of my eventual eight credits were definitively in the bag. I knew I could swing the double award general science from a probable carry in January to definitive carry in June, if I worked hard in the next few months, and the last two I needed a bit of luck at the exam to pass. I knew that my worst skeptics would call any delay as a sign of my academic insecurity regardless of circumstances. My counselor told my mother that, given the stakes involved, I should be allowed to make this decision on my own, without her influence. Against her judgment, I decided that I would take my GCSE examination that June and take the fire out of their belly in one bold stroke. I subsequently dropped GCSE History citing the workload would have been insurmountable.

The moment of truth came in August when the results from the June examinations were released. I have successfully passed all seven subjects. That is why I believe in the will to go it alone.

My Thoughts and Comments: Dancing on the Head of a Needle Dept.

Ann Marie Lipinski, senior vice president and editor of the Chicago Tribune, conceded that the newspaper industry needs to formulate a strategy to confront the realities of an Internet world in her speech at the Ruhl Lecture hosted by the University of Oregon (see previous entry). At the same time, she said that the industry is facing reduced advertising dollars, rising news printing cost, reduced circulation and investor disenchantment and disillusionment. Once again the newspaper industry refuses to recognize the behavior of their competition, namely the major networks and their local affiliates and the cable news are already providing their content to the Web-surfing public for free. Worse, the industry has yet to grasp the demographics of the Internet using community and, for many newspapers, their dependency on local or regional audience. According to Internet World Stats, the Internet has achieved a 68.6 percent penetration into the US Market, which means 68.6 percent of the American population has access to the news through the Internet, unlike Spain which has only 38.7 percent penetration.

By dependency on local or regional audience, I mean that a newspaper in Eugene Oregon would principally focus its coverage on news in Eugene and its surrounding municipalities and therefore its audience are people living in that area. The core problem is that local newspapers are competing online against the local affiliates. This means that if one refuses to provide their online edition for free users would simply turn elsewhere for their informational needs. To compound the 21st Century business model of local newspapers, the major national news organizations like CNN, the Wall Street Journal, USA Today or International Herald Tribune would also provide coverage on major stories happening in that city like the Enron trials in Houston or the Conrad Black case in Chicago. Speaking of Conrad Black, the former Canadian media mogul, as of Thursday 25th May 2006, I have yet to see any reporting in The Oregonian, Portland’s major daily. Yet, the Wall Street Journal, CNBC, Canada’s Globe and Mail, many Canadian local daily newspapers and Business Week all provide reporting on the Black case. Consequently people in distant places no longer have to rely on the local newspaper for information on major local stories. In comparison, national newspapers address a significantly larger audience because of their focus on important national, international and world business stories. As a result, these newspapers sacrifice the interests of local communities in favor of reaching the affluent readers with broader interests. Furthermore, these newspapers have access to foreign markets because their broader coverage. More importantly, these newspapers face a very limited competition, namely CNN and BBC and not too much more. As a result, these newspapers can also levee a user fee for their Internet-edition.

Lipinski on Thursday refuses to address the survival of newspapers in her speech or the question and answer session aftwerwards concerning a business model completely dependent on advertising dollars. In other words, I fear that the print edition of local daily newspapers, especially in smaller markets, would soon become free newspapers, like so many other publications. However, I believe that the demise of community reporting in favor of major national, state and international news may once again restore profitability to newspaper chains and re-establish newspapers as a window for the reading public to the world. The network and cable news only cover major national and international stories and the local affiliates cover news in the immediate area. This begs the question: who is covering major state stories like the proceedings at the state legislature or state appellate courts? My advice to editors today would be to fire the obituary writer, reassign the beat reporters to cover city hall, county commissions, the governor, the state legislature and public policy issues. I say let the broadcast news bottom-feed the local stories.

