It won’t be known for some time exactly how successful that operation in Dallas was that separated the 2-year-old Egyptian twins conjoined at the head. But so far, so good for Ahmed and Mohamed Ibrahim. This much, however, is known. The Egyptian parents and caregivers knew where to go for help. To America.
Mrs. Ibrahim was quoted as “thanking everybody around and thanking her faith that brought her to this great place: Dallas, Texas.”
Wonder if that soundbite ever surfaced on Al-Jazeera?
To paraphrase Benjamin Disraeli, there are lies, damn lies and media rationalizations about controversial programming.
There are certainly no legitimate reasons for defending the pay-as-you-go practices of WFLA-TV Channel 8’s Daytime show. The soft-news morning program has a standard practice of charging some guests a fee — $2,500 for four to six minutes of exposure — to chat about their product or service.
Daytime, which airs at 10:00 right after the Today show, is part of a recognized television genre: a fluff-feature A.M. show with a lot of obsequious and vacuous chatting. Some occasionally cut away for an actual news item. It is what it is. If viewers should assume it’s a local version of NBC’s Today, which doesn’t charge guests, then that’s a perception that WFLA can certainly live with.
For those interested in the “news,” there are regular, around-the-clock, around-the-globe sources for all that’s wrong with the world. “If it bleeds, it leads” is a hard-news tenet. “If you’re a client, we’re pliant” would seem an operative credo for Daytime.
Here’s the problem if you care at all about journalism. If you’re doing an infomercial, say so — with obvious, upfront labeling, including proper identification in the TV listings. There’s a place in the market for these paid-advertisement hybrids. Without them, we’d have far fewer options to acquire killer abs, buns of steel and the mother of all blenders. They are what they are.
But programs such as Daytime are not what they seem. They appear to be info-tainment, yet another media amalgam. They are, however, pimp forums, ready to cater to the self-promoting fantasies of customer-johns with a story to tell.
In its defense, WFLA officials note that Daytime isn’t produced by the station’s news department, nor does it conceal the nature of pay-as-you-go guests. True, but quickly noting that “The following segments were paid advertisements” in the final credits is nothing more than an ethical loophole. It’s not to be confused with the sort of obvious labeling that provides an honest indication of what viewers have just seen.
There is, suffice it to say, more than enough on TV that is bad. But the question is typically taste — and the answer is: don’t watch.
When the question is ethics, however, the answer should be: don’t show it.
In a previous incarnation I was the media relations manager at the University of South Florida. Among the folks who staffed the office was Juanita Holbrook Ingram, a pleasant, 50ish woman who not so secretly harbored a desire to write. She took some courses in USF’s School of Mass Communications. She learned to craft a news release.
After retiring in 1996, Juanita and her husband Bob did some serious traveling in their Winnebago. She became intrigued with the history of places they traveled to out West. That led to some serious writing — of the historical Western fiction genre — especially suitable for young adults.
She just authored her third book, “Blue Mountain.” She’ll be doing a book signing at the Henry B. Plant Museum on Nov. 11, 10:00-noon.
But pursuing and realizing her dream may be the best story of all.
The other day the Pentagon’s Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin spoke out of turn and referenced the war on terrorism in religious terms. As in Us vs. Them, Christianity vs. Islam. Bad move.
It might be “jihad” to the other side, but we keep it secular. Defending America is a life-and-death challenge, but offending others is unconscionable.
A predictable firestorm of outrage resulted with calls for Boykin’s ouster. Sure, a Saudi diplomat went apoplectic, but there was also domestic outrage, including Democratic presidential candidates. When we’re on top of our self-criticism game, nobody bashes us like us. Administrative embarrassment was palpable, and there were the requisite apologies.
Now consider something that Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said recently. He stated that “Jews rule the world by proxy” and recruit others “to fight and die for them.” In an historical take of intriguingly devious proportions, he declared that the Jews “invented socialism, communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong
For as long as I’ve been following baseball, I continue to be dumbfounded by fan behavior. And I’m not even talking about losers running on the field to assault someone or those who ransom souvenirs emblematic of someone else’s achievement. That’s just part of the dysfunctional times we live in.
And I’m not talking about fans who still yell “balk” whenever a pitcher fakes a throw to a base. That’s just impossibly technical stuff for a lot of fans.
But I am talking about something that is really, really basic.
Fans, even those who bring their own gloves, shouldn’t be going after a ball in play. But they do; again and again. As if it were a front-row entitlement. And sometimes, as we’ve become accustomed to seeing, it can help determine a game’s outcome.
So, how’s this for a concept? Only someone who is actually PLAYING — not someone who bought a ticket to watch others play — is permitted to field or attempt to field a ball in play. It doesn’t get more fundamental than that.
Maybe the front row of seats in areas that abut the playing field should be left vacant. Perhaps Plexiglas shields should be erected as in hockey.
Or maybe nothing should be done, because baseball needs all the reasons it can muster to induce fans to come to the ballparks, including a chance to lend a hand and land a souvenir. That, ultimately, is the ticket.
Now that Limbaugh has been given the bum’s Rush, and there’s more interest in his interest in OxyContin, here, upon further review, is what the whole “quarterblack” flap was about.
