5 Reasons SpaceX Must Sell Starlink

11 Friday Jun 2021

Posted by Paul Kiser in Astronomy, Business, Communication, Customer Service, Internet, NASA, Public Image, Space, SpaceX, Starlink, Technology, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Falcon 9, Internet, Public Image, Satellite, Space, space business, space flight, Space Program, Space X, Starlink

Since the start of 2019, slightly over half¹ of SpaceX’s launches have been for the Starlink satellite network. The idea of becoming a worldwide provider of Internet service with a constellation of flashy satellites that people can see crossing the sky after launch has been a welcome boost for the SpaceX fan club. The image of boosters coming back for a perfect touchdown has provided a great cover for the reality that may be lurking behind the SpaceX curtain…SpaceX must sell Starlink.

¹[Starlink = 29 launches, Commercial and Government = 28 launches]

Starlink satellite rack ready to deploy

5 Reasons SpaceX Should Sell Starlink

1. Cashflow

In a previous article, I argue that SpaceX is not doing what is required to keep a business viable, that is to make money. [SpaceX “Burning Through Cash” and Boosters] In 2018, all 21 of SpaceX launches were revenue-producing (100% for a paying customer) flights for either commercial or government customers. That dropped to 11 revenue-producing flights in 2019, and 12 in 2020. In the first six months of this year, SpaceX has only launched 5 revenue-producing flights.

The drastic cut in revenue-producing flights in 2019 raises questions as to why SpaceX couldn’t find customers. Possibly in response, SpaceX ramped up their pet Starlink project in 2020 to maintain the public image of a busy private space enterprise.

However, that image does not come without its costs. Each Starlink launch is estimated to cost $111 million² [Morgan Stanley report Sept 2019.] That number is disputed [NextBigFuture article Dec 2019] by SpaceX; however, they don’t offer to disclose the real costs of the system. If the costs per launch were only $100 million, SpaceX will have spent $2.9 billion since 2019 on the Starlink launches.

Revenue from the users of the Starlink system is not expected to break even with the costs for several years so SpaceX looks to be in a serious cashflow deficit.

²[$50 million for vehicle + ($1 million per satellite x 60) = $111 million]

2. Weak Market Base

Despite the fact that the Internet has been around for over two decades, there is no significant use of satellite-based Internet services. Space allows greater access to users; however, the cost/benefit comparison makes ground-based systems a better option.

The target market is the rural user that can’t easily access a broadband connection and this market consists of users with the least spendable income. There is a great need for quality Internet service in rural areas; however, rural area economies don’t provide the financial resources to pay for it.

Starlink is a service that is like selling food to starving people. The need is there, but if the people could afford it, they wouldn’t be starving.

What 1,500 Starlink satellites look like in orbit. There will be 30,000.

3. Liability

Starlink has already run into controversy about the impact of the massive satellite system. Astronomers worldwide have voiced complaints about the network interfering with the scientific study of space from Earth-based telescopes. SpaceX has attempted to lessen the impact of the reflectivity of the satellites and they have become less obvious in orbit.

There has also been an incident in 2019, where a request was made by the European Space Agency (ESA) to alter the orbit of a Starlink satellite and the Starlink operator refused to comply. SpaceX claims they initially felt the threat was not a concern, then later realized that it was; however, because of a communications breakdown between SpaceX and the Starlink operator, they failed to act. [Forbes article Sept 2019]

With tens of thousands of satellites and scores of launches every year to build and maintain the constellation, the risk of a significant incident is high. The possibility of a collision would not only impact the satellites involved but would send debris out toward other satellites creating the nightmare scenario that was the plot of the 2013 movie Gravity.

Whoever operates the Starlink constellation takes on the liability of an accident that has global implications.

4. Risk of Failure

The Starlink satellite system is a long-term, high-risk gamble both financially and technologically. The logic of how such a system will be economically feasible seems to be flawed. It is a business venture that seems likely to leave someone holding the bag…and the bag may be filled with debt and public humiliation.

The Starlink Constellation: 30,000 moving parts, traveling at 28,000 km/hr, operating 24/7/365. What could possibly go wrong?

5. Cost of Maintenance

Based on the Morgan Stanley analysis, the initial cost of the full 30,000 Starlink satellite system will be somewhere between $40 and $50 billion but the cost doesn’t end there.

Each satellite’s lifespan is only five years according to SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell [CNBC.com article Nov 2019.] That would seem to indicate that SpaceX may be continuously launching satellites for the life of the constellation.

But SpaceX is Rolling In Money!

SpaceX has been successful in obtaining venture capital; however, the investors expect a return on their investment. If SpaceX can’t make a profit, there will be consequences.

What about the rumored IPO?

An Initial Public Offering (IPO) of Starlink has been talked about by Musk, Shotwell, and the financial community; however, an IPO means that SpaceX will still be responsible for the costs and risks of Starlink. Selling Starlink allows SpaceX to wash their hands of it and recoup the money they’ve already spent.

Starlink has done what it needed it to do. It has given SpaceX the image of a successful private space corporation. SpaceX will likely be in desperate need of money to keep operations functioning for all of the existing projects. Starlink will likely become a liability and finding someone to dump it on is the best-case scenario for SpaceX.

Betelgeuse: Schrödinger’s Star

21 Tuesday Jan 2020

Posted by Paul Kiser in Astronomy, Communication, Ethics, Exploration, Higher Education, History, Honor, Internet, Journalism, Religion, Science, Space, Technology, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

AAVSO, American Association of Variable Star Observers, astronomy, astrophysicist, Betelgeuse, dimming, fainting, light year, math, mathematics, prediction, progenitor star, Schrödinger's cat, Schrödinger's star, Star, stars, supernova

Much Ado About Something

Some astronomers are taking a dim view of the fading light of Betelgeuse. Many are trying to dampen down reports of the star’s demise while not ruling out the possibility. The reality of science is that no one knows what is happening.

What are you doing, Betelgeuse?

A Funny Thing Happened On the Way to a Supernova

Betelgeuse is the hot topic in astronomy because it has been dramatically dimming or ‘fainting’ [SEE Graph 1.0.] In a period of three months, it has dropped from being the eleventh brightest star in the night sky to the twenty-third brightest. This fainting spell is significant because when a star goes supernova it rapidly collapses prior to the event.

Astronomers Edward Guinan, Richard Wasatonic (Villanova University,) and Thomas Calderwood (AAVSO) posted a notice on December 8th of the fainting of Betelgeuse that helped raise awareness of the event. The news media became aware of it and by late December the fainting of Betelgeuse was trending in public speculation of a spectacular doom for Betelgeuse.

Graph 1.0 – Betelgeuse fainting is historic (2018 to current)

A 645-Year-Old Notice

Because of the distance between Earth and Betelgeuse, we wouldn’t know of a supernova event until approximately 645 years after it happens. Our first indication would likely be through a sudden increase in neutrinos. The visual confirmation would occur a few hours later.

If Betelgeuse has gone supernova within the past ≈645 years, then an astronomer could say that Betelgeuse has both gone supernova and has not gone supernova. The delay creates a Schrödinger’s cat scenario. The truth is unknowable.

But astronomers remind us that it may be 100,000 years of more until Betelgeuse makes a stellar spectacle of itself and then abruptly ends its role of marking Orion’s armpit. Their impreciseness of the future of the star is due to a lack of observations of the behavior of progenitor stars (stars that end their life as a supernova) in the years, months, weeks, and days just prior to a supernova.

Betelgeuse is the armpit of Orion

Why Don’t Astronomers Know?

It’s been over 400 years since a star in the Milky Way was observed after it went supernova. That event, like almost every other supernova observation, occurred after the star exploded. Rarely have astronomers been forewarned of an impending explosion and in those cases, the warning has been a matter of hours prior to the event.

To make an accurate prediction of a supernova, we must have data to create a theoretical model of behavior preceding the collapse of the star. The model must be created by using mathematical formulas based on observable data. Without the math, a prediction is just an opinion.

In science, “We don’t know,” is the motivation to discover the truth, even if the truth contradicts the desires and opinions of the majority. At the core of every legitimate scientist is an unwavering desire to offer facts and not mislead others. Astronomers can’t, and shouldn’t, attempt to predict a supernova. “We don’t know,” is the correct answer and the general public has to accept that answer.

Unfortunately, most humans don’t like not knowing. Religions like to give absolute answers to questions even if the answer is unknown or even if it is 100% wrong. A scientist and/or scholar is governed by a higher power of truth. For scientists, not knowing the answer is what makes the process discovery so satisfying.

The End of the Faint?

In the past week observations of the fainting of Betelgeuse have leveled off. This may indicate that Betelgeuse is about to begin increasing in brightness. It may also indicate the fainting is pausing, or it may indicate that there is no pause and next week astronomers will see a continued drop in brightness. No one knows.

Graph 2.0 – Is the dimming leveling off in mid-January? (OCT 2019 to current)

My Answer To the Question

I am not a scholar in the field of astronomy so I can state my opinion about the situation. My opinion is that at some time in the past 645 years, Betelgeuse has gone supernova…and it hasn’t.

You have to love Schrödinger.

Astrophysics Book Review – Space: 10 Things You Should Know

11 Friday Oct 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Astronomy, Book Review, Communication, Education, Entertainment, Exploration, Higher Education, Information Technology, Internet, NASA, Passionate People, Photography, Print Media, review, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Space, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, Women, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

astronomy, astrophysicist, astrophysics, Book, Book review, cosmologist, cosmology, galaxies, Milky Way galaxy, Science, Space, space exploration

Minding the Gap of Knowledge

Sharing the knowledge of scholars (e.g.; astrophysicists) with non-scholars is difficult. Astrophysics scholars have spent years obtain a foundational understanding of the dynamics of our universe that is not obviously known to the public. They also have a working knowledge of special terms, acronyms, and highly cited authors. This creates a chasm with scholars on one side, who are advancing human knowledge, and non-scholars on the other side, unaware of the progress and activities of those in the field.

As scholars tend to be focused on their work and the work of their peers, it is rare to have a scholar attempt to bridge the chasm and help non-scholars have access to the secrets that have been uncovered and the challenges to be overcome.

Dr. Becky Smethurst, astrophysics researcher, educator, YouTuber, and author

Dr. Rebecca Smethurst, or Dr. Becky as she is known on her YouTube channel, is one of those rare scholars who is diligently immersed in sharing new knowledge and discoveries in astrophysics with the public as she actively participates in furthering our understanding of it. In her new book, Space: 10 Things You Should Know, (2019) Dr. Smethurst continues to inform and enlighten us about what humans know and don’t know about the development of galaxies and the stars within them.

Review – Space: 10 Things You Should Know

Category: Nonfiction, Science, Non-Textbook

UK/Europe Release: 5 September 2019 by Seven Dials Publishing
North America Release: Summer 2020 by Ten Speed Press

Informative ★★★★★
Relevancy ★★★★★
Readability ★★★★☆
Half-Life ★★★☆☆
Expertise ★★★★★
Visuals ★☆☆☆☆

[Formats: Hardcover, Audio]

Dr. Smethurst has written multiple scholarly articles; however, this is her first book. It is a short, easy to read work of 10 chapters. Each chapter reveals information about our universe that may not be part of public awareness.

The book is written in conversational language, not scholar-speak. It provides a basic knowledge of what we know about the formation of the universe, galaxies, and planets (including the Earth.) Amateur astronomers likely know most of this information, but Dr. Smethurst provides nuggets of new information that make the book worthwhile to read.

She begins with a view of how gravity is critical to how the universe functions. Because her work deals with supermassive black holes, Dr. Smethurst discusses what we know about black holes and theories of how supermassive black holes impact the galaxy they’re located in.

Dr. Becky also discusses Dark Matter, why scientists believe it is real, and what it means in the grand scheme of the universe. Two other chapters talk about the hunt for planets outside of our solar system and the practicality and current limitations of human space travel.

This book could serve as a unit in a middle or high school science class, but it is just as functional as a broad-based survey of current astrophysics knowledge for adults who can read above a sixth-grade level. As a first book by a doctorate level scholar for consumption by the general public, it is brilliant.

As one might expect with a book of this nature, the subject matter is fleeting. As Dr. Smethurst states in her preface, “…science moves quickly…” Though this is not a textbook, it encounters the same problem of most textbooks in that research and discovery moves on while the printed book remains unchanged.

My projection is that the half-life of this is about seven to ten years. After that, about half of the information will become less relevant as new discoveries push astrophysics forward. That said, this book is certainly not a wasted effort and the need to persevere with updated information is critical.

If this book were a second or third book by this author I would expect to see a more expansive book and more visually stimulating. Both Carl Sagan and Brian Cox have used television and print to ignite a passion for science in the minds of the public. Their books are filled with images that help the reader to see science as a living entity filled with wonder and adventure.

Dr. Becky uses imagery extensively on her YouTube channel so it is likely that we can expect future books to have a greater visual element.

Still, as a first book, coupled with her YouTube work, Dr. Smethurst has built an impressive bridge to reach out to the public. As an active researcher, she offers a unique opportunity for non-scholars to access scientific information from a knowledgeable source rather than the entertainment-based news media.

Dr. Rebecca Smethurst is the one to keep a telescopic eye on.

Dr. Becky’s Astrophysics Work

Understanding The Life and Times of a Galaxy

In the last 100 years, our ability to visualize the stars has vastly improved but the galaxies we see today have changed very little in the past 10,000 years. Changes in the shape and location of a galaxy take millions of years to occur so what astronomers see today isn’t that much different than what they could have seen thousands of years ago.