The 1988 Pulitzer Prize winning journalist of the Chicago Tribune speaks on the ethics and the economics of American journalism in the 21st Century

On Thurs. 25th May, Ann Marie Lipinski, the senior vice president and Editor of the Chicago Tribune, covered many pertinent areas concerning American journalism in the 21st Century at the 2006 Ruhl Lecture hosted by the University of Oregon's School of Journalism and Communication. She spoke to an audience of 222 people in the Ballroom of the Erb Memorial Union building of the Tribune’s role in ending capital punishment in Illinois, the issue and impact of plagiarism in journalism from a practitioner’s viewpoint and the lessons she learned from her grandmother ironing while General Hospital is on television.

Before an audience of college students majoring in journalism and the faculty of the School of Journalism and Communication, Lipinski recalled her first experience with plagiarism by a co-worker when she was a student journalist at The Michigan Daily, the University of Michigan’s student newspaper.

“I remembered three things,” she said. “The sobriety of the editors who examined the claims and made the decision to let go their fellow student; the sadness that enveloped our small newsroom for the deception that had been visited upon us and our readers; and, finally, the heartache we all felt for our fallen colleague, who surely was wrong but was still a human being.”

She witnessed the destruction reaped by a single act of plagiarism on a friend’s possible career in professional journalism before it has even begun. As an editor, she has sat in judgment of a co-worker suspected of plagiarism and faced the difficult decisions that followed. Editors have a duty to the reading public to enforce the ethical standards of a newspaper on their journalists, who they sometimes call friends. In her speech, she never once discussed the difficulties facing a newspaper after such an incident to regaining the trust of its reading public.

She also discussed the business pressures and the economic changes facing American journalism today. Wall Street and investors today expect companies to increase profits quarter over quarter, year over year.

“The familiar gale winds buffeting the economy are at our doorstep, and knocking,” she said. Newspapers across America face a financial death spiral. Advertisers want the biggest bang for their buck and newspapers today have a declining circulation. Naturally, advertisers have taken their business elsewhere, like television and the Internet. Both Yahoo! and Google enjoy enormous advertising dollars because of the reach of their search engines to the Web-surfing public. Perhaps it is not surprising that, given the declining profitability of newspapers, the investing public has become disenchanted and disillusioned with the industry.

She conceded that the industry as a whole yet to formulate a policy to survive in the Internet age. Some newspapers like the Wall Street Journal charge users a fee to read its online edition, while many others merely give away for free. She finds the notion of information wanting to be free economically to be journalistically troubling, given the sheer cost of gathering the information. She said that in her office hangs a picture of a Chicago Tribune journalist and a photographer working on a story about the North Alliance of Afghanistan on a laptop computer powered by a gas generator in a room lit by a kerosene lamp on a cold dark night.

“You can’t Photoshop that,” she said.

Media convergence, journalists bloggings, journalistic bloggers, where the hell is the freaking yardstick?

After reading David Shaw’s article in the 27th March 2005 edition of the LA Times, Jack Shafer’s piece in Slate and the op-ed piece by Philip Meyer, the Knight Professor of Journalism at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; I am convinced that there are some basic issues that could be dispensed with immediately and some more complicated issues which requires further soul searching.

The simplest issue is the First Amendment rights of bloggers. Shafer correctly argues that the professional press did not exist at the time when the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution and the subsequent amendments. Hence the first ten amendments are commonly referred to as the "Bill of Rights". Furthermore, everyone, from journalists to bloggers to Tom, Dick and Harry, are entitled to the freedom of speech and thought. The First Amendment protects the rights of anti-war protesters to march in Washington or the rights of anti-abortionists to demonstrate outside the Supreme Court. Secondly, the journalism, unlike law or medicine or accounting, is an occupation which requires no true form of certification, which means all aspiring journalists are in a similar boat to bloggers until they are hired by a media organization.

