MNO Blog – Motorcycles, News, Opinions

Saddam Hussein was hanged at dawn is the report for the past hours in the Mainstream Media groups. However, some are careful and watchful before reporting the incident as truth. While many of the top government leaders around the world have already commented on the news of Saddam’s demise, the stories that are coming out have too many conflicts to be ruled as a fact.

Conflicts in the many articles that have been coming out in the past hours:

Where the execution was held. There were reports of two places where the execution was to be held and now as the stories are released it appears that he was hanged at both places.

Three men were executed. There have been reports that all three men scheduled to be executed were hanged at dawn, one was Saddam’s half-brother Barzan Ibrahim, while other reports say that the only one executed was Saddam Hussein.

The news of the death of Hussein did spring up a series of events in Iraq and around the world, however the good news is that none of the events reported have been violent. For me, it is still a wait and see at this time. I am not convinced at the series of articles that have been released as to the completeness of the reports , but the official witnesses seem to agree on one fact and that is that Saddam Hussein remained calm and refused to have his face covered before the hanging.

Source:

http://www.kwtx.com/breakingnews/5042821.html

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/947603

http://news.google.com

It is interesting to see the different outlooks of the MSM (Mainstream Media) about what we do as the people of the Internet. The individuals that have chosen to commit time to the world wide web by writing a blog, and using video and photography to report news to readers.

In a article written by Wall Street Journal editorial assistant, Joseph Rago, he appears to either be uneducated to the blogging web or feels threatened by the same. The article he titles “The Blog Mob“, Rago lashes out at the blogosphere saying

“The blogs are not as significant as their self-endeared curators would like to think. Journalism requires journalists, who are at least fitfully confronting the digital age. The bloggers, for their part, produce minimal reportage. Instead, they ride along with the MSM like remora fish on the bellies of sharks, picking at the scraps.”

This is just one man’s opinion, the opinion of Joseph Rago, and maybe his opinion is not as significant as he would like to think. At least not if one is to judge by the popularity of the blog for the reader as well as the writer. The blog writer of today is not making a post just to read it online! If this is true, then the post would be kept private and password protected. As one writer has put it:

“The blogosphere is a celebration of citizen journalism and the freedom
of speech.”

While further down the article, writer Rago, seems to point more to political blogs that seem to be a thorn in his side, calling most blogs “pretty awful” and without naming names, refers to the more popular blogs as “downright appalling”. Certainly, Mr. Rago would not be wise to reference popular blogs such as the WSJ Law Blog or could not have read the WSJ special report Find A Blog.

Near the close of the article, the true heart of Mr. Rago’s message; he is not to fond of the computer, nor Internet:

“Certainly the MSM, such as it is, collapsed itself. It was once utterly dominant yet made itself vulnerable by playing on its reputed accuracy and disinterest to pursue adversarial agendas. Still, as far from perfect as that system was, it was and is not wholly imperfect. The technology of ink on paper is highly advanced, and has over centuries accumulated a major institutional culture that screens editorially for originality, expertise and seriousness.”

While the rant of one mainstream writer is now buried days into the archives of the Opinion Journal, Time Magazine cover page was released naming the person of the year for 2006, You. Yes, You that control the information age. Quite the reverse of the previous, Time Magazine sees things such as the blog, You Tube and My Space as a major contribution not only to changing the world, also to change the way the world changes.

Time looks at the way we, as citizens of the Internet report on things saying:

“And we didn’t just watch, we also worked. Like crazy. We made Facebook profiles and Second Life avatars and reviewed books at Amazon and recorded podcasts. We blogged about our candidates losing and wrote songs about getting dumped. We camcordered bombing runs and built open-source software.”

So, congratulations to you and all of the people that work hard on their place on the web! You chose to entertain and inform us, reporting to your readers on information that you find important. You have delivered us a honest and unbiased account of the world as it happens blogging from home on your computer, at the airport on your lap top and even directly from your cell phone. Time magazine has pointed out a very important factor in what shapes the world wide web, You.

So while many of the people that contribute to the Mainstream Media feel threatened by You, there are others that reconize that it is You that makes the choice in what you read and watch. It is what you find important that matters. The people that want to rail you for putting what you believe in or what you report on will only make you stronger.

Time Managing Editor, Richard Stengel, wraps it up by saying:

“Some have called it an “amateur hour.” And it often is. But America was founded by amateurs. The framers were professional lawyers and military men and bankers, but they were amateur politicians, and that’s the way they thought it should be. Thomas Paine was in effect the first blogger, and Ben Franklin was essentially loading his persona into the MySpace of the 18th century, Poor Richard’s Almanack.”