What astrophysicists do know is the relative age of a galaxy. When we image a galaxy that is ten million light-years away we are seeing how it looked ten million years ago. By using the relative age of a galaxy and the characteristics of that galaxy, astrophysicists can identify group traits of similar galaxies and begin to understand how galaxies develop and eventually die.

The work of Dr. Smethurst has been to increase our understanding of the role of a galaxy’s core black hole (supermassive black hole) in the development of a galaxy and of its ability to establish new generations of stars. The current theory is that as the galaxy matures the core supermassive black hole sucks much of the free hydrogen out of the galaxy. Without an adequate source of hydrogen, the fuel for the formation of new stars is depleted and the galaxy becomes inactive.

Dr. Smethurst’s Scholarly Astrophysics Linage

Dr. Smethurst’s advising faculty for her doctorate program was Dr. Chris Lintott. Since 2013, Dr. Lintott has been a co-presenter for the BBC’s enduring documentary astronomy television program, The Sky At Night and is a co-founder of Galaxy Zoo, an online crowdsourced project to engage the public in helping to categorize millions of galaxies for research purposes. Dr. Lintott’s advising faculty included the highly published and cited cosmologist Dr. Ofer Lahav.

Dr. Becky earned her Master’s degree in Physics with Astronomy at the University of Durham and her Doctorate degree in Astrophysics at the University of Oxford. Currently, she is a Junior Research Fellow at Christ Church College at Oxford University. Her focus is on studying galaxies and their interactions with their core supermassive black hole.

In 2014, [23 April 2014] Dr. Smethhurst was asked where she saw herself in five years. Her response was, “I’d look to reach the most amount of people as possible…to spread the word about the amazing things that people have no idea about.”

…to spread the word about the amazing things that people have no idea about…

Dr. Rebecca Smethurst – 23 April 2014

Now, five years later, Dr. Smethurst is achieving that goal through her new book, her YouTube channel, and her outreach work.

Dr. Becky Smethurst

Curriculum Vitae
Webpage

Dr. Becky on:

Twitter
SpaceTV
LinkedIn

Sample of co-authored published work:

What About Marriage?

02 Wednesday Oct 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Gender Issues, Generational, Health, Lessons of Life, Life, Marriage, Mental Health, parenting, Religion, Respect, United States, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

children, divorce, gay marriage, husband, LGBT, LGBTQ, love, marriage, parents, Relationships, spouse, widowed, wife

I’ve been married twice. Eight years the first time and I am nearing 25 years in the second marriage. I look back at my marriage experiences and I consider young adults and the decisions they have to make in relationships. The question is whether or not marriage worth it? I believe that like most important life decisions, there is no perfect answer.

[Author’s NOTE: For the purpose of this discussion, marriage is defined as a lifelong, intimate, and exclusive commitment to another person regardless of the genders of the couple (female/male, male/male, or female/female) involved in the relationship. It includes couples who have not officially married but have mutually agreed to have an exclusive, cohabitating relationship. This discussion assumes a monogamous relationship and does NOT include other types of multiple spousal relationships such as polygamy, polygyny, polyandry, or polyamory.]

A Case For Marriage

Despite all the challenges to maintaining a relationship over time, marriage usually has a positive effect on both partners that cannot be achieved as a single individual. Maybe it is sharing the burden of life with someone else that makes our existence more rewarding. Maybe it is the stability of the relationship that smooths out the manic aspects of life.

Regardless, there is almost always a reward in having a significant, loving relationship that is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve by living alone. Marriage typically makes us more focused, more rational, and more emotionally stable.

For some couples, marriage becomes the center of their lives. Decisions are made jointly and other people see the couple as a single entity. All things are shared, even an email address.

For other couples, marriage is a symbiotic relationship that enriches each other’s experiences. Each person maintains a separate identity but time spent together is the oasis of their lives.

It is interesting to note that research indicates that married men live longer than men who remain single, divorced, or are widowed, although there are disputing studies that suggest single men that stay single also live longer. Men who lose their spouse have an increased risk of dying within a short period afterward. Note that this data is on heterosexual couples. Same-gender marriages are relatively new and there has not been enough time to study longevity issues associated with single-sex marriages.

A Case Against Marriage

Any relationship is complicated because it involves the hopes, desires, and preconceptions of two people. The idea that two people will have attitudes about marriage that perfectly coincide is absurd. People who decide to get married typically are willing to compromise on their preconceptions of marriage in exchange for the hope that over time a compromise will be reached and their relationship will become perfect.

While compromises in a relationship are usually made, eventually one or both reach a point where they realize that they compromised on things that are important to them. It is at this point the Dissatisfaction Syndrome begins.

Dissatisfiers

Many years ago I realized that decisions are driven by dissatisfaction. A person becomes dissatisfied with something and ultimately decides to make a change. This usually happens over time and consists of multiple ‘dissatisfiers.’

An example would be a person’s employment. Initially, a person may be excited about a new job, but over time the employee will experience dissatisfiers (reaching top of the pay scale, unreasonable demands, poor management decisions, disagreeable co-workers, etc.) and that person will begin considering looking for a new job. Eventually, a final event (dissatisfier) will motivate an employee to take action.

This happens in marriages. Dissatisfiers can operate in the background of any relationship and build over time. A tipping point is reached when the person realizes that the marriage is no longer sufficiently satisfying and a change must be made.

The Growth Problem

Another problem in any relationship is the Growth Problem. Human development occurs over a lifespan. A healthy, well-adjusted person needs to engage in a continuous process of learning and adapting. The problem is that humans learn and adopt new attitudes and priorities at different rates and usually in different directions.

A person at 25 is completely different than they are at 40, so what happens when the person you’ve been with for 15 years is now a stranger?

The Worst Marriage: Codependency

There is a worst-case scenario in marriage. It is when one or both partners are codependent on each other. In this situation, all the normal things that breakdown a relationship occur but one or both partners stay in the relationship because the can’t imagine living independently.

This results in the marriage becoming a black hole of despair, anger, and mistrust that destroys the mental and emotional health of both partners.

Children and Marriage

I believe that children substantially impact a marriage, but that children tend to magnify the state of the relationship. In the case of a healthy relationship, the net impact is to enhance and deepen the relationship. In an unhealthy relationship, the net impact increases the existing problems and issues.

“Till Death Do You Part?”

The concept of marriage has radically changed over the last two centuries, along with the human lifespan. Most advanced countries accept that the ‘wife’ is no longer the property of the male. Additionally, divorce has become more accepted.

The idea that marriage is for life is not practical for most people despite that many religions still cling to 18th-century concepts of marriage. There are some couples that defy the odds and maintain a loving relationship until death but in many cases, a relationship can become destructive to the emotional and mental health of one or both partners after a period of time.

The Need For a Different Marriage Model

I don’t believe that anyone can predict or accurately assess a couple’s relationship and know whether or not it will last. There are too many variables.

Still, there are benefits to monogamous relationships and marriage creates a framework for a couple to be committed to each other. The problem is that in many relationships, a point of no return is reached that signals the end. What is needed is a new model of marriage that requires couples to have an ongoing assessment of their relationship (e.g.; counseling,) a measure of the quality of the relationship (e.g.; is it working or not) and, if needed, an acceptable transition out of the relationship that keeps both people whole.

What isn’t accounted for in this model are the children. A child should be a planned event, as much as possible, with the understanding that a child creates a third, and equal party in the relationship. Sadly, too many people have children who do not have the appropriate skills to be a parent, let alone a parent in an unhealthy marriage.

Sexuality and Teaching It

14 Sunday Jul 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Discrimination, Education, Gender Issues, Generational, Health, Lessons of Life, Life, Mental Health, parenting, Pride, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

LGBT, sex, sex education, Sexuality

I believe that we have a problem with educating children about sexuality. We ask public schools to teach children about sex and instantly the lessons focus on the physicality and the dangers. Then religious groups leap into the discussion and demand that their mythical taboos be incorporated into the education. In the end, the programs become so mechanical and fear-inducing that even an adult would laugh at the result.

What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate

My point of view about sexuality is probably off the norm. I don’t believe the function of sex to be about physicality, bonding, religious, or societal aspects of life. I believe sex is centrally about communication.

Bear with me.

In terms of understanding the meaning of the communication of a speaker or author, the lowest form of communication may be the written word. When I write an email, all aspects of vocal and physical clues of my communication are lost. Scholars in Speech Communication call it “impoverished communication.” It means that my words may fail to communicate my intent because the subtleties of my nonverbal cues cannot be conveyed in written form.

A phone conversation is an improvement over email because the other person can hear my intonation and rhythm of my words to understand my meaning. Still, a phone conversation lacks the nonverbal physical clues that help express what I’m trying to say.

Many scholars believe that face to face communication is the highest form of communication because the words and nonverbal cues offer a complete package of meaning that allows the listener to better understand the meaning of the person speaking.

Sex: The Ultimate Communication

Despite the positive aspects of face to face communication, the meaning (or mind-to-mind transfer) of the speaker still may not be fully complete. There is a gap between what the person is thinking, and what the other person interprets from the words and nonverbal cues.

I believe that the physicality of sex leads to the closest humans can come to mind-to-mind communication. Even ‘meaningless’ sex contains a significant communication between the two people that may be denied or discounted by one or both after the encounter but remains regardless.

Mentoring Sexual Communication

While there are differences in sexual encounters based on gender and there are health and procreation issues that must be understood, the unifying aspect of sexuality is communication and its impact on the individual.

A child needs to know that having a sexual relationship with someone will change their view of that person and of themselves. After a first sexual encounter, new aspects of their minds and bodies will be revealed and it likely will trigger a desire to experience that intense experience again.

It doesn’t matter if it is a male/female, male/male, female/female, transgender, or any other type of sexual encounter, the communicative aspect of the sexual encounter will have the same impact. Just as friendship is bonded by discussions and sharing, sex creates a bond with another person that cannot be denied, nor ignored.

The Real Story of Sexuality

Some people seem to think that sex is something that is done after two people have achieved a milestone in their relationship (going steady, marriage, etc.,) but it is not a milestone. Sex is a conversation. I’m not trying to weigh in on the morality of affairs, or sex before marriage, but I do believe that when two people have a sexual encounter it is a sharing of minds that is not easily dismissed as insignificant.

If we could teach that to our children I think they might have a better idea of what they are getting into when they take that step into exploring their own sexuality.

SpaceX Public Relations: Secrecy is Modus Operandi

04 Thursday Apr 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Communism, Conservatives, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Government, Government Regulation, Management Practices, Mars, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Soviet Russia, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Falcon Heavy, manned space program, privatization, Public Image, Public Relations, space business, space exploration, space flight, spaceflight, SpaceX, static fire test

[UPDATE: Eric Ralph, a writer for Telsalarti, posted an article saying that the Falcon Heavy launch was likely to be delayed and that it was “OK.” Again, Ralph is a knowledgable source but not an official source, so SpaceX is not accountable for the speculation. Source: Teslarati 4 Apr 2019.]

SpaceX is scheduled to launch the new Block 5 version of the Falcon Heavy on Sunday (7 April) sometime between 6:36 PM and 8:35 PM EDT. We know this from an official source of information that was made available on 22 March. That information was not provided by SpaceX to the directly to the public. SpaceX reported it as required; however, if not for that requirement, the public would have no information on the time or date of the launch. The public is given the silent treatment while SpaceX collects billions in taxpayer dollars.

While a lot of people are distracted by a Raptor in Texas, 27 Merlin 1Ds are hoping to attract your attention in Florida.

KSC goes into Critical Support from 20:30 Local (March 31) to 20:30 Local (April 1), meaning rollout to 39A likely on Sunday and then Static Fire on April 1. pic.twitter.com/nXUtGIiKsJ

— Chris B – NSF (@NASASpaceflight) March 27, 2019

This tweet by Michael Baylor, a managing editor for NASASpaceflight.com and considered a highly knowledgeable source, was wrong. SpaceX has remained silent.

SpaceX Public Relations: Code of Secrecy

Because SpaceX is a private company, they’re not required to tell the public anything,…and they don’t. This leads to speculation through other sources and that speculation works to their favor. By not making announcements about time or dates, they can’t be held responsible for delays. SpaceX avoids negative publicity by not being accountable to the public. The new reality of public relations in space exploration is that everything is on a need to know basis…and the public doesn’t need to know.

Prep for Falcon Heavy Static Fire Test…in 2018

Falcon Heavy Problems?

This week’s Block 5 Falcon Heavy debut is a prime example of how SpaceX uses secrecy to their advantage. Instead of informing the public, the public relations people at SpaceX are taking a low profile prior to the launch. No announcements, no tweets.

Speculation has been made that the static fire test (a short test-firing of the engines) would occur on Monday (1 April,) Wednesday (3 April,) and now Thursday (4 April.) [Sources: Teslarati 28 Mar 2019 – E. Ralph, Spaceflight Now 1-3 Apr 2019 – S. Clark] Again, not from official sources, but by knowledgeable sources. This type of teasing drives SpaceX fans into a feeding frenzy of speculation, but SpaceX isn’t accountable for any of the speculation, regardless of how knowledgable the source.