With greater media convergence, the lines between non-journalistic writers and journalistic writers are increasingly more blurred. Hence the need for a yardstick, otherwise Shafer’s argument concerning the First Amendment would also apply to the Shield Law that currently exists in 31 states. Therein lies my fundamental problem, why would a nation need to enact a Shield Law to protect journalists from overzealous prosecutors when, in an era of media convergence and easier right to publication through the Internet, everyone can be a journalist, in which case, this country needs a Constitutional amendment protecting everyone from revealing any secret sources. The only difference is between a traditional journalist and a blogger is the accreditation by a news organization. If a Shield Law is meant to protect accredited journalists would that extend to his unsanctioned blog? If so, what would the limits be? I think, currently, most bloggers would like to think that they have a high degree of accuracy in their writing. However, some bloggers are highly opinionated and their writing reflects the style of a political talk radio in print. Hence my call for a yardstick to differentiate a web version of talk radio in print asserting the rights of journalistic protect versus a legitimate online journalist, like Slate.

I would argue that a model for any Shield Law should only offer limited protection like the current diplomatic immunity for consular officials from foreign countries in the US. In other words, a Shield Law should only apply to journalists on official assignment with full documentation from the news organization prior to the journalist starting his or her assignment. This documentation could be as simple as a log book documenting every assignment for every journalist with its start date and end dates or something much more formal. A diplomat on holiday in a foreign country not of his assignment is not entitled to diplomatic immunity; any shield law should work in a similar manner for journalists not working on his or her official assignment. Keep in mind, the formalization of diplomatic immunity was to protect intelligence agents working under official cover, usually under the guise of an embassy official. Otherwise, any journalist could claim that one is working on an assignment when, in truth, one is only researching for a possible future assignment.

Philip Meyer's op-ed piece in the 31st March 2005 edition of the USA Today

Don't Fear the Blogger: Will Someone please help the Los Angeles Times' David Shaw get a grip

Blogging the Media Blog

There are many approaches to writing a blog. One could simply say what is on one’s mind and let the world react to it. Another interesting approach is simply to provide readers with information one finds interesting. Alternately, one could try to offer some insights into an issue of some importance. For most people, the blog is the prefect place to rant. However, that is also the easiest way for complete strangers to know an awful lot about a given individual without ever meeting the person. Others seem to believe that one is relatively safe on the Internet and the blog merely informs people who cares to know where one is. I prefer reading blogs with fewer entries and more insights into the substantive issues of concern like the role of journalism in general in the modern world.

Terry Heaton, a broadcast journalist from the South (see link below), allows people to track his every movement around the country and the world. Given Heaton’s media credentials, one would expect Heaton to offer some insights into the role of journalists in the every-changing technological world of 21st Century. However, one would be disappointed with the type of information Heaton has to offer. He spent most of his blog talking about the entertainment world and the broadcast journalism. In one entry, he talks about the problem of football overrunning its time slot and explains why the viewing audience is not particularly pleased. In his opinion, Les Moonves should abandon football, if CBS was to compete with NBC or ABC. It is credible that a former news director in the South seems to enjoy ranting on the entertainment world and the ratings wars. It is like what I said in my second entry, there are bloggers and then there are bloggers. It is not one of those journalistic websites I will particularly care for.

First Draft by Tim Porter, a former editor for the San Francisco Examiner and the Richmond Independent (see link below), now tries to pursue quality journalism independently. He uses the blog principally as an advocacy tool to assist print journalism to survive in the 21st Century as just a print record of events, but as an information leader. He discusses how the newspaper could be more relevant and the conferences that focus on revitalizing the newspaper business. Unlike some people in the industry, he acknowledges the competition and the state of affairs within the paper industry. Now this is a blog that is worth reading.

First Draft by Tim Porter

Terry Heaton's Promo Blog

Hello! Washington to reopen its embassy in Libya.