Merry Christmas and thanks to YOU for reading.

Source:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009409

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1570743,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html

http://www.webproworld.com

(Daytona Beach, Florida) 12/17/2006 Weekend Roundup

The recent death of Yvonne Scarlett-Golden, the Mayor of Daytona Beach forced a rather rapid decision on the city commission. Who would be appointed to fill the rest of the term? The decision took longer than expected and was postponed from being decided on last Monday to a new date set for Thursday.

While some spoke of certain Mayor hopefuls to fill the term, others did not want any of the prospective candidates to have an upper hand by serving the short period. I cringed at the mention of certain parties that were on the list, but rejoiced when I heard the idea was rejected. By Tuesday, popular opinion had Daytona Beach businessman Glenn Ritchey as the projected appointee and by the end of Thursday’s City meeting, he was in.

Glenn Ritchey had announced that he had no intentions of running for Mayor, but would consider taking the appointment for the remainder of the term after Mayor Golden’s death. Ritchey being appointed does not sever ties between the ISC (International Speedway Corporation) and City Hall in Daytona Beach. Read more at The Real Daytona.

In other news, Elizabeth Book, has won yet another battle in court for baring her breast in public. You will remember that Book was first arrested back in 2004 during Bike Week for baring her breast on the main street bridge in Daytona Beach. She later escaped arrest by protesting behind a curtain on the bed of a truck, but then exposed her breast again in front of the Peabody Auditorium. She was arrested for this time for disorderly conduct, which she was acquitted for on Thursday.

However, it looks as though a city deputy attorney, Mary Hartman, refuses to let the issue go and has already started a petition to bring the case back to local court for reconsideration of appeal. It seems there are better things that could be done with the tax dollar income for Daytona Beach.

In a recent article that came out in the Toronto Star, in Canada they did a investigative report on MADD of Canada. The report entitled MADD’s `exorbitant costs’ anger charity’s volunteers filed by investigative reporter Kevin Donovan. Great work Kevin!

This report is shocking, but enlightening about where the money goes when caring citizens and victims of drunk drivers donate to MADD of Canada. The report shows that a mere 19% of every dollar goes toward charitable work. This has volunteers of the organization in rage. Volunteer being the key word here. The real backbone and workers of the organization. The ones that visit victims and help them with kindness. The unpaid workers of MADD of Canada, who are usually the family members or friends of a drunk driver victim.

While MADD of Canada claims that 83.6 % of the money donated goes to MADD of Canada programs. The financial documents of the organization show differently. The volunteers of the organization are calling for them to “clean up their act”. John Bates, who started the Canada based group back in 1982 called PRIDE (People to Reduce Impaired Driving Everywhere) says MADD has taken a national tragedy and turned it into a fund raising machine. Bates group originally created when his friend’s daughter was killed by a drunk driver. In 1990 MADD USA expressed interest in coming into Canada, they combined Bates group and two others to form MADD of Canada.

This investigative report sparked my interest into what is going on behind the scenes of the US based charity organization, so I paid a visit to the MADD web site. Like many charity organizations, MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) started off with a great concept and good intentions. Could MADD here in the United States be guilty of the same type of internal activity as MADD of Canada?

A charity is required by the IRS to file a form 990 and the same information is available to the public. At the MADD web site the form 990 for year 2005 can be easily found in the annual report section of the MADD web site. The MADD annual report is made to show the public the good work that the organization does.

If we look at the top 5 paid employees of the MADD charity organization we see that the amount compensated for 40+ hours ranges from nearly $105,000.00 to right at $72,000.00 with the number of employees making over $50,000.00 listed as 38. This does not include the officers, directors or trustees. While the program CEO is only paid $55,000.00 a year, in contrast the director of program and development is compensated $152,408.00 yearly.

With the better part of the charitable work that MADD does being achieved on the local level by the volunteers and paid fund raisers, it may be that we need to have a closer look at what this charity does here at home. Bottom line, this charity winds up putting $.20 of the dollar you donate to charitable work.

According to the government web site for the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) there was 212 billion dollars collected by 700,000 government recognized charities in the year 2001. If you donate to a charity, make sure that your hard earned dollar goes as much towards the cause as possible. The better charities put between 60 to 80 % of the donation toward the charitable work.

What you can do.

Check the charity out before donating to them.

There are ways that you can check a charity out online or by telephone. A few good sources to check out a charity include Charity Navigator, the Better Business Charity Site or by telephone at (703) 276-0100 and the FTC Charity Fraud site which has a large list of resources here.