This allows SpaceX to miss a projected date or time for the static fire test because they never said when the test would occur. It is likely that the information in the above tweet by Michael Baylor was accurate and something has happened to cause SpaceX to push back the static fire test, but they don’t have to reveal that to the public. They can keep the public guessing until it becomes obvious that the launch date and time will not be met.

This also allows SpaceX to minimize failure while wildly pronouncing a success. If the launch is a success, SpaceX will make public announcements with video of every positive aspect of the launch. If the Falcon Heavy launch fails SpaceX will likely cut video feeds to the public and wait several hours to form a carefully crafted explanation that will suggest the failure was an expected risk of a rocket launch. Then they will go silent.

This is what SpaceX did on the first Falcon Heavy (Block 4) launch when the booster core failed to land on the drone ship. The video feed was cut when the booster crashed near the ship and damaged the engines. SpaceX then didn’t confirm or deny what happened until several hours later, even though they had a continuous video of the event. [Source: The Verge 6 Feb 2018 – L. Grush]

Why Should the Public Know?

Roughly half of SpaceX’s revenue has come from the taxpayers pocket. According to Sam Dunkovich, $5.5 billion of SpaceX $12 billion in launch contracts are from NASA or the U.S. military [Source: RealClear Policy 2 Feb 2018.] SpaceX wouldn’t be in the space industry if it were not for the financial revenue it gains from the U.S. taxpayer. The first launch of a Block 5 Falcon Heavy is a significant milestone of how our money is being spent by this private company.

Space exploration has been a public concern since Soviet Russia launched Sputnik on 4 October 1957. The conservatives desire to privatize space exploration is at best an experiment and certainly is a one-sided political agenda. By withholding information from the taxpayers, the effectiveness of that political agenda cannot be fairly determined.

Secrecy in public relations is a Soviet model and not acceptable in the United States. Withholding information from the public to hide the true situation is still a lie. This is why private business is incapable of overseeing themselves and should be required to inform the public of their true activities and problems.

Is Space.com a Soviet-Style News Agency for SpaceX

29 Friday Mar 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Communism, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, Journalism, labor, Management Practices, Marketing, Mars, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Science Fiction, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Soviet Russia, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Dragon 2, Dragon Capsule, Elon Musk, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, International Space Station, journalism, journalism standards, journalistic ethics, manned space program, manned spacecraft, Soviet space program, space exploration, space flight, Space.com

Space.com is in love. They are head-over-heels in love with SpaceX. Reading the articles posted by Space.com writers one might think that SpaceX has already landed on Mars, colonized the Moon, and cured the common cold. It’s not that Space.com writers present false information about SpaceX, it’s just that they tend to overlook…well, almost everything negative.

This style of almost compulsory cheerleading of SpaceX by an alleged news source is reminiscent of the type of reporting from the Soviet days of TASS (Telegrafnoye agentstvo Sovetskogo Soyuza,) Russia’s official news source. From 1925 to 1992, Soviet intelligence agencies often used TASS to put out positive news and disinformation, including crafted stories praising the Soviet space program. For decades, TASS was the mouthpiece for the Soviet government reminding Soviet citizens that the Soviet government was always correct even when they were wrong.

A Fake Starship Prototype?

Space.com demonstrates the Soviet-like reporting in one of its latest articles on SpaceX. Writer Lee Cavendish published an article [Space.com 29 Mar 2019] that gushed about SpaceX’s Starship Hopper. He began his piece as follows:

SpaceX continues to amaze in popularizing space exploration. Not only is it doing fantastic work in reaching and exploring space…

Lee Cavendish for Space.com

For his article, he used this artist’s rendering of the Starship…

Artists rendering of SpaceX’s Starship used by Space.com

However, this is what the actual craft looked like at the test site in January before the top blew off in the wind…

…and this is what it looked like after it fall down, go boom….

…and finally, this is what it looked like for this week’s tests:

A test of a Starship, or a silo with legs?

It’s understandable why the artist’s rendering was used and not images of the real thing. SpaceX didn’t even bother to put the top half of the Starship back on for the test.

Not an expert, but doesn’t that seem to be a wimpy propulsion system?

Close-ups of the bottom of the Starship would indicate that almost no effort was put into making this ‘prototype’ anything but a show for the public. From top to bottom this doesn’t look like anything that can get off the ground, which is may be why Space.com used an artist’s rendering.

Is Space.com Ignoring the Problems?

SpaceX has glaring problems and yet, Space.com has nothing but praise for the company. This week I wrote two articles detailing their problems (SpaceX’s Implosion and SpaceX 2019 Launch Schedule Realities] and yet, space-focused media outlets like Space.com seem to have a blind eye regarding the issues that seem to be obvious.

Among the issues that seem to be ignored are:

Hidden costs of relanding the boosters (30% fuel reserved for relanding reducing lift capacity, cost of boosters built for reentry and landing, cost of maintaining an ocean landing pad, costs of launch delays because of weather conditions at the ocean landing pad, cost of transportation of reused booster, costs of refurbishment of a booster, etc.)
Reduction of 10% of their workers when they should be expanding
Failure to test a Block 5 version of the Falcon Heavy before launching for a paying customer
A lack of progress on Dragon 2 and Falcon Heavy testing for most of 2018
Drastic reduction in 2019 launch schedule
Significantly underpricing the cost of a mission while apparently in a financial crisis
A silly prototype test of the SpaceX Starship
Overhyping an unmanned test of the Dragon 2 crew capsule that was essentially a mimic of a cargo delivery to the International Space Station (ISS)

Space.com: SpaceX’s Public Relations Team

Instead, Space.com publishes an unending series of articles that 1) sing praises of SpaceX, 2) seem to be expanded versions of a SpaceX public service announcement, and/or 3) are based on an Elon Musk Tweet. At times the articles cover the same topic as reported by another Space.com writer or sometimes the same writer will cover the same topic, only days apart.

Below is a list of articles that Space.com has published regarding SpaceX in the last 35 days:

Meet SpaceX’s Starship Hopper [Space.com 29 Mar 2019 – Lee Cavendish]
SpaceX’s Hexagon Tiles for Starship Heat Shield Pass Fiery Test [Space.com 22 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
You Can Watch SpaceX’s Starship Hopper Tests Live Via a South Texas Surf School [Space.com 22 Mar 2019 – Sarah Lewin]
SpaceX Preparing to Begin Starship Hopper Tests [Space.com 18 Mar 2019 – Jeff Foust]
SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Megarocket to Fly 1st Commercial Mission in April: Report [Space.com 18 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Demo-1 Test Flight in Pictures [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Hanneke Weitering]
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Looks Just Like a Toasted Marshmallow After Fiery Re-Entry [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
SpaceX Crew Dragon Splashes Down in Atlantic to Cap Historic Test Flight [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Success Heralds ‘New Era’ in Spaceflight [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Left Its ‘Little Earth’ Behind on Space Station [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Hanneke Weitering]
SpaceX Crew Dragon Re-Entry May Be Visible Over Some of Eastern US [Space.com 7 Mar 2019 – Joe Rao]
Astronauts Pack Up SpaceX’s Crew Dragon for Return to Earth [Space.com 7 Mar 2019 – Meghan Bartels]
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Homecoming Friday May Be Toughest Part of Its Mission [Space.com 6 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
VP Mike Pence Hails SpaceX Crew Dragon Success at Space Station [Space.com 6 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
‘Little Earth’ on SpaceX Crew Dragon Gives Boost to Celestial Buddies [Space.com 4 Mar 2019 – Robert Z. Pearlman]
New ‘Celestial Buddies’ Earth Plush Is Even Cooler than SpaceX’s ‘Zero-G Indicator’ [Space.com 4 Mar 2019 – Kasandra Brabaw]
SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Docks at Space Station for First Time [Space.com 3 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
Trump Hails SpaceX Crew Dragon Launch, Says NASA’s ‘Rocking Again’ [Space.com 3 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
SpaceX Adds Adorable ‘Zero-G Indicator’ Inside the Crew Dragon [Space.com 2 Mar 2019 – Hanneke Weitering]
Elon Musk Was Emotionally Wrecked by SpaceX’s 1st Crew Dragon Launch Success — But In A Good Way [Space.com 2 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
SpaceX Crew Dragon Launch Heralds ‘New Era in Spaceflight,’ NASA Chief Says [Space.com 2 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
With SpaceX and Boeing, Commercial Crew Launches Will Boost Space Station Science [Space.com 1 Mar 2019 – Meghan Bartels]
It’s Just About ‘Go’ Time for SpaceX’s 1st Crew Dragon Spaceship [Space.com 28 Feb 2019 – Tariq Malik]
SpaceX Is Launching a Spacesuit-Clad Dummy on 1st Crew Dragon [Space.com 27 Feb 2019 – Mike Wall]
NASA, SpaceX ‘Go’ for 1st Crew Dragon Test Flight on March 2 [Space.com 23 Feb 2019 – Mike Wall]

Why?

The question is why? Why do Space.com writers seem like they are part of a Soviet-style news agency? One reason is that perhaps they are just fans of SpaceX and Space.com has become a SpaceX fansite. Another possibility is that their access to information regarding SpaceX is conditional on cooperation with the company. It may be as simple as an article that is critical of SpaceX will result in he or she being blacklisted. Maybe the writers are enamored with and afraid of SpaceX at the same time.

Regardless, it would seem that Space.com is not a reliable source of unbiased information. In 2003, Space.com won an award from the Online Journalism Association for coverage of the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. That was over 15 years ago. Maybe they haven’t won another award because they actually have to do journalism to be considered.

SpaceX 2019 Launch Schedule Realities

28 Thursday Mar 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Communism, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Government, Management Practices, Marketing, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Soviet Russia, Space, SpaceX, Technology, The Tipping Point, United States, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Boeing, cargo, commercial space, Dragon 2, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, human-rated, International Space Station, manned space program, Russia Space Program, Soviet space program, Space, space business, space flight, Space Program, Space Station, spacecraft, SpaceX, Starliner

SpaceX Retreating Launch Schedule

SpaceX has had three successful launches so far this year. The problem is that one launch per month is a major retreat from the 21 launches it had in 2018. Looking forward, SpaceX next three quarters will not improve. Based on the available information they will only attempt ten more launches before the end of the year.

[NOTE: This is a follow-up story to Tuesday’s article – SpaceX Implosion]

The One and Only: The 1st and last Falcon Heavy launch one year ago

Soviet Style Space Program…Everything is on a Need To Know Basis

Much like to old Soviet Space program, SpaceX avoids making public announcements regarding its launch plans. On its website, SpaceX lists the contracts it has by the customer or satellite name in alphabetical order but doesn’t give a date or time for the launch. Most of the information on SpaceX launches is derived from secondary sources and legally required filings. Here is a list of what is known about the rest of the 2019 SpaceX schedule:

ªNL – Launch not likely in 2019.
¹The original target date for launch.
²Author’s best estimate of the likelihood of launch on that day, or during that time period based on multiple sources.
³Launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

[Primary Source: Spaceflight Now Secondary Sources: Wikipedia, RocketLaunch.live, NASA, Brian Webb]

Based on multiple sources, four of these launches are unlikely to occur in 2019. The Starlink flight [14 May] has disappeared from most launch schedule websites. This is a program that would seem to be the lowest priority and would add more expense to SpaceX with little or no revenue in return.

There are some reports that the late June Dragon 2 abort test flight is being pushed back and that the 25 July Dragon 2 test flight with a crew will be no earlier than November at the earliest. This would make the first Dragon 2 delivery of a crew to ISS unlikely until 2020. [Source: TASS 22 Mar 2019] Comments from the unnamed space representative said that the Dragon 2 parachute system would have to be replaced. If true, the launch abort test in June could be significantly delayed and the crew test would hang in the balance of a completely new parachute system, making the crew test unlikely even by November.

Finally, the Sirius Radio Satellite schedule for the 4th quarter of 2019 would seem unlikely based on the flights being pushed back or already scheduled in the 4th quarter.

Falcon Heavy Headaches

Another major issue in the SpaceX schedule is the second Falcon Heavy flight now scheduled for June. Everything would have to go perfectly on the 7 April Falcon Heavy flight for any chance of meeting the planned June flight as two of the three boosters on the April flight are to be reused for June flight. Any issues with the two side boosters in April would require SpaceX to find a replacement booster(s.) It is questionable if SpaceX has any Block 5 boosters to spare.

In addition, the launch pad has to be configured for a Falcon Heavy launch and then reconfigured for a normal Falcon 9 launch. That means weeks of extra work between launches that render the pad useless.

Dragon 2 Human-Rating Race

SpaceX has had an advantage in the race to provide a human-rated space capsule. It already has a cargo capsule that is already operational for unmanned flights to and from the International Space Station (ISS.) Since the crewed Dragon 2 capsule will be under autopilot as its default, the basic spacecraft needed little conversion to fly its first test mission to ISS and back.

Dragon 2 Cargo Capsule – already flying

Many looked at this month’s [2 March 2019] Dragon 2 test flight as a major milestone; however, it really was a cargo flight with seats, a dummy, and an Earth-shaped plush toy. It really proved little about the human-rating of the capsule, but it was a big show for SpaceX.

Dragon 2 Crew Capsule – take out the cargo, add seats and touchscreens

The reason that it’s significant that Russia news agencies are reporting a major delay in Dragon 2 testing is that Russia would have to be contracted to provide ISS crew flights if the United States doesn’t have a human-rated capsule by the end of this year. Since SpaceX doesn’t usually report problems in their space program to the United States media, the first report of the schedule being significantly pushed back would likely come from Russia.