On Tuesday 16th May 2005, The New York Times article said that the Bush Administration announces its decision to reopen its embassy in Tripoli and strike Libya from its list of state-sponsored terrorists. Secretary of State Condolezza Rice said that Libya is an important model for the political changes necessary in countries like Iran and North Korea. More interestingly, senior US officials have the impression that Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, changed his ways after witnessing the fate of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. The State Department admits that for the past two years, Washington has maintained a small interest section in Tripoli. If the invasion of Iraq was a direct factor in the recent changes in Libyan behavior perhaps some good have been achieved. However, the Qaddafi regime has never truly feared the American might. Therefore, an alternative viewpoint is needed to explain the recent development within the Libyan government. More importantly, a causal observer should bear in mind that nothing on the international stage happens in a vacuum. Hence, a new interpretation may be in order.

The article summarizes Washington's relationship with Libya over the past quarter of a century starting with the withdrawal of the American ambassador from Tripoli in 1972 to the organized ransacking of the American Embassy in 1979 to the severing of all diplomatic ties in 1986 after suspected Libyan agents blew up a West Berlin discotheque. Libya then orchestrated a rather complex terrorist attack against Pan Am flight 103 in 1988, better known as the Lockerbie bombing, named after the small Scottish town where the wreckage of the Boeing 747 laid scattered. It should be noted that Pan Am never recovered from that attack. Everything seemed to have changed in 1999. Tripoli finally agreed to the extradition of the two accused agents for trial on the Lockerbie bombing in Scotland. Following the conviction of one of the agents, Libya took full responsibility for the Lockerbie bombing. At this point, changes happened rather quickly in the past four years. However, the New York Times fails to mention anything concerning the changes in Libyan behavior prior to 2004.

This suggest that Libya's fight with Washington was largely for its support for the Palestinian cause and not because its anti-West beliefs. The terrorist attacks on September 11th may have quickened Qaddafi's timetable to loose its image as a state-sponsor of terrorist. Qaddafi perhaps has no interest in associating himself or his government with the likes of the Taliban or their supporters. Thereby giving some credence to its fight against Washington in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s as one that was merely to support the Palestinian cause. The change in Palestinian and Israel relations during the Clinton Administration seems to support that theory. In fact, it has disappeared from our headlines. Given the timeline, senior Bush Administration officials may be wrong to attribute these changes to the invasion of Iraq, but rather the small inroads President Clinton made in his attempt to foster a true peace between the Palestinian and the Israelis. In addition, the CIA confirms that Libya has undertaken significant economic reforms in recent years, means that political reform was also inevitable. All of these events suggest that Libya recognizes that its need for the West is far greater than the West's need for Libya. Or Qaddafi had a very good crystal ball to time Libya's return to the international community to capitalize on the record high oil prices.

US Will Restore Diplomatic Links With the Libyans - The New York Times article on Tuesday 16th May 2005.

US Ties with Libya Restored - Los Angeles Times article on Tuesday 16th May 2005

The Tale of Two Journalists on the Meth Trail

Many years ago, someone once said that if one thinks one has made a new discovery, one should check history and found out whether someone in the distant past has already made that discovery. Steven Suo of The Oregonian in October 2004 found that Washington could have prevented the methamphetamine epidemic had Congress given the Drug Enforcement Agency the necessary powers to regulate both ephedrine and pseudo-ephedrine. Unfortunately for Suo, his information is out of date even by October 2004 standards. Michael Specter of The New Yorker magazine found a greater epidemic has unfolded for the past six years among the gay men in major cities across America, namely the connection between the raise of HIV/AIDS cases among gay men and the use of methamphetamine and the search of sexual partners online. Suo failed to examine every possible angle before writing his articles including the work of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes. So, here is the story of two journalists working from different angles.