When ESPN hired Limbaugh for its Sunday NFL pre-game show, it was expecting — and hoping — for controversy and a resultant ratings spike. But polarizing, controversial commentary is one thing; polarizing, controversial commentary on race is entirely different. It’s still too taboo. Not even Limbaugh — love him or love to hate him — can transcend that one.
First, let’s put the whole “quarterblack” matter into its appropriate context. It’s obviously a subset of the politically correct, racially sensitive times we live in. For too many, the difference between a racial reference and racist rhetoric is indecipherable or incidental — when the speaker is a non-minority. Warren Sapp commenting on “Anglo scrubs” isn’t news. It’s just the way it is. It’s part of the double-standard, linguistic minuet we dance to in contemporary America.
For example, if you’re in the media, you have to watch your wording in a restraining order of self-censorship. Even if you’re Howard Cosell — and just “monkeying” around — the onus is on you to prove what you did not mean. Using the proper code words is a must to avoid an arresting moment by the nuance police.
If an announcer says a player can beat you with his “athleticism,” what color might that player be? If he says that a player can’t beat you with his “athleticism,” but is like a “coach on the field,” what color do you think of? Happens all the time.
If you said black players were behaving like boorish clowns by their celebratory, look-at- me antics on the field, are you a racist? Well, it so happens that white players, except for the occasional tight end from the University of Miami, don’t do that. Then, again, maybe it’s a matter of cultural insensitivity. Or perhaps you’re just no fun.
The morphing of racial into racist, especially in sports, can be seen in all manner of ways. Intent is in the eye of the beholder. Imply and infer are synonyms.
Suppose, for example, you disagreed with Temple University basketball coach John Cheney who wants black recruits admitted to Temple regardless of academic standing. Cheney will tell you it’s part of giving poor kids a chance in life and a ticket out of the inner city cul-de-sac.
Are you a racist if you argue that Temple — or any university worthy of the higher education label — is not the place for remediation? Are you a racist if you were to suggest that less emphasis on sports — and more on schooling — would be a more helpful ticket to pursue? Would you be a racist if you were to note that virtually everyone who excels in football and basketball can’t make a living at it?
Does it matter if you argue that uncompromised standards really send a positive signal to inner city, student-athlete wannabes that academics do count as much as scoring averages? Does it matter if you argue that a “no” to an academically sub-standard black athlete probably means “yes” to the next best black player with decent grades and test scores?
But back to ex-ESPN commentator Limbaugh. His brains aren’t on loan from God, but neither are they borrowed from David Duke. And as difficult as it is, never mind that he’s an arrogant neocon-lover.
His views on who wants to see quarterblacks succeed is not way off target. Just dated. Such observations would have been more pertinent a decade or two ago. Currently, more than a quarter of NFL starting quarterbacks are black, among them Duante Culpepper and Steve McNair, who are franchise-type players. Not among them, alas, is Shaun King. Anyway, it’s a long way from James Harris going solo for the Los Angeles Rams as a quarterblack a generation ago.
Would the media like to see more quarterblacks succeed? That’s not that relevant; besides, it’s a rhetorical question. Reporters are not supposed to cheer from the press box — whether it’s for the home team or the home boyz. But most sign on to a liberal agenda, of which race is the centerpiece in this country. So, the answer is yes. (Probably an emphatic “yes” regarding McNabb, who is articulate and well liked.) To the media, the more stereotype-busting QBs, the better. So what else is new?
The NFL’s take, however, is more important.
It remains embarrassed — and subject at a moment’s pique to Jesse Jackson extortion — because in a league dominated by black players, it has so few black head coaches. Teams get fined for not interviewing black applicants. Ownership is white. Most of the fans and advertisers are white. It’s getting more like the NBA. It’s not unlike the Romans watching the Christians take on the heavily favored lions.
So the next best thing for NFL show-and-tell is the highest-profile position on the field: QB. What better way to say, in effect, “We really are progressive. We’re not part of the Al Campanis-Jimmy the Greek generation. We think black players assuming the consummate cool-under-fire, make-good-decisions, lead-your-men-in-battle position reflects well on our league. It helps bury those stereotypes that still linger that blacks are gifted athletes who aren’t as smart as their white counterparts. It helps buy us time until we can showcase more black head coaches.”
Now to Donovan McNabb, the Philadelphia Eagles’ versatile, black quarterback.
For all their loutish, mutant behavior, Philly fans are pretty savvy sorts. Most of them, especially after the Eagles’ horrible, season-opening, offense-challenged losses to the Bucs and the New England Patriots, wouldn’t dismiss out of hand Limbaugh’s comments about McNabb being overrated — and their choice of words would be x-rated. He looked awful.
Philly fans remember former Eagle QB Randall Cunningham. He had enough, uh, athleticism to have his own highlight video. But in big games, they will tell you, you couldn’t count on him to make good decisions. Ron Jaworski took them farther.
They see haunting parallels in McNabb, who’s better than Cunningham. They will tell you that the biggest fault of the Eagles offensively is forcing NcNabb into being more of a pocket (read: white) passer than he should be. He was free to freelance — and do what he does best and put up big, Pro Bowl numbers — when the Eagles were a non-contender.