If it is true that SpaceX can’t launch the first crewed test until 2020, it would be devastating to its Dragon 2 program and open the door for Boeing’s Starliner to be tested and rated by the end of this year.

What’s SpaceX’s Problem?

SpaceX seems to be in financial trouble. The ten percent reduction in the staff indicates a severe cash flow problem. The 40% reduction in the launch schedule would indicate the financial issues are more severe than they would publicly acknowledge.

2018 was a year of primarily paying the bills with commercial launches. That may have actually cost SpaceX in the long term. Now they are in a heated race with Boeing to win the crew capsule business and because they only have one test launch of the Falcon Heavy they didn’t land the military contracts they desperately need. Now they are trying to prove that the Falcon Heavy is reliable with two launches in three months. SpaceX fans applaud the company on its brilliant strategy but this year their strategy isn’t working.

Nevada Democratic Primary State and Federal Choices

26 Saturday May 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Conservatives, Economy, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Gun control, Higher Education, Honor, jobs, Life, Nevada, Opinion, Passionate People, Politicians, Politics, Reno, Republic, Second Amendment, Taxes, Universities, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2018, Democrat, Democratic primary, federal, Nevada, Primaries, Primary, state

Early voting in Nevada’s 2018 Primary begins today. Because Republicans have damaged themselves severely in attempting to create a Soviet-type government, some conservatives have shifted to the Democratic party in order to be elected. This makes the Nevada primary more critical than the General election, as the Democratic Primary nominee is likely to win.

Casinos and mining industries are heavy contributors in Nevada elections and an informed voter will note that any candidate that has a well-funded campaign is possibly being propped up by those special interests. In this Primary, there are several candidates that seem to have an unusual amount of money to spend.

Based on my research, here is who I’m voting for in the Nevada Democratic Primary for Federal and State offices, and why:

Governor of Nevada

MY VOTE: Christina ‘Chris G.’ Giunchigliani

Casinos and mining have managed to control the Governor’s race for at least the last twelve years. Jim Gibbons and Brian Sandoval have been noted to follow an agenda that has favored those industries over the needs of the citizens of Nevada. This year, the two candidates for Governor that seem to have the nod of casinos and mining are Republican Adam Laxalt and alleged Democrat Steve Sisolak. If Sisolak wins the Democratic primary, Nevada will end up being the stooge of those two industries.

The only plausible candidate is Christina ‘Chris G.’ Giunchigliani. She has a consistent record of Democratic ideals as opposed to Steve Sisolak who has suddenly become a champion of a few Democratic issues. Sisolak has a reputation of being arrogant, unintelligent, and Trump-like in his behavior. He is the ideal candidate that casino overlord Sheldon Adelson would want as his errand boy.

Candidate Chris G for Nevada Governor

All other Democratic candidates lack the support to win in the General election.

U.S. Senate

MY VOTE: Jacky Rosen

Why not Danny Burleigh? Impotent campaign.

Why not David Drew Knight? He wants more vocational training in public schools. We don’t need to spend more public money to train workers for businesses. Businesses should train their own workers through internships where workers are paid to learn to do the job instead of taxpayers and workers paying for their own industry-specific training.

Why not Sujeet ‘Bobby’ Mahendra? Ignorance. Mahendra wants to reduce corporate and personal taxes in a State that doesn’t have corporate tax and income tax, but has one of the highest rates of violent crime in the U.S. and the worst education system in the U.S. Mahendra is a Soviet Republican running as a Democrat.

Why not Allen Rheinhart? Wants to join with Russia in a fight against fake Islamists? WTF?

Why not Jesse Sbaih? He would be my second choice, but he is inexperienced and would be a weak candidate against the incumbent Soviet Republican Dean Heller.

I have some issues with Jacky Rosen. One red flag is the award she received from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. That organization has devolved into an extreme right-wing organization, and any recognition by them is not good.

However, she is likely to defeat Heller and she is the best choice of the field.

U.S. House of Representatives District 2

MY VOTE: Rick Shephard

Why not Dr. Vance Alm? Weak campaign.

Why not Patrick Fogarty? I like his positions on the issues, but I don’t see him as a strong candidate in the General election.

Why not Jesse Douglas Hurley? Impotent campaign.

Why not Clint Koble? He would be my second choice because of his stance on issues and work with rural communities.

Why not Jack L. Schofield, Jr.? Impotent campaign.

Why Rick Shepherd? Shepherd is passionate about many issues. In everything I read, I couldn’t find any issue with which I significantly disagreed. We need a passionate Democrat to contrast the Good Ole Boy Republican Mark Amodei.

Lieutenant Governor

MY VOTE: Kate Marshall

Why not Laurie L. Hansen? Impotent campaign.

Why Kate Marshall? Experience, dedication to Nevada, and intelligence.

Attorney General

MY VOTE: Aaron Ford

Why not Stuart J. MacKie? Impotent campaign.

Why Aaron Ford? Only logical choice and has the experience for the job.

State Assembly District 24

MY VOTE: Sarah Peters

Why not Edward Coleman? I believe Sarah Peters demonstrates a stronger passion, which I feel is important in battling Republican bullying; however, Coleman seems to be qualified and a strong alternative.

Why not Deonne Contine? There are two issues I have with Deonne that concern me. First, she doesn’t have her children in a public school. I’m not criticizing the personal choice of education for her children, but we need an advocate for public schools and Brian Sandoval has demonstrated that when you don’t have your own children in public school it is easier to cut public school budgets.

My second issue is the funding of her campaign. She seems to have a lot of money to spend, which makes me concerned as to who is pulling the strings in her campaign.

Why not Tom Stewart? Again, the key for me is a passion to move forward and Stewart’s campaign seems a little generic to me.

Why Sarah Peters? I feel Peters has a desire to call out bad decisions and she seems highly intelligent in her assessment of key public issues.

Hot Tub “Make It Work Project” Video

24 Thursday May 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Do It Yourself, Ethics, Honor, Life, Make It Work, Management Practices, Marketing, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, Recreation, Respect, selling, Technology, Water

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Balboa Water Group, control pad, controller, DIY, Do It Yourself, heat, heater, home repair, Hot Tub, motor, pump, pumps, Spa

Make It Work: Hot Tub Repair

With a background and a degree in theatre, as well as years of home projects, I often have encountered “make it work” situations. My experiences in electrical and plumbing have allowed me to undertake projects that I would have never attempted as a young man.

A “Make It Work” project is a significant repair or build that is not done by a professional, nor done with a major budget. It is a project that involves adaptation and usually requires resolving several issues that are not part of the standard procedure.

I just completed a major repair on our hot tub (spa) and created a video that records the steps taken to replace several worn out key components.

Balboa Water Group: The Customer is the Enemy

The most significant challenge of this project was the anti-customer relations of the Balboa Water Group. Balboa was the company that made the controller that failed and the replacement. Their philosophy of support is to only deal with spa technicians and shun customers.

That philosophy is understandable as spa technicians require less interaction in troubleshooting a problem because of the technician’s familiarity with hot tubs. Customers require more explanation and are more time consuming. Because of the plumbing and electrical issues associated with a hot tub, most people rely on a professional technician to deal with any spa problems.

However, the customer is the person that actually purchases the product (one way or another) and the company should have some accountability to the customer. Balboa tech support is so anti-customer, the phone maze actually hangs up on the customer once the person identifies themselves as a customer, not a technician.

Fortunately, they will take emails from a customer, and tech support called me almost immediately after I sent an email, but the attitude of the support person was that I needed to hire a professional. He did give me enough information that I was able to know what to test, but he was elusive in giving me direct answers to my questions.

Their lack of cooperation and the confusing electrical design of the Balboa control board was responsible for about one-quarter of the time involved on this project.

Starbucks: The Adults In the Business World

18 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Discrimination, Employee Retention, Ethics, Honor, Human Resources, labor, Lessons of Life, Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Social Media Relations

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

CEO, employee relations, Kevin Johnson, Philadelphia, racism, Starbucks, United Airlines

When you have with 238,000 employees, most of whom interact with the public all day, someone is going to do something stupid. That is a fact of human nature. The question is, how the leadership of a company deals with an incident? In the case of Starbucks, you be the adult and not the five-year-old.

Racists Don’t Think They’re Racist

Racism is a major problem in this country. Racists usually don’t know they are a racist. In their minds, they do what they think is ‘natural’ from their cultural perspective. What is natural is what is correct. This means most racists are in the bigot closet and don’t even know it.

There is no racism test for an employer to give a job applicant. If there were, a lot of people would be unemployable. Closet racists are going to be hired at all major corporations. Sometimes, like at Cracker Barrel, the racism is condoned by the employer; however, most companies avoid hiring overtly racists employees. At least that’s what they claim.

Regardless, when an employee does something that is racist, many executives will attempt to minimize the incident, or attempt to deny the issue was about race. The public relations (PR) people are experts at diluting the obvious by reminding the media that motivations can’t be proven. From a PR perspective, a company, like United Airlines, can do no wrong, even when it does something wrong.

Starbucks Policy of Responsibility

The leadership at Starbucks is probably not perfect, but at least they make every attempt to be aware of what is correct from what is wrong. That is why Kevin Johnson, the CEO of Starbucks wasted no time in responding to one of his employees calling the police on two African Americans for trespassing in a Starbucks when they didn’t purchase something in the store.

In this incident is noteworthy that at least six officers were present to arrest two non-combative African American males. It was overkill that the police were called, and overkill that six police responded. If a white man had robbed the Starbucks it is likely that it wouldn’t have had this response.

The victims of this incident were held for over eight hours after being arrested. They were released after the police admitted they had no crime to with which to charge them.

What Starbucks Didn’t Do

Johnson didn’t offer excuses for his company. He didn’t say the video doesn’t really tell the whole story. The CEO didn’t even hint that it might not have been a racist act.

Instead, Johnson offered apology after apology. Johnson met directly with the men involved. He called the act “reprehensible.” It is unclear what happened to the employee in question, but the employee is no longer at that store.

Most companies today look like children trying to cover up their misbehavior after a public relations incident such as this one. It is good to know that Starbucks is capable of using common sense and decency in responding to this situation.

Sadly, the rest of the employees at Starbucks will be impacted by this one person’s act. We all pay for the bad behavior of others.

Hey, Small Hands. Don’t Screw With the U.S. Postal Service

14 Saturday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, jobs, labor, Management Practices, Nevada, Panama, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Reno, Russian influence, Taxes, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Amazon, delivery, Donald Trump, FedEx, Jeff Bezos, mail, Post Office, U.S. Postal Service, UPS, Washington Post

Republican Head Witch Donald Trump is doing his Kylo Ren tantrum by attacking the U.S. Postal Service for revenge. He’s mad at Amazon’s CEO Jeff Bezos because of fact-based articles about him in the Washington Post. I know, it’s confusing and silly, but aren’t most temper tantrums? The problem is that Trump is threatening to screw up a great service for our country because he has the maturity of a three-year-old.

Much Ado About the U.S. Postal Service

Trump is attacking the U.S. Postal Service because it gives a volume discount to Amazon on shipping its products to its customers. The partnership gives the Post Office vital business income and forces it to be more efficient. Amazon gets better shipping fees that help reduce the cost to its customers, and a delivery service that can handle the volume of packages it ships.

Home Delivery: What Makes the United States Great

Jeff Bezos owns both Amazon and the Washington Post, so in Trump’s little mind attacking the Post Office is a way to attack Amazon, which is a way to attack Jeff Bezos, which is a way to attack the Washington Post. Yes, Trump is really that immature.

While we are on the subject, it is reported that the U.S. Post Office will lose $1.50 on average for each package it delivers for Amazon. That amounts to Billions of Dollars. The Failing N.Y. Times reports that “the size of the company’s lobbying staff has ballooned,” and that…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 31, 2018

Don’t Screw With a Good Thing

What many citizens may not realize that while the U.S. Postal Service doesn’t break even, it is vital to our country. Most importantly is the security it gives us in sending letters and parcels around the country. In the USA, we take it for granted and become really upset on the rare occasions our mail is lost. That is not the case in many countries.

A person can’t send a letter to someone in Panama and expect it to be delivered. If it is a package, it will almost never be delivered. It takes a very organized, very committed postal service to keep the integrity of delivery that we have in the United States. We trust that we can give something to a stranger and it will arrive at its destination in a reasonable amount of time. That is the exception in the world, not the rule.

The U.S. Postal Service also employees over half a million people in jobs that pay a living wage in communities small and large. For the service we receive, we also have half a million people not looking for a decent job. That has a major impact on our economy.

What About the Alternative Services?

FedEx and UPS have been good competitors with the U.S. Postal Service, but they don’t replace the mail carrier. They even have partnerships with the Post Office to that allow them to focus on more profitable business. They pass off less profitable package delivery that requires more service, such as some residential deliveries with more stops.

Let’s keep the investigations of things that don’t work to the people and services that really have problems…like Donald Trump.

Employee Ownership? Does Business USA Own Its Employees?

11 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Donald Trump, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, labor, Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Reno, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, United States, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

13th Amendment, Akima, Business, company, corporations, Donald Trump, Employee, employee ownership, employee relations, Employer, flipping the bird, indentured servitude, Juli Briskman, quid pro quo, slavery

Employee Ownership?