Suo was the guest lecturer for University of Oregon's Associate Professor Scott Maier's Power Journalism class on Thursday 11th May 2006. Suo has for the past four years worked and continues to work on the methamphetamine epidemic. Suo contends that the series of five articles entitled 'Unnecessary Epidemic' has directly contributed to the most recent U.N. resolution concerning the global spread of the methamphetamine. In pointed fact, any recent U.N. actions concerning any type of controlled substance was probably spurred by the 2004 and 2005 World Drug Report (see links section for complete report) with reports stating that the use of contaminated injection needles has significantly contributed to the spread of HIV/AIDS in other parts of the world. Although the world has long knew that sharing needles from recreational drug use has increased an addict’s chance to contract HIV/AIDS, what may not have been known is that recently, in major cities across America, gay men has contracted a new strain of the HIV virus. In the 23rd May 2005 edition of The New Yorker magazine entitled Higher Risk (see bottom of the entry for link to article) contends that methamphetamine user with the deadlier version of HIV might develop full blown AIDS in as little as four months when a person with normal HIV might not develop full blown AIDS for as long as ten years.

Suo further contends that the methamphetamine epidemic started in the West Coast in the 1970s and has been and continues to move towards the East Coast. In pointed fact, his computer-assisted and computer-generated maps for 2002 shows that less than five percent of all people in the East Coast entering rehab centers suffers from methamphetamine addiction. He said in today's class discussion that the super-labs had suddenly sprung all over California overnight. Any economist knows very well that such massive demands do not suddenly appear. In fact, the May 2005 issue of The New Yorker supports this premise. It claims that the drug is available on the streets, in bars and online for less than a good bottle of wine. Specter also said that a recent survey of gay men in San Francisco and Los Angeles shows that more than ten percent has used the drug in the past six months and the figures for New York is even higher. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that this trend has been going on for more than the past six months, which means that Suo may have missed the bigger story, namely the raise of HIV/AIDS cases connected to the use or abuse of methamphetamine. More importantly, Jeffery Klausner, then director of the Sexually Transmitted Diseases Prevention and Control Services of the San Francisco Department of Public Health, identified this trend began in 1998 when small increases of gay men started coming in with syphilis cases. As a result, the City’s Department of Health began tracking the sexual activities of gay men and discovered a greater problem – AIDS.

However, Specter contends that gay men today using or addicted to methamphetamine has a higher likelihood to contract HIV/AIDS through finding sexual partners online. In fact, methamphetamine and the Internet, according to Specter, is 'the prefect compliment for high risk sex.' The results of The New Yorker investigation found that gay men who met online is more likely to use the drug, more likely to infect AIDS and less likely to use a condom.

Like a true egotist, Suo credited his reporting for any recent UN actions, when the evidence clearly indicates that global policymakers were prepared to support any impending resolution before any UN body. It is unhealthy for journalists to take credit for any global action when one should be aware that such actions frequently were impending as global policymakers are privy to far more current information that any journalists could ever be. Worse, Suo failed to investigate the work of some of his colleagues at other news organizations or explore other possible angles.

The New Yorker's Higher Risk by Michael Specter

Award-winning journalist talks Sex and Sexuality in a 21st Century America

Benoit Denizet-Lewis, the youngest contributing writer in New York Times Magazine history, began the 2006 Johnston Lecture by accusing the media of bad reporting on sex and sexuality in America. He attributes the poor coverage due to the nature and pressure imposed on journalists, especially newspaper writers, frequently results in articles that are shallow and poorly researched. A journalist working on a piece on escort service or sex addicts deems reading three or four articles on the subject as sufficient background research. One would then spend a couple of hours with the subjects before writing the article.

He raised America’s current hysteria with sexual predators. Before, the editors believed that what bleeds leads. Now, the lead story should be about the latest sex predator, such as the testimony of 19 year old Justin Berry before a committee of the US House of Representatives on his five years on the Internet in the child pornography business. In fact, he believes the impact of the Internet has been detrimental to sex and sexuality in America due to the proliferation and ready availability of pornography.

Denizet-Lewis said that he is thinking of writing a story on children as young as 10 who have told their parents about their homosexuality.

“The parents are horrified. Some kids feel they can come out at 10, 11 or 12 and be honest” he said. “Most people do have a sense of what they are before they have sex.”

He said that gay children have the confidence to out earlier now because of the constant talk of gay marriage. He is really excited that this will be the first generation to experience something that resembles a normal adolescence.