But since the Eagles became better balanced, he’s been asked increasingly to play within a more disciplined system. (As was the case with the backups who replaced an injured McNabb last season and still won.) But when he stays in the pocket, within the system, Philly fans will tell you, he’s not nearly as effective. And he won’t be leading the Eagles to any Super Bowls that way. Moreover, he will likely look “overrated” in the process. The fans are frustrated as only Eagle fans can be.
And in moments of despair and candor, they’ll tell you that the Eagles are better if McNabb just stops trying to be too much of a traditional pocket passer. If that sounds like they want him to be less like a stereotypical white quarterback, they don’t care. If it sounds like they want him to be more like a stereotypical black quarterback and use his legs a lot, they care even less. They don’t want a black Koy Detmer. They don’t want social justice. They just want to win.
For the record, the hard-core fans in Philly were much less upset about the Limbaugh flap than were some presidential candidates and the media, including Philadelphia’s own. Philly fans were about as upset as the strangely silent Michael Irvin seemed to be when Limbaugh made his stop-the-presses comments.
And this final thought.
Amid all the agenda-pushing and knee-jerk comments across the political spectrum, the one person with significant insight who came across as notably classy was McNabb. Regardless of ratings, overratings and racial politics, he remains a superb athlete and a talented quar
terback. He also took the high road when so many around him couldn’t get out of the rhetorical ditch.
Some unsolicited advice for those Tampa City Council members who recently voted for that 23 per cent pay hike that ultimately failed, 4-2. It was a valid question, and there were legitimate arguments to be made.
But first things first: Earn it.
Not to be unkind, but isn’t it ironic that the twosome that voted for the increase, Mary Alvarez and Gwen Miller, have done the least to merit it. They are the council’s least accomplished members. Moreover, the catalyst and foremost proponent for the proposed pay hike, Kevin White (who missed the final vote), is a rookie with no track record for meriting anything yet.
John Madden came into town for the Bucs’ Monday night meltdown against the Colts early enough to see the USF-Louisville game two nights prior. He noted that the Bucs’ Martin Gramatica was among those running on to the field to celebrate brother Santiago Gramatica’s winning field goal. Only he referenced “Southern Florida.”
Another example of why the university is marketing itself as simply “USF.” And another example of what a challenge that continues to be.
NEW PORT RICHEY — The big yellow stickers said: “You BET I’m with BETTY for U.S. Senate.” On this day, they could have said: “You can COUNT on KATHY.”
On a Saturday afternoon at New Port Richey’s downtown library, the West Pasco Democratic Club was awaiting the arrival of U.S. Senate candidate Betty Castor. A gathering of some 75 members, a number of them seniors, was on hand.
Several wore caps designating military service. A middle-aged guy sported a T-shirt emblazoned with “Regime Change Begins At Home.” Some wanted to tell Castor that they didn’t much care for the current Administration’s non-support for the expansion of veterans’ disability benefits. Most just wanted to hear what Florida’s pre-eminent female political icon had to say to this Main Street (Democrat) assemblage.
What they got was a pretty good surrogate, Kathy Castor. She’s articulate, enthusiastic and hardly hustings-challenged. She was pinch-hitting because her mom had been called out of town — to Glassboro, N.J. — to be with her dying, 85-year-old mother, Gladys Evans.
Kathy Castor, to be sure, is no neophyte. In fact, over the last decade the current Hillsborough County commissioner has had more experience running for office than her mom. Betty, of course, was busy being president of the University of South Florida and president and CEO of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
In addressing the gathering, Kathy highlighted her mom’s bio, reminded everybody that there has never been a U.S. senator from the Tampa Bay area, pointed out that her mother’s timing has always been “impeccable” and served up some campaign boilerplate.
Her mom, she said, looks at Washington and “sees a lack of policy direction, a lack of vision and a lack of clear understanding of how the federal government affects the lives of people
For more than a decade, Frank Morsani has battled Major League Baseball over what he has said amounted to an illegal conspiracy to prevent him and the Tampa Bay Baseball Group from getting a team. Recently Morsani and MLB reached a settlement on his lawsuit, the results of which are strictly confidential. Morsani, however, seems satisfied.
Good for him, because he got a raw deal and spent a lot of his own money in the ill-fated process. It’s only fitting that Morsani be fairly compensated, if that is, indeed, still possible. There was nothing fair about MLB’s bad faith, strong-arm treatment of Morsani and the TBBG. Not only were they induced to make concessions — especially regarding the Minnesota Twins — but they were led to believe such concessions would be rewarded via expansion.
He was, however, stiffed by MLB and eliminated early from expansion-franchise consideration. Eventually, of course, a Vince Naimoli-led group was awarded the franchise that became the Tampa Bay Devil Rays and began playing in 1998.
We can all empathize with what Morsani has gone through. He deserved better — and so did we. A bad team, in a bad facility, in a bad location with bad ownership. This market has been stiffed too. Thanks, MLB; thanks, Vince.
Hopefully there will be another satisfactory settlement — and not contraction down the road.