It was a chance encounter. Juli Briskman was out riding her bike on a Saturday in October. Trump was just leaving from playing another round of golf. Trump’s motorcade passed Briskman and she saluted the Resident of the White House with her middle finger. Had a photographer not caught the act it would have just been another typical day. This day, it would get Briskman fired. The company’s position: it owns its employees.

Trump’s Single Digit Approval Rating

Quid Pro Quo

It’s important to note that Briskman was not identified in the photo, nor could she be identified as the photographer was behind her. She voluntarily told her company that she was the one in the photo. The company then fired her.

Employment is a quid pro quo environment. An employer agrees to pay compensation and benefits in return for certain specific tasks and responsibilities. Employment is not servitude, nor does it allow an employer to govern the employee’s actions 24/7/365. The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States forbids indentured servitude along with slavery.

In the social media age, businesses have attempted to expand their authority over employees and govern hu’s (her/his) non-work activities. The problem is that if a company is allowed to govern free speech outside of the work environment they are essentially making a demand on an employee’s time, expression, and choice without compensation. Again, employment is a Quid Pro Quo environment and both parties must agree to the terms of what is offered in return for compensation and benefits.

Is the Reverse True?

The test of this situation is to reverse it. If the company can claim it can govern employee behavior during non-work hours for no pay, does that mean all employee non-work activity is a liability for the company? If an employee kills someone, can the victim’s family sue the company? The point is that a company cannot arbitrarily decide what non-work activities it governs. If it governs some non-work activities, shouldn’t the company assume responsibility for all non-work activities?

The reality is that business has failed to be reasonable in its limitations on employee rules and policies. It is now time to reestablish that quid pro quo relationship and stop attempting to ignore the 13th Amendment.

My First and Final (gulp) Imaginary Interview With Terry Gross

05 Thursday Apr 2018

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Don Gonyea, Fresh Air, interview, Kai Ryssdal, npr, Steve Inskeep, Terry Gross, WHYY

[NOTE: 5 April 2038. This imaginary interview with Fresh Air’s host Terry Gross took place in the cafeteria at the National Public Radio (NPR) Senior Care Facility in Washington, D.C., about five blocks from the NPR headquarters.]

Fresh Air’s Terry Gross, 1987

Interview with Terry Gross: Part I

Me: This is a special guest-host edition of Fresh Air. My guest today is Terry Gross. She has been on radio for 65 years. For over six decades she has been the host of this weekday interview show produced by WHYY in Philadelphia and aired across the nation through National Public Radio stations. She has a degree in English, and a Masters degree in Communication. Among her many honors are a Peabody Award, an Edward R. Murrow Award, a Columbia Journalism Award, a 2015 National Humanities Award, and in 2012 she was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame. Terry, thank you for allowing me the honor of guest hosting your show, and the honor of interviewing you.

Terry: You’re welcome.

Me: You have had a front row seat to the some of the most influential and creative people for over sixty years. Does it ever become boring?

Terry: Not usually. There is a routine we follow, but each interview is a potential Pandora’s box. We never know what we’ll find until we start talking to the guest. It keeps things edgy.

Me: You could have retired decades ago. What has kept you going?

Terry: A lack of a retirement program. It’s public radio, not “Who Wants To Be A Millionaire.”

[Me: Pause.]

Me: So you keep working for a paycheck?

Terry: Not a paycheck. I get to stay here. Woo-hoo.

Me: I should tell our listeners, that by ‘here’ you mean the NPR Senior Care Facility.

Terry: Again, woo-hoo. Look over there. That’s Steve Inskeep eating his oatmeal. They still wheel him over to NPR six days a week.

Me: To record NPR’s Morning Edition.

Terry: And to clean the bathrooms…and he’s talking to Cokie Roberts. She’s probably explaining to Steve once again why he can’t have prunes in his oatmeal and prune juice. Here, you get one or the other, not both. That man at that table is Kai Ryssdal. He’s so hot. Oh, and over by the coffee machine is Don Gonyea….oh, wait, he’s trying to snort the artificial sweetener again. Excuse me.

Interview with Terry Gross: Part II

Me: We’re back talking to the host of Fresh Air, Terry Gross. Is Don okay?

Terry: He’ll be fine. We’ve told them that they can’t keep the artificial sweetener by the coffee. He finds them every time. Now, where were we?

Me: I think we were talking about your amazing history on the radio. You have connections to generations of well-known people. How do you keep finding the next ‘Tom Hanks.’

Terry: It’s not that difficult. After so many years, people come to you. You can usually tell they want to be on the show when they start inviting you to their parties.

Me: But isn’t it exhausting to come up with high-quality interviews every weekday?

Terry: Not really. We get at least two shows after each interview.

Me: You mean re-airing the interview with the person releases a new book or movie?

Terry: Yes, that, and when they die. We discovered long ago that the interview has a bigger audience just after they die.

Me: Does that make an original interview less meaningful knowing that it will have a smaller audience, than after the person dies?

Terry: Of course. But it means my show is easy the day after they’ve died. A little intro. A few edits. Bingo, new show. We call the first interview premorties and the final broadcast postmorties. Premorties is the salad, Postmorties is the entree and dessert.

Me: Uhm…I see. Lately, it seems that most of your shows are postmorties.

Terry: Yes. We’ve changed our strategy in the last few years. Now we do the interview just for the postmorties. We interview, he or she dies, we broadcast.

Me: But what about days when no one significant has died?

Terry: We have a guy.

Me: What do you mean?

Terry: Have you ever noticed that a celebrity dies almost every day except Fridays and Saturdays?

[Me: Choking a little.]

Me: You don’t…

Terry: Yes, we do.

Me: So this interview…

Terry: You’re a postmortie. You didn’t really think you were important enough for me to have on my show.

Me: I’m going to …die?

Terry: Spectacularly. It will be a self-driving car hit by California’s high-speed train. We’re trying to get a Tesla, but they’re really hard to find. Jay Leno used to have one, but it caught on fire. I was hoping we could have you also hit by that Tesla Roadster SpaceX launched twenty years ago, but they said the orbit was all wrong.

Me: oh…that would have been nice…I guess. I think I should head home now.

Terry: Sure, but be careful. Don’t do anything dangerous before Tuesday.

Me: okay.

The Dichotomy of Small Towns: Good People, Small Minds

04 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, College, Communication, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Education, Generational, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, jobs, Lessons of Life, Life, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Reno, Small town, Travel, United States, Universities, US History, Voting

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

aging, CO, confirmation bias, Craig, groupthink, Music Man, Roosevelt, small town life, Small towns, UT

Small communities are two kinds of special. A small community can be a place of good people who would do anything for each other and will help out a stranger if needed. They also can have a darker side of illegal activities, whispered gossip of secret knowledge, and a narrow view of the rest of the world. It is the Jeckle and Hyde personality of a small town that is never discussed, but almost always there.

Small towns: The Pretty

Ruts of a Small Town

Change happens in small towns, but it often follows a counterintuitive logic. If the change is rational, involving a relatively workable plan of implementation, it is often viciously opposed by some people in the community. If the change is a Music Man-type (see video clip below) change consisting of unproven goals with lofty promises, a small community often embraces it.

Small towns. The Ugly

What that means is that small communities often don’t change significantly over time. The ‘BIG’ change that is going to reinvent the community typically falls flat. That results if a fear of change. Without change, life becomes a rut that everyone falls into.

Aging and Small Towns: The ‘Comfort Zone’

Growing up in a small town is an interesting window into human development. Ask high school students what they want to do when they graduate and often the response is, “Get out of this hick town as fast as possible.” Small towns often don’t have enough jobs for high school graduating classes. College is often the best way for children to break out of the small town cycle.

But even those who go off to college sometimes return because there is a ‘comfort zone’ in living where hu grew up. As people grow older, the desire to ‘get out of Dodge’ is replaced with the fear of living somewhere else. That fear is eventually replaced by an intense loyalty to small-town life. Usually, older the person, the more defensive they are about living in a small town.

Small Towns and Confirmation Bias

In a small town, everyone knows everyone. As people age, they have a select few friends that they have significant contact. In some cases, daily contact. Unlike cities, people in small towns may see the same people at work, at school, at the grocery store, at church, etc. This immersion with other people creates intimate friendships that are as close, possibly closer, than marriage relationships.

People in small towns have limited experiences with people outside of their community and intimate friendships. They tend to develop a groupthink about the world and people outside their community. When all your close friends have the same lack of knowledge and experience with the rest of the world, people are exposed to ‘confirmation bias.’ This bias occurs when friends confirm a person’s beliefs, and other information that might counter those beliefs are ignored or unknown by the group.

Typically, confirmation bias fosters negative attitudes about people who are not like them. That leads to a conservative mindset that is easily exploited. It is not a coincidence that rural environments are ripe for politically conservative influence because they focus on telling rural communities exactly what they want to hear.

Small Town Black Holes

All of this is a generalization of small town people. To be fair, problems of larger communities, such as traffic, noise, pollution, homelessness, etc. are not the ideals of any community; however, small towns have an environment that generates the same patterns over and over. Children in a small town will often grow up to be like hu’s parents. People living in a marginal society disjoined from the world.

Novice Directors Make Theatre Painful

29 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, All Rights Reserved, College, Communication, Directing, Education, Entertainment, Higher Education, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Pride, Random, Recreation, Reno, Theatre

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

BFA Theatre, Blocking, Directing, give focus, lighting design, Plays, scene changes, set design, Shakespeare, take focus, technical theatre, Theatre, William Shakespeare

For five years we ran a small theatre company. Between children plays and main stage adult plays we produced up to twelve shows a year. I had a BFA in Techincal Theatre; however, the experience as a teacher, director, technical director, actor, and executive director forced me to quickly improve all my skills.

Church and School Plays: How to teach young people to hate theatre

The Theatre Director’s Curse

I’m embarrassed to say how bad our first productions were but my skills I did improve over time. Now, I find watching a play is a constant effort to try and enjoy the action of the stage while suppressing my analysis of the work of the director. I deliberately avoid attending plays because I often can’t enjoy what is happening on stage.

My worst experience as an audience member was when I saw King Lear in Stratford-upon-Avon on a theatre tour in England. A Japanese director had violated several basic responsibilities of staging. While his work had been given high praise by many, I found myself looking for a nice pub after intermission.

What Not To Do

Here are some basic mistakes of novice directors:

Chaotic Blocking

An audience member cannot focus on the entire stage at once. It is the job of the director to guide the audience’s attention. Normally that is to the person talking, but it also includes key actions that give the audience information nonverbally. Blocking is the term used to describe how the director uses the movements of the actors to give focus (release the audience’s attention) and take focus (draw the audience’s focus.)

No movement on stage should be unplanned. If an actor is wandering aimlessly on the stage it is the director’s failure to give clear guidance to the actor. Blocking also requires that a director knows at least five ways for an actor to give and take focus. If they don’t know this, the audience will miss keys lines and action that establish the story.

Plodding Scene Changes

OH…MY…GOD! Any scene change that takes more than ten seconds is a failure. The play is a story and the scene change has NOTHING to do with the story. It actually breaks the concentration of the audience and the actors. The scene change is choreography. Everything must be rehearsed over and over with the lights down. Once the scene change is perfected, it must happen exactly the same way every time.

Bad Actor Management

During the rehearsal process, the director will begin to notice which actors may not be capable of handling their role. It is the job of the director to manage the actors and address performance issues. The director must either coach the actor, cut lines, transfer lines, or take other action to resolve the issue. A bad performance is the director’s fault.

Over Designing the Show

Scenic, costume, and lighting design enhance the play. They do not tell the story, and they can often be distracting. Actors are the alpha and omega of a play. Light them, dress them, surround them with a set to perform on, but never forget that a great actor can play a character on a bare stage, with a candle, in hu’s* underwear.

Journalism Ethics: Interviewing the Reporter As a News Source

27 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Donald Trump, Entertainment, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Journalism, Language, Opinion, Politicians, Politics, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Republic, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, Website, Wordpress, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

community relations, Facebook, investors, journalism standards, journalistic ethics, journalists, local news., local tv news, media companies, media organizations, Newspapers, PR, Public Relations, reporters, Standards

News organizations have not evolved as much as they have devolved over the last sixty years. Journalism ethics have suffered the greatest. The priority in news organizations has shifted from high journalistic standards to gaining market share. The news anchor or primary news host now use the reporter as hu’s* news source.

I can't match the anchor's name to any of the CNN faces online

CNN news anchor interview CNN reporter Matt Rivers

How Did We Get Here?

Originally, the news reporter job was to gather the facts, confirm the facts, and organize the facts into a story. The myth of Superman’s girlfriend getting the scoop and landing a Page One, Pulitzer Prize article wasn’t how it really happened.

Good journalism was the verification of the facts, careful research, and exposing lies. In the end, the reporter’s name was the byline, not the storyline. Reporters needed the attention to detail of an accountant, the interrogation skill of a great attorney, the ethics of a great judge, and the knowledge of a college professor, in addition to the ability to write a compelling story.

But when investors began buying up news organizations, money became the priority over journalism standards. Advancement was based who could attract a bigger audience. Women were brought into the newsroom, but the motivation was ratings, not equality. Money flowed to those that could produce shock and awe. The young, idealistic journalism graduate discovered that a reporter was underpaid, overworked, and disrespected.