“They will date, get dumped and do all these sort of things in a healthy way where they are not like sneaking out in the middle of the night to get onto the Internet,” he said.

The Internet was the preferred medium of communications between gay children. First gay children used the Internet to find other gay children to talk to. He also points to the existence of gay children having chat rooms explicitly for such purposes in order for them not to be ashamed of their sexual orientation.

Denizet-Lewis, a San Francisco native, is the youngest person to speak at the Johnston Lecture, a Richard W. Johnston Project event, hosted by the University of Oregon's School of Journalism and Communication. Denizet-Lewis worked as a writer at Boston Magazine and as a staff writer for the San Francisco Chronicle after graduating from Northwestern University with a degree in journalism. He has won the National Lesbian and Gay Journalist Association Annual Excellence in Journalism Award and the New York Maggie Award for Best News Story.

Articles by Benoit Denizet-Lewis

My reflections on bloggers and journalists entering each other's domain

There many ways to be a journalist in the modern world, like print, broadcast or, even, web journalism. Web journalism needs to have some sense of creditability; otherwise it is just what professional bloggers posting whatever information he or she receives. Keep in mind, that there are some journalists like Jayson Blair who has fabricated material during his time with the New York Times. For bloggers, this is even easier, although I will admit that such a fraud might be discovered even quicker.

Perhaps, the old school of ethics might still be applicable in a world of instant information, namely confirm all one's information with two independent sources and, if the information is controversy, one may need three sources to verify. This is not rocket science. If anyone believes that online journalism would gain any sort of creditability just because one could gain and post information faster than traditional news organization without doing some of the necessary legwork, then that person is obviously unaware as to how much bogus information is on the web.

I am very weary of where I get my news. Frankly I do not care much for speed, but I care an awful lot for accuracy, in term of the general facts and the specific details. As a member of the reading or viewing public, I still believe the ancient adage of never believe what one hears or sees until one has confirmation is true. People in ancient China once said that there is a very good reason for naming everything what it is today. We still hear on television news, both network and local, anchors saying that a certain story is still to come after this commercial break. The operative word here is story, which means that one should still take it with a gain of salt regardless of the non-fiction nature of it.

In the lead up to the ground offensive in the Persian Gulf War of 1991, according to the autobiography of Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, a CNN reporter, I believe, told the world that she witnessed an artillery duel between an American airborne division and elements of the Iraqi Army. Schwarzkopf was not only furious with the report, but later found out from the division’s public affairs officer that it never happened. And who could forget the Sago mine tragedy of January 2006. In a mad rush to be first, the journalistic world got it wrong and the news organizations let America go to bed believing that 12 of the 13 miners were successfully rescued.

Jose Raul Capablanca, the famous Cuban world-class chess master of the early 20th Century, rightly said that fools rush in. That is exactly what bloggers would have everyone do, if they ran the journalism world. In a world of instant information, media organizations believe that speed is everything when, in reality, it is the accuracy of the information that really matters.

Instant reactions on becoming a blogger

Like many people, I am a huge critic of certain television personalities. Now that I am a blogger I can finally rant and rave as much as I want about some of the third-rate stock pick of CNBC's Mad Money host, Jim Cramer. I have caught some of his stock picks, which were, in my opinion, outrageously expensive, like Electronic Arts, which traded in the mid-50s to low 60s at the time of his recommendation. Frankly, I think someone should darn well call him on his picks. Not to mention, there are better choices that might yield a patient investor a significantly higher return than his recommendations. Although I rarely watch Mad Money, I know quite a few friends who have checked out Cramer's recommendations and they have said that Cramer would never pick any stocks that hold any risks because if such stocks actually tanked, viewers who followed his strategies would be in rage the moment they started loosing money.

However, to anyone who reads this blog expecting any recommendations, I only have this to say, please don't wait to exhale, least of all, on my account. My picks are a trade secret and I have no such outrageous desires to share them with anyone, except a couple of old college pals. And they are not talking.