Telephone Calls: 

If the charity is calling you on the telephone, only donate then if you already know the charity and have donated before. Many charities use paid fund raisers to make telephone calls. If someone calls you on the phone asking for money for charity, ask them if they are being paid to call you. If so, find out how much they take of the donation for their service. Additionally, never give out your credit card, bank account or personal information over the phone. Try to get the address for the charity to send in your donation. This cuts out the middle man giving more of your dollar to the cause.

Summary: It is a shame that we need to check out a organization or program before donating money, however, you can see it has become necessary. Most organizations start out with the victim or less fortunate in mind. Greed can spread rapidly in a financial environment, so check your charities annual statement. When donating, you are best to donate at the local level.

Be careful of scammers that prey on your senses and kindness.

Do not stop donating to what you believe in, Believe in what you are donating to.

Source and credits:

http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/4129.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/tmarkg/charity.htm

http://www.thestar.com/

MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) form 990 as public information

I would like to be a journalist. While I have a lot to learn in order to consider myself a true journalist, much less that of my peers. I think it is sad that there are those who are paid to report the news that do not do their job. 

Sure it feels good to get a “scoop” or an exclusive story. I suppose I would feel proud that my editor slaps me on the back and says “hey, good job on that story Mike”. However, I do not have an editor to answer to. My editor is you, the one that is reading my articles, stories and news. The public are the only ones that I answer to, beside myself.

The problem that I see presented is that most of the journalist or news reporters of today are to caught up in just getting the story out. What happens is they have a tendency to rush, naturally, and the article suffers lack of facts. People read these articles and expect them to be factual or at least based on facts. They also expect or assume the articles to be complete and without omission of facts.

Unfortunately, most of the news today is not complete and/or not based on fact. Then you have the problem that many people read just one article and form an opinion based on their reading. Some, become so sure of themselves that they are willing to get into a word fight in a forum based on being misinformed by the article that they just read. “It was in my favorite paper, so it must be true”. Please, steer away from this type of behavior.

The news of today, if you want to involve yourself, has to be researched, researched and then verify that research.

If you are just a kitchen table reader that has a cup of coffee and reads the paper, that is fine. That is pretty much what the newspapers today are worth, a piece of entertainment while relaxing or waking up. This only works if you throw the paper aside and go on about your day. If you plan on reading the paper and taking it to heart as the truth and forming an opinion by reading one article you are headed for trouble. Especially if you plan on voicing that opinion in public, on a forum or blog.

An opinion about facts or an incident is not news, nor should they be mixed.

Most of today’s news papers are based on opinion and not facts. If you agree with the opinionated news that you read, it becomes your favorite paper. Once the paper has an article that you do agree with, you are compelled to do something about it. This is also unfortunate. At this point you either toss the paper in the trash and forget it until the next day or you find something else to read. Some will write to the editor and voice their disagreement and that is good. After all, that is what the letters to the editor section is for. The true problem with the news as it is, would be organization. Truth is that most of the items the papers want to refer to as news should be put in the opinion section. That is what the opinion section is for, opinion and columnist. Problem is that the opinion section seems to overflow into the news.

It is the journalist responsibility to report the facts and to include every amount of factual evidence that can be found on the item being reported.

The news is based on facts. Even in writing, it should be reported as though you are live, on the scene and have a camera in front of you. The news paper reporter has the luxury of not having to be “on the scene” and “reporting live” of having the time to do research into the facts. At times, I suppose, that it can also be a hindrance. If you do actually witness the news, it becomes easier to report. Even at that, there can be things that you did not see that someone did. This is where research comes into play. Gather all of the facts possible and then verify those facts.

I studied journalism in school, that does not make me a journalist. Also, remember, at the beginning of this article I said, I would like to be a journalist. I am, however, not. I am studying and researching the idea of becoming a better writer, possibly even a journalist. I would find it hard though to become part of any one particular news organization, because they all have their faults. So, for the moment, I will do my best, when I do report the news, to make it as factual and complete as possible. I only wish many of the reporter and journalist of today would do the same.

* This article is my opinion. It is about the delivery of news. It is not news nor is it based on facts. I did, however, put it in the news section because it is about news. OK?

Technorati Tags: editorial, news, journalism, blog

Before I had this Blog on the domain with my name, I started a blog titled the rear view mirror at blogger.com. Check it out, I still blog on it and there are some interesting reads that you may want to create a trackback to.

Technorati Tags: blog, blogger, mno, mike odom, profile