And while the journalism standards fell, the news source wall went up. Organizations created ‘public relations’ experts to ‘control the message.’ Now a reporter is the person between the news organization looking for ratings and the news source that wants to be a shining star.

Corporate Public Relations Mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak

Not every company believes in lying to the public, but it does seem the bigger they are, the less responsive they are willing to be. The most recent major incident is Facebook’s initial response to the data of 50 million users being collected by conservatives connected to the Donald Trump campaign.

After the story broke on Saturday 17 March, Facebook ran silent for days before issuing any response. Journalists that attempted to obtain information and/or a response were ignored. Major headlines were running about the data breach and Facebook was on lockdown.

Corporate PR has made the company the least likely source of accurate, reliable, and/or truthful information. So now the reporter digs up whatever information they can and becomes the ‘expert.’ The news anchor often interviews the reporter as the sole news source because no one else will talk.

The problem with this is that the reporter can’t speak with authority. They are not privy to the inside information so they can only offer hu’s opinion. That changes journalism into gossip and guessing. No one can be sure of anything because no one knows the truth. That leaves it up to the individual to accept what they want to hear and reject what they don’t want to hear. That is never good for a democracy.

[*Hu’s is a gender neutral pronoun for his or her.]

The Sad Life of a Russian Troll (Печальная жизнь русского тролля)

26 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Donald Trump, Economy, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, labor, Language, Life, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Random, Respect, Russian influence, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Technology, Travel, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Voting, Website, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

fake identities, fake news, GOP, Russia, Russian, Russian Troll Farms, Soviets, Troll Farms, Trumpsters, USSR, Vladimir Putin, Web Brigade

It is a statement of life in Russia when one of the best jobs to be had is employment to write fake news stories, deceive people, and attempt to create chaos in other countries. Russian Troll Farms, or Web Brigades, as they refer to themselves, tell us more about Russian life, than about Western gullibility. What follows is my own fake story of an interview with a Russian Troll.

Troll – a mythical creature in folklore living in caves or hills or under bridges as either a giant or a dwarf, typically having a very ugly appearance.

Living Large in Russia: Condos in St. Petersburg

Interview With A Russian Troll

[NOTE: Some language may be inappropriate for young readers.]

Interviewer: What’s your job? (Кем вы работаете?)

Russian Troll: I learned to speak English so I could be paid to agitate and influence people in the United States to vote for politicians like we have in Russia. (Я научился говорить по-английски, чтобы мне могли заплатить за то, чтобы агитировать и влиять на людей в Соединенных Штатах, чтобы голосовать за таких политиков, как у нас в России.)

Interviewer: How does that help Russia? (Как это помогает России?)

Russian Troll: It doesn’t, but it makes the Americans suffer like we have to suffer in this shithole country. (Это не так, но это заставляет американцев страдать, как мы должны страдать в этой стране.)

Interviewer: Why do you do it? (Почему ты это делаешь?)

Russian Troll: I live in Russia. How else can I pay the bills? (Я живу в России. Как еще я могу оплатить счета?)

Interviewer: The economy of the United States drives the economy of the rest of the world. If you’re successful, aren’t you afraid of a worldwide economic disaster? (Экономика Соединенных Штатов стимулирует экономику остального мира. Если вы добились успеха, разве вы не боитесь мировой экономической катастрофы?)

[Language warning]

Russian Troll: Don’t tell me about disaster until you’ve seen the crappy place where I live in the middle of winter. Fuck the Americans. Fuck the rest of the world. They all celebrated when Americans landed on the Moon. They all celebrated when the Berlin Wall fell. Fuck them! (Не говори мне о бедствии, пока не увидишь дерьмовое место, где я живу в середине зимы. Ебать американцев. Трахайте весь остальной мир. Все они отмечали, когда американцы высадились на Луну. Все они праздновали, когда упала Берлинская стена. Трахайте их!)

Interviewer: What about your children? How will your work help them? (Как насчет ваших детей? Как ваша работа поможет им?)

Russian Troll: Who cares? Did anyone care about me when I was a child? For the last twenty years no one cares, so why should I care? (Какая разница? Кто-нибудь заботился обо мне, когда я был ребенком? За последние двадцать лет никто не заботится, так зачем мне это волновать?)

Interviewer: You mean the last twenty years when Vladimir Putin has led your country? (Вы имеете в виду последние двадцать лет, когда Владимир Путин привел вашу страну?)

Russian Troll: Exactly!…No, wait. YOU TRICK ME! (Quickly looks around) No, Putin has been good. I mean Putin has been great. Great! Putin is a great leader! (Точно! .. Нет, подожди. ВЫ ТРЕТЬЕ МЕНЯ! Нет, Путин был хорош. Я имею в виду, что Путин был замечательным. Большой! Путин – великий лидер!)

Interviewer: What does a Russian troll do after they leave the Farm? (Что делает русский тролль после ухода из фермы?)

Russian Troll: First of all, we are not a Troll Farm. We are a Web Brigade! We fight a war against the Free Countries of the World! We will bring them to their knees! Second, when I finish here I will be rich! I will never have to work again! I will move to America and be a…how you say,…big?, BIG, yes?, I will be a big man! You will know me by my shiny red sports car! (Прежде всего, мы не Ферма Троллей. Мы – веб-бригада! Мы ведем войну против Свободных стран мира! Мы поставим их на колени! Во-вторых, когда я закончу здесь, я буду богат! Мне больше никогда не придется работать! Я перееду в Америку и буду … как вы говорите, … большой?, БОЛЬШОЙ, да ?, Я буду большим человеком! Ты узнаешь меня своим блестящим красным спортивным автомобилем!)

GOP Disease: Say It, Then Apologize

23 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Assault Weapons, Communication, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Gun control, Gun Extremists, habits, Honor, Information Technology, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, racism, Respect, Russian influence, Second Amendment, Social Media Relations, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Carl B. Nett, character, CIA, Donald Trump, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, Kentucky, NRA, Secret Service, Secretary of State, Tweet, Twitter, United States, values, Violence

Republicans have a consistent problem. They first say what they are thinking…and then they apologize for it. It’s the GOP disease. In incident after incident a Republican office holder, or a Republican candidate will say something that is completely inappropriate and then smirk. They are proud of it. Then when it becomes national news, they suddenly grow a conscience and apologize for the remark…some of the time.

Former CIA Turned GOP Candidate Jokes About Killing Opponent

The most recent incident to make national news is when a Republican candidate for Kentucky’s Secretary of State, Carl B. Nett, office suggested in a tweet that he could use an anti-NRA pin for a target if his opponent would move the pin closer to the center of his body.

The tweet itself is disturbing. What is more disturbing is that Nett is a former CIA and Secret Service agent. He was one of the people that our country entrusted with the use of deadly force because he supposedly was trained to control his impulses. As a former agent, the expectation is that he knows that killing someone is not a joking matter.

Nett has caused the world to question the training and discipline of our country’s CIA and Secret Service agents. He has made all of them look like cowboys out for a party with little or no self-control.

Trump As A Model

Donald Trump has been the model for Republicans in breaching intellectual and civil boundaries of behavior with his practice of saying anything that comes to his mind. Trump reveals his inner thoughts and expresses them in a diarrhea-type flow of violent, subhuman, and racist comments.

Unfortunately, Trumpsters love Trump because he says what they are thinking. That, in itself, is also disturbing.

Qualifications To Be a Public Servant

When someone says what they think, that is honesty. Honesty is good; however, when honesty reveals that the person is of a vile nature, they are not qualified to be a citizen of this country, let alone elected to public office. An apology is not the measure of a person. The person is measured by hu’s* actions.

Nett’s apology was a self-serving statement that he’s just a normal human:

I now join the long list of imperfect human beings with “foot-in-mouth” disease. Once again, I apologize to Congressman Yarmuth and his family and ask for their forgiveness.

— Carl B. Nett (@realCarlNett) March 20, 2018

Nett is not a normal human. Hu is representative of the nature and character of the Republican party. Hu’s values are Putin-like values that belong to a society of corruption and terror. We don’t need the excuses of people who can’t respect the ideals our country. We need people of character. Republicans are not those people. Carl B. Nett is a case in point.

[*Hu’s: a gender-neutral pronoun for his/her. Hu: a gender-neutral pronoun for he/she.]

100 Consecutive Days of Writing

22 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Communication, Generational, habits, Health, Internet, Journalism, Language, Lessons of Life, Life, Mental Health, Nevada, Reno, review, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Technology, Website, Wordpress, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

100 days, Blogging, journalism, language, Publishing, words, writer, writing

On 13 December 2017, I published an article titled, “Send Our Trash Into Space.” That began a streak of 100 consecutive days of posting an article. I had no grand plan to start publishing daily, but after a week it became addictive. I decided to go for two weeks, then a month. Now it’s been over three months, and I’ve discovered something about writing every day. It’s about me.

Personal View Writing is Historical, Not Instant Analysis

Writing on a frequent basis is not great for the reader. There is a saturation point at which I passed a long time ago. To keep someone’s attention over the long-term usually requires a mystery, sensationalism, a serial-type plot, or some other device to capture a reader’s mind. I write in an episodic style that is observational. My readership numbers ebb and flow depending on the topic, but I’m not writing to attract an audience.

Our world has become obsessed with instant analysis, interview the person on the street, report the story before we have the facts, and/or assess the pulse of our society based on what is trending on social media. That is not necessarily bad, but it is not news. That is ‘entertainment.’ Its focus is attracting a bigger audience.

News organizations have always fought for market share, but in the days of Watergate and before, journalistic integrity was the foundation and audience size was secondary. Now all the media organizations are investor-owned and viewer/listener/reader body count is the center of the news world. When the goal of ‘news’ media is based on the size of the audience, the focus turns to the most outrageous, most shocking, most disgusting stories.

We have made the news into a for-profit business, and that means its primary focus is to entertain, not report. What is needed is an alternate view that is not about trying to entertain to attract an audience. The perspective of the individual writer, devoid of concerns of the accountants, is the last remnant of what was called journalism.

Witness To a Calamity

I am convinced we are in a time of crisis. We are the frogs in the pot that the heat has been slowly turned up to a boil. Many are in a state of denial, but no one can deny that our society is in upheaval with a severe conflict in process.

I am not the one who can judge the effectiveness of my writing but I hope that by offering my perspective, not for entertainment or market share, that it will give the sense of the time of this crisis. Our country has made horrible mistakes that the future needs to understand.

I’m sure people in the future will wonder at how we allowed these Republicans and this President to rise to power. In part, my political writing is to give my viewpoint in how and why that happened. Writing is a recording of history and the United States in 2018 is a time of dire history.

My Method

Not all my writing is about politics. I also try to interject subjects that interest and/or amaze me. I’m not sure I can claim to have a method in my writing. Most of the time I create a working title for the topic a few days in advance. Usually, that is all I have to start with when I start writing. I don’t plan out, nor outline my articles. If I have multiple points to make in an story I will sometimes write draft headings to remind me.

Typically, I do some research on the issue, but sometimes that doesn’t occur until a reach the point in the article that I’m trying to say something that should be backed up with a fact or source. I link to my sources rather than footnote the source. If I’m writing a reaction piece to an event or act I will link the article or include a quote.

I’m not held to any standard of truth, but my own. There have been times I have started writing about a topic and changed my opinion about the issue during my research. As a liberal, I know I have an opinion, but I it also means that I have to support my opinion. That doesn’t make my opinion correct, but it is absolutely required in a decent society.

The Score

In 2016 I wrote 40 articles using 22,085 words (an average of 552 words per article.) In 2017 I wrote 53 articles using 23,954 words (an average of 452 words per article.) So far in 2018 I’ve written 82 articles (including this one) using 47,337 words (an average of 577 words per article.)

I don’t know if I will keep going on the streak. I have other writing projects that I would like to finish and I find that writing at this pace is difficult to maintain. Regardless, this has been very rewarding for me. I hope it has been of some benefit to you.

Looking Back

Here are the articles I’ve published during the last 100 days (and more):

DECEMBER 2017

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

13-Dec-17	Send Our Trash Into Space	271
14-Dec-17	The End of the United States of America	225
15-Dec-17	School Vouchers Are About Religion and Racism, Not Choice	625
16-Dec-17	Journalists Using Uneducated, Uninformed Opinion As Fact	237
17-Dec-17	Government Regulation Makes USA Business Great	412
18-Dec-17	Redacted Review of Star Wars: The Last Jedi	477

[NOTE: Articles from 19 December 2017 to 28 February 2018 are not currently linked. This is being corrected.]


19-Dec-17	What Happens In Sixty Years	304
20-Dec-17	Senator Dean Heller is Still a Stockbroker	298
21-Dec-17	A New Year’s Earthquake?	386
22-Dec-17	Review of Star Wars: The Last Jedi	217
22-Dec-17	Failure to Diagnose: Right Hemisphere Strokes	482
23-Dec-17	SpaceX and Mars: The Illogical Strategy	453
24-Dec-17	GOP War on the Spirit of Christmas	326
25-Dec-17	Can Venus Be Made Habitable?	475
26-Dec-17	Illogical: Commercial Real Estate Price Boom in an Internet Economy	183
27-Dec-17	Religion Controls Equality For Women	398
28-Dec-17	Dear Republican: Your Party Left Without You	345
29-Dec-17	1929 is Coming	216
30-Dec-17	Are You Not Breathing When You Sleep?	670
31-Dec-17	Understanding Global Warming and Cold Weather	530

JANUARY 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Jan-18	Why a Bigger Government is Being Fiscally Responsible	507
2-Jan-18	Need a New Plan for Gaining Political Support	285
3-Jan-18	Nevada’s Pot Business About to be Smoked	401
4-Jan-18	Telsa Powerwall Has Product-Killing Questions Unanswered	1000
5-Jan-18	Trump Corrupt Public Relations: Using Business PR as the Model	393
6-Jan-18	12 Days in 1968	956
7-Jan-18	1968 Mystery: Four Subs Lost In Four Months	626
8-Jan-18	To Sleep, Perchance To Dream	327
9-Jan-18	Panamá versus Oklahoma: Transportation	457
10-Jan-18	Zuma Fail: Why Space Is No Place For Private Business	509
11-Jan-18	Rapid HR Hiring Process Required In Professional Environment	477
12-Jan-18	ICE Solidifies Itself As Trump’s SS Police	555
13-Jan-18	About This, About Writing	412
14-Jan-18	Panamá’s Caribbean Afterthought	805
15-Jan-18	Why You Won’t See A Tax Cut	338
16-Jan-18	Why Trumpsters Don’t Understand Anti-Trump Reactions	377
17-Jan-18	Should the Nuremberg Code Be Applied to Internet Data Collection?	1212
18-Jan-18	Government Shutdown An Opportunity	416
19-Jan-18	NASA’s Orion Capsule: A ‘Look Busy’ Project?	1067
20-Jan-18	Total Lunar Eclipse January 31…Western United States	243
21-Jan-18	Popes That Damned Women, Choice, and Humanity	708
22-Jan-18	An Indictment Against NPR Journalism Standards	745
23-Jan-18	SpaceX Falcon Heavy-Lift Rocket: A Soviet-Style Disaster?	865
24-Jan-18	Why the Stock Market is Like a Strip Club	316
25-Jan-18	Trump and GOP Causing Emotional Numbness?	455
26-Jan-18	Employee Relations: The You’re-Not-Getting-a-Raise-Letter	342
27-Jan-18	Why We Elect the Wrong People?: #1 Business Wants Dumb Politicians	428
28-Jan-18	The Day Business Killed The NASA Space Program	1246
29-Jan-18	The State of the Union of the United States of America	1069
30-Jan-18	Why We Elect the Wrong People?: #2 We Don’t Understand the Purpose of a Republic	592
31-Jan-18	2018 Blue Moon Lunar Eclipse	499

FEBRUARY 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Feb-18	Zuma Mystery: It’s Classified and Invisible…Apparently	777
2-Feb-18	Should You Become a Parent?	789
3-Feb-18	The Plantar Wart and HPV	385
4-Feb-18	Housing Prices Edge Closer to Catastrophe	419
5-Feb-18	Stock Market Symptom of Great Depression, Not Cause	629
6-Feb-18	GOP Memo is Last Straw	343
7-Feb-18	SpaceX Falcon Heavy Defies the Odds	484
8-Feb-18	66 Years Ago: A Princess in Africa Becomes Queen	392
9-Feb-18	North Korea Bizzare Olympics Stunt	382
10-Feb-18	Snowpack is No Longer a Viable Water Supply	583
11-Feb-18	500th WordPress PAULx Post: Milestone of Words	553
12-Feb-18	Forget Stock Market & Bitcoin, Invest in Mendadent Toothpaste	329
13-Feb-18	Reno Nevada Mayor Schieve Declares She is Uninformed	804
14-Feb-18	To Love Your Child, Be Honest With Them	652
15-Feb-18	Corp USA: “The Stock Market Requires We Underpay You”	312
16-Feb-18	Space Exploration Isn’t Profitable, It’s Transformative	707
17-Feb-18	McDonald’s Shake Machines Legendary Unreliability	551
18-Feb-18	Mass Shooters Not Criminals Before They Picked Up A Gun	341
19-Feb-18	Are These People the Next Mass Shooter?	353
20-Feb-18	Center of the Milky Way: Update	608
21-Feb-18	Second Amendment: A Well Regulated Militia	501
22-Feb-18	Victims of Major Mass Shootings Since Sandy Hook Elementary	709
23-Feb-18	David Brooks is Wrong Again on Guns	473
24-Feb-18	Five ‘Facts’ About the Equinox?	529
25-Feb-18	Trumpster ‘Hillary’ Excuse Proves Russian Influence	1701
26-Feb-18	Hiding Journalists Behind the Paywall	527
27-Feb-18	My Imaginary Interview with Marketplace’s Kai Ryssdal	499
28-Feb-18	SpaceX 2018 Launch Schedule Is PR Gold or PR Nightmare	681

MARCH 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Mar-18	Pigs In Space: Discrimination on the ISS	744
2-Mar-18	Trump’s Family: Keepers of the Big Liar	335
3-Mar-18	Is There a Planet Nine or Not?	553
4-Mar-18	Urban Coyotes	609
5-Mar-18	Could David Brooks Be Correct About Being Wrong?	664
5-Mar-18	Breaking News: Trump Loses Control of Hotel in Panama	321
6-Mar-18	Pence’s White Greed National Space Council	710
7-Mar-18	Trump’s Trade Deficit Talk Proves Lack of Knowledge	522
8-Mar-18	Leadership Madness: Time To Check Trump’s Urine Color	373
9-Mar-18	Three Myths That Gun Extremist Believe	350
10-Mar-18	Magnetic Pole Reversal: Will It Turn Our World Upside Down?	620
11-Mar-18	Time To Stop Changing Time? Why We Need Daylight Saving Time All Year	425
12-Mar-18	Are We Ready For Gender Neutral Language?	355
13-Mar-18	Why Are Conservatives Anti-Society?	558
14-Mar-18	NRA is Not a Gun Safety Organization	719
15-Mar-18	The Ides of March is Really About the Moon	381
16-Mar-18	Three Steps For Solving the Assault-Type Weapons Problem	375
17-Mar-18	Saint Patrick Wasn’t Irish and Other Facts?	461
18-Mar-18	Roots of ‘Easter’ Myth Adapted For New Testament	946
19-Mar-18	Why Are There 360 Degrees in a Circle?	376
20-Mar-18	First Day of Spring is Fake News	506
21-Mar-18	Ten Reasons There is Life on Earth	965
22-Mar-18	100 Consecutive Days of Writing	828
23-Mar-18	GOP Disease: Say It, Then Apologize	477
24-Mar-18	Saturn V’s F-1 Engine: The Monster That Made USSR Cry	445
25-Mar-18	Trump’s Tariffs Are For Putin	775
26-Mar-18	The Sad Life of a Russian Troll (Печальная жизнь русского тролля)	697
27-Mar-18	Journalism Ethics: Interviewing the Reporter As a News Source	507
28-Mar-18	Falling Sky: China’s Tiangong 1 Space Station Last Hours	355
29-Mar-18	Novice Directors Make Theatre Painful	536
30-Mar-18	Trump’s Soviet-Style Government	409
31-Mar-18	Our Roving Intelligent Life On Mars	427

APRIL 2018

DATE

TITLE

WORDS

1-Apr-18	April Fool’s Day is Donald Trump Day	368
2-Apr-18	Tax Breaks Don’t Work When Everyone is Giving Them	502
3-Apr-18	Should Federal Dollars Go To States With Low Taxes?	451
4-Apr-18	The Dichotomy of Small Towns: Good People, Small Minds	608
5-Apr-18	My First and Final (gulp) Imaginary Interview With Terry Gross	833

Are We Ready For Gender Neutral Language?

12 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, History, Honor, Language, parenting, Pride, Public Image, racism, Relationships, Respect, Traditional Media, United States, Universities, US History, Women, Writing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

definite article, English, Female, femininity, French, Gender, gender bias, German, hu, hu's, Italian, male, masculinity, nouns, pronouns, Spanish, transgender

In an age where gender issues are rising to the surface, language demonstrates the depth of gender discrimination. In centuries of the spoken and written word, a division between male and female became part of communication. The only logical reason for creating this division of masculinity and femininity in language is to create bias.

Language begins the division of the genders

Implied Gender Embedded in Language

English has shed most of the masculine and feminine constructs; however, pronouns remain a roadblock to gender-free writing or speech. Many other cultures face an almost impossible task of removing gender from their language. Masculine and feminine are embedded deep into the language of Spanish, French, Italian, German, and many other languages.

In many of these languages, not only the pronouns are gender defined, but the definite article (the, a) is gender-linked to the noun, which is also gender-linked.

Table 1.0 Gender Differences in Different Languages

Gendered Language Creates Social Issues

There are many studies that consider the issues of gender in languages. Most demonstrate an insidious bias caused by using words to define a person or thing as male or female. One significant issue of gendered language involves people who are transgender. Defining a person as male or female is offensive and harmful to a person whose physical form does not match her or his internal perception. It also creates undo awkwardness with people who are androgynous in physical appearance.

Gender is an unnecessary problem as there is almost never a need to establish masculinity or femininity using language. The reasons for using gender in writing and speech were attached to a patriarchal society where men were assumed to be dominant. Keeping gendered language is a failure to let go of the past and move forward.

Introducing ‘Hu’

I can’t change how people use language but I can experiment using a non-gendered pronoun in my writing. Because the he/she/him/her/his/hers pronoun is unnecessary, I am going to use the word ‘hu‘ for a non-gendered pronoun and ‘hu’s‘ as a non-gendered possessive pronoun.

Are we ready? We will never know unless we start somewhere. I’ll be interested in your reactions.

Could David Brooks Be Correct About Being Wrong?

05 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Communication, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, History, Journalism, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Print Media, racism, Religion, Respect, Second Amendment, Traditional Media, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Conservatives, David Brooks, GOP, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, NRA, Republicans, school shootings, Trumpsters

Damn him! Just when David Brooks seems to be defending a position on gun control that blames liberals for not being warm and fuzzy with gun extremists, he turns around and reconsiders his position. This is unacceptable! How can we establish a clear line in the sand when he says, “Maybe I’m wrong.” THE NERVE of that man!

David Brooks on Gun Control: Let Red Be Red

David Brooks has at least twice indicated that gun users should have a significant role in determining the parameters of gun ownership. Most recently he suggested that liberals should let the gun owners lead the discussion.

So if you want to stop school shootings it’s not enough to just vent and march. You have to let Red America lead the way, and to show respect to gun owners at every point.

David Brooks – 19 February

His position was to let gun extremists continue to do what they’ve been doing and maybe…maybe, someday they will let common sense return. For me, that position is a nonstarter. I know these gun extremists. They are from small towns like where I grew up. For at least 40 years they’ve been on a steady diet of “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” (I saw that bumper sticker on a truck in the 1970’s.)

Gun extremists have not been rational for decades. The constant statements that “they’re coming to git your guns” is oxygen to gun extremists. These are not gun owners, they are gun cultists. They have no business being part of a discussion about guns, let alone lead it.

He Said What??

But last Thursday David Brooks took a different perspective on the issue. He said:

Continued school shootings could be just the thing that persuades the mainstream that conservatism is vulgar and socially illegitimate, somewhere between smoking and segregationism.

David Brooks – 1 March

This is an understatement. Slaughtering seven-year-old children with an assault rifle should never be compared to smoking or segregationism.

However, his realization is something that our country hasn’t heard from conservatives in a long time. It is not likely to be shared by many gun extremists, but if it were, we would have the assault weapon ban reinstated in a matter of days.

The rest of the country is watching the trainwreck of conservatism. The lead engineers of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnel, and Paul Ryan are putting more power to the engine even as it falls off the trestle. The Trumpsters onboard are laughing and whooping with joy.

Conservatives have used a desperate tactic of building a coalition with racists, religious extremists, gun extremists, and corrupt people of wealth. An idea is growing among people of common sense. The question is not just asking how do we stop the madness. The question is how do make sure it never happens again. The answer to that question should have Trumpsters soiling their underwear. There is a cost to arrogance, and arrogance is only temporary.

My Diagnosis of David Brooks

I believe I know why David Brooks is able to consider different points of view on issues as divisive as gun control. First, he was born in Canada. (I’ll take a moment while most of you slap your forehead and say, “Of course!”)

Second, I believe that David Brooks has used,…please, hear me out,…I believe he has used LSD at some point in his life. Recently I read about a study where subjects were tested after they were given LSD and the results indicated that they were more open-minded.

So, my theory is that the combination of being born in Canada and taking LSD at some point can cause a conservative to consider issues from multiple viewpoints. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that our country has many conservative Canadians who have taken LSD.

Nobody said this would be easy.

(NOTE: David Brooks comments are published in the New York Times. Because this source uses a paywall to prevent sharing I have not linked to his full article per normal.)

Trump’s Family: Keepers of the Big Liar

02 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Journalism, Management Practices, Politicians, Politics, Relationships, Respect, Russian influence, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

advisors, Donald Trump, Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner, National Public Radio, npr, On Point, public servant, Ray Suarez, Royalty, security briefings

Yesterday, (1 March 2018) I listened to a few minutes of On Point, hosted by Ray Suarez, discussing Jared Kushner’s security clearance downgrade. A caller had talked about the issue of having family members as a political adviser to the President. Suarez responded by defending Donald Trump’s use of family members into positions for which they lacked the qualifications.

All in the Family: Trump’s Lie Keepers

Suarez said that Trump needed loyal advisors and that Trump saw his family as loyal. It was the most absurd defense of Donald Trump I have heard from a normally reasonable person.

Trump Family Not the Royalty in USA

Presidential advisors are not dogs. They are responsible to the people of the United States of America. Feckless Trump is not the King of America and he is not allowed to use family members to keep his dark secrets. Trump is a servant of the public.

When did we forget this? When did the idea that political office is NOT to serve the people of the United States of America? Trump doesn’t get to keep secrets from the public and he isn’t allowed to use unqualified family members to keep his lies. Trump and his administration are accountable and answerable to us.

Media Accepting the Alt-Reality

There is a growing problem in the news media succumbing to the version of our country’s political dysfunction as normal and acceptable. Trump has demeaned the Office of President. The President is responsible for the welfare of our country and as President-elect he spurned security briefings that are part of being a well-informed leader. Even before taking the oath of office he refused his responsibilities and put our country at risk. This is a refusal to accept the responsibility required by the position.

Since he has taken office, Donald Trump has led our country farther away from who we are and it is unacceptable. Journalists should not be his accomplices. They shouldn’t be making up excuses for him that redefine the responsibilities of the Presidential administration.

Hiding Journalists Behind the Paywall

26 Monday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Ethics, History, Honor, Information Technology, Journalism, Management Practices, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Stock Market, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, US History, Website, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

entertainment, investors, journalism, journalism standards, journalists, New York Times, newpapers, News media, news organizations, packaging news, paywall, paywalls, The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post

Several news organizations have blocked their website content behind paywalls. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post are noteworthy examples. Paywalls are an attempt to force the reader to pay a subscription to access the news articles of the day. The question is what kind of a journalist wants her or his work held captive from the public?

Paywall News Organizations: The Road to Irrelevance

Out of Sight, Out of Mind, and Irrelevant

The thinking of these organizations is that the value of the content behind the paywall will create a desire for the reader to open a wallet and pay them money. The problem with that theory is that information is not ‘owned’ by a news organization, it is only packaged. News is what happens in the world and is reported in the raw on Twitter, Facebook, and all the other free sources on the Internet.

What investor-owned news media attempts to do is make the reader pay for their packaging of the news, not the product itself, and in an age of the Internet, someone else can offer the same product in a different package for free.

For the writer or journalist that creates the packaging of the news, it means that the public can’t see her or his work…ever. If people can’t see your work, you become irrelevant. The best writer in the world risks becoming invisible when all his or her creative efforts are on a pay-to-read basis.

Even those who are willing to pay for the subscription can’t share an article with others when it is behind a paywall. The benefit of readers discussing a journalist’s work is limited to the subset of those who pay-to-read and in a ‘Share’ world, that is a critical shortfall.

Paying Journalists For Their Work Myth

The organizations that inflict a paywall on the reader and the journalists defend the decision by saying:

Someone has to pay for quality journalism!

But that is a lie. The truth is closer to the statement:

Our investors have to suck as much money out of the work of the journalists!

Note the list of news organizations and, according to Forbes magazine, who owns (as of June 2016) the controlling stake in them.

Behind Hard Paywall (all articles pay-to-read)

Wall Street Journal – Billionaires Rupert Murdoch and Lachian Murdoch
The Washington Post – Billionaire Jeff Bezos

Behind Soft Paywall (limited free views)

New York Times – Billionaire Carlos Slim Helu
Wired – Billionaire Donald Newhouse
The New Yorker– Billionaire Donald Newhouse

No Paywall

Bloomberg Businessweek – Billionaire Michael Bloomberg

The people who control these news organizations don’t need to find new ways to pay journalists. They are just using journalists for greed.

News As Entertainment

Journalism is a philanthropic duty. It is not created to generate profit for investors, it is created to provide information to citizens. The transition from journalism to entertainment is strictly about greed.

Few great journalists become wealthy, but great journalists become the keystone to a great society. The fall of our country can be traced, at least in part, to the fall of journalism. If journalism is about making money then journalists are just prostitutes of news.

Trumpster ‘Hillary’ Excuse Proves Russian Influence

25 Sunday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Internet, Politicians, Politics, racism, Russian influence, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2016, Benghazi, Congressional investigation, Donald Trump, Election, Election 2016, email server, FBI, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Presidential election, Presidential race, Russia, Russian troll farm, Russian trolls, sexual assault, sexual harassment, Trumpsters, Vladimir Putin

Evidence of the Russian influence on the outcome of the Presidential election is readily available. People who voted for Trump make it obvious that they voted based on fake and false information, and even today they maintain the same belief in the misinformation put out by the Putin Troll Farm.

Here’s the statement I see social media from people who voted for Donald Trump:

When are liberals going to understand that we weren’t voting ‘for’ Trump, as much as we were voting ‘against’ Hillary Clinton.

On Quora by Jason Whitehurst (original question 25 AUG 2017)

Russian Influence For a Feckless Man

The statement itself is lacking in logic. It is akin to saying, “I didn’t want to eat dog poop as much as I wanted to avoid eating broccoli.” The person who makes the excuse that his or her vote for a feckless man like Trump was forced by his or her aversion to Clinton is either stupid, a liar, or under the influence of Vladimir Putin.

Fake News of Russian Trolls

‘Crooked Hillary’ is a common term by Trumpsters, but what is it based on?

Congressional Investigations

Clinton was investigated by bloodthirsty Republicans in Congress EIGHT times regarding the Benghazi attacks, the security beforehand, and the response afterward. The results? She did nothing intentionally wrong, and they could find no charge to file against her.

That is not the story promoted by the Russian trolls.

FBI Investigation-Private Email Server

The FBI began two investigations associated with Hillary Clinton in 2015. The first investigation was regarding Clinton’s use of a private email server. Also in 2015, the FBI began an investigation into donations made to The Clinton Foundation. The investigations coincided with the Democratic Primary campaign season.

The email server investigation was closed on 6 July 2016 by the Justice Department after FBI Director James Comey delivered a fiery news conference the day before. Comey admitted the FBI could find no intentional wrong-doing, but took the opportunity to scold the former Secretary of State for not following suggested protocol by using a private email server.

James Comey: Supported Russian Fake News

Less than a week before the election and after early voting had already begun, Comey made a sudden announcement that new evidence had been found in the email server case. The announcement by the FBI just prior to the election had the effect of a declaration of guilt by the FBI Director. Two days after the election, Comey announced that nothing found in the new evidence would change the decision to close the case.

FBI Investigation-The Clinton Foundation

There have been multiple accusations of people and countries ‘buying influence’ by making donations to The Clinton Foundation. The implication is that someone who knows almost every significant political and powerful person in the world might use a gift to her charitable foundation as a bribe to do special favors for that person.

To date, no charges have been filed even though the Trump administration has worked hard to use the investigation to throw off media attention on probes into Russian influence on his campaign and administration. One source close to the investigation said:

It was never a great case, but it’s still being worked…

What We Have Here is a Failure of Evidence

What is consistent in all of the accusations is that none of them are based on evidence, nor on truth. Regardless of what anyone believes about Hillary Clinton, there is nothing that supports any evidence of wrongdoing, and it is not for a lack of investigating. In 2015, it was reported that over $7 million dollars had been spent on the Benghazi investigations. Add to that all the FBI work, Department of Justice work, and other investigations, the cost of the fruitless chase of fake accusations is likely over $20 million.

Republicans have now opened additional investigations including an investigation of the investigators as to why the FBI couldn’t prove the fake charges against Clinton.

Still, Russian trolls gave a different version of the outcome.

Under Russian Influence?

In comparison to Clinton, Trump was guilty of real character issues before, during, and after the elections. Based on a summary by The Atlantic, voters knew:

Sexual-Assault Allegations

Based on a summary of sexual allegations compiled on Wikipedia, Donald Trump has had three cases filed in court, New York Times story interviewing 50 women revealing unwelcome sexual attention from Trump, and 13 accusations of unwanted sexual contact.

1. Accusations filed in court against Trump
- 1.1 Ivana Trump (1989)
  - Ivana Trump stated that in 1989, Donald Trump forcibly had sex with her during an episode of rage. Later she offered a carefully stated comment that indicated that it felt like rape, but she didn’t mean in the criminal sense.
- 1.2 Jill Harth (1992)
- 1.3 Summer Zervos (2007)
2. May 2016 New York Times story
- 50 women interview revealing unwanted sexual attention from Donald Trump
3. Recording controversy and second 2016 presidential debate
4. Public allegations of unwanted physical contact since 2016
- 4.1 Jessica Leeds (1980s)
- 4.2 Kristin Anderson (1990s)
- 4.3 Cathy Heller (1997)
- 4.4 Temple Taggart McDowell (1997)
- 4.5 Karena Virginia (1998)
- 4.6 Mindy McGillivray (2003)
- 4.7 Rachel Crooks (2005)
- 4.8 Natasha Stoynoff (2005)
- 4.9 Juliet Huddy (2005 or 2006)
- 4.10 Jessica Drake (2006)
- 4.11 Ninni Laaksonen (2006)
- 4.12 Erin Burnett’s unnamed friend (2010)
- 4.13 Cassandra Searles (2013)

Donald Trump has denied all of the accusations, entered into a paid agreement of silence with some women, and accused all of the women of being liars.

VP Mike Pence: “I’m with Comrade Trump”

The Beauty Pageant Scandals

Donald Trump has been accused of using his authority as the sponsor to make an unannounced entrance into women and girls dressing rooms during beauty pageants. Wikipedia compiled this list:

Allegations of pageant dressing room visits:

Trump University

Trump announced that he would never settle the lawsuits against Trump University, then paid $25 million to settle under a condition he didn’t have to admit wrongdoing. Trump University was closed in 2010.

Trump Institute

Like Trump University, the Trump Institute was largely a fraudulent scheme with video of Trump making promises about the quality of the program and that he handpicked the instructors. In the end, he had only sold his name to the program, offered the recorded video, and the curriculum was plagiarized from other textbooks.

Tenant Intimidation

Trump bought a building with the intention of tearing it down and building luxury condos. From 1982 to 1986 he attempted to squeeze the existing, rent-controlled tenants out using hardcore tactics. He turned off the hot water and the building’s heat, he refused to make required repairs, and he threatened to fill the vacant apartments with homeless people. He finally lost the battle.

The Undocumented Polish Workers

Trump-run operations do not demonstrate ethical management. Despite being tough on immigration as President, Trump managers have employed undocumented employees. In 1980, they hired 200 polish immigrants to demolish an existing property. The workers were paid substandard pay, and at times, not paid at all. They were threatened with deportation if they complained about the back pay.

Undocumented Models

Former models hired by Trump have said they did not have the required documentation when employed by his organization.

Antitrust Violations

In 1986, Trump attempted a hostile takeover of two gaming companies. He violated anti-trust laws and was fined $750,000 for failure to report his purchase of the stock in those companies as legally required.

The Four Bankruptcies

Trump-run companies have declared bankruptcies four times (1991, 1992, 2004, and 2009.) Trump suggests that it is just part of doing business, but it reflects a consistent issue with his financial management ability.

Refusing to Pay Workers and Contractors

Trump has hundreds of complaints against him for failure to pay for services rendered. Trump has offered excuses, but the volume of the complaints indicate a consistent problem and a lack of financial ethics in business.

Suing Journalist Tim O’Brien for Libel

Trump had a libel $5 billion lawsuit tossed out regarding a Tim O’Brien book that stated that Trump was worth far less than he claimed. The Washington Post reviewed Trump’s deposition in the suit and determined that Trump lied 30 times under oath.

Refusal to Release Tax Information

Despite it being an informal requirement of every Presidential candidate, Trump has refused to release any of his tax returns. This is likely because his tax returns will confirm the book by Tim O’Brien that states that Trump is not worth what he claims.

Racial Housing Discrimination

In 1973, Donald Trump and his father were sued by the Department of Justice of multiple instances of racial discrimination. The Trumps countersued but settled out of court without admitting guilt.

The Trump Foundation

The Trump Foundation has violated rules on self-dealing. The Foundation is still under investigation and has been told to stop illegally accepting donations.

The Inauguration Fiasco

Trump’s Inauguration Committee received more money than was needed and said it would donate the extra money, and then didn’t do it.

Condo Hotel Shenanigans

Trump has been involved in multiple condo schemes that have failed or been fraudulent. In one case, his partners had a criminal past history. In each case, Trump has claimed limited involvement in the deals and has avoided admitting wrongdoing.

The Cuban Embargo

Despite laws against it, the Trump organization has been involved in commercial activity with Cuba since 1998. The involvement is still under investigation but appears to be illegal.

Breaking Casino Rules

Trump has been in trouble with gaming authorities and has been able to avoid any admittance of wrongdoing. He is no longer in the gaming business.

Buying Up His Own Books

During the campaign, Trump used donor money to buy his books. This illegally allowed money from the campaign to end up in Trump’s bank account and made his book sales look larger than they really were.

Mafia Ties

Multiple situations of Trump interactions with Mafia. No direct connection with Trump, but has been required to testify in court regarding the relationships.

Collusion With Russia

This Seattle Times article details twelve things we know about Russian involvement with the 2016 election and connections between Trump aides and Russian agents. It offers a clear connection between Trump and the Russian effort to influence the outcome.

The question is if it was successful. Based on the fake accusations made against Hillary Clinton and the known character issues of Donald Trump it is clear that those who voted for Trump to prevent Clinton from winning were influenced and continue to be influenced.

Or they are just stupid.