August 26th: Grossly Overly Politicized

Watching the 2016 Presidential race heat up from outside of the country has been a fascinating cultural experience. As a general rule, the information is mostly volunteer access, meaning that I have to go find the information, rather than the more standard American access, which is less of a choice and more of an overwhelming avalanche. That being said, it puts the burden on the consumer of the information to look for a balance of opinions and to see a variety of perspectives.

Take, for example, the recent GOP debate that took place in Cleveland earlier this month. I was unable to watch the debate first-hand live; it was taking place at 3 AM local time. Waking up the next morning, every news source and social medium had an influx of information, not only breaking down the content of each candidate’s platform, but also dissecting every detail of HOW that information was presented.

I started on social media (my favorite and most biased outlet), which primarily consisted of reactions from non-professionals. These were everyday Americans, the voters, commenting and critiquing the candidates that they would one day see on a ballot. The opinions generally skewed to the left, as most of my digital community share my liberal ideals.

Next, I moved to my news outlets of choice. Primarily, I like the coverage of USA Today, because it is one of the few newspapers in the country that has done the best work to transition into digital and online formats, making it easy to access traditional journalism styles in a modern format. I explored what the journalistic community had to share about the event. Again, USA Today tends to sit on the left side of the aisle, and even more so CNN. Much of what I found on these pages were breakdowns of the ways that candidates presented themselves, the politicking between individuals on the podium, and collections of soundbites that had Republicans digging at each other and looking to crack holes in their opponents.

So far, I had found almost no actual issue-based coverage so I gritted my teeth and headed to Fox News. I generally don’t enjoy Fox’s coverage, as they are way too far to the right for me, and their bias is far too easily identified, but in this case, when looking at a GOP debate that was, in fact, hosted by Fox, I was intrigued to see how they would cover it. Better than any other news source, there were details about what exactly each candidate stood for, and how well they got that point across.

After almost 2 hours of research, I felt like I had a decent understanding of what happened and where each candidate stood on various issues. Considering how easy it is to find SOME information, I was very surprised to learn how hard I had to work to find ALL of the information.

It is easy to blame my absence from the country for the difficulty. In reality, though, it is just as hard in America to see through all of the biases and angles to get to the real issue: the issues. We can find easy information about the feud between Donald Trump and Rosie O’Donnell (ok, his feud with women in general), but what will he actually do to create greater stability in the Middle East? We know that Rand Paul is being a child in criticizing Chris Christie for hugging President Obama after Hurricane Sandy, but where does Paul stand when it comes to disaster relief?

Our gathering of information has turned into a full time job. We are bombarded with so much information about the political world that we now need to distinguish between what is real and what is crap. As hard is it might be, we need to do it, for fear that we will be unwitting bystanders in a system that encourages our politicians to belittle us, condescend us, and avoid us, for fear that we may actually demand that they lead.

The major theme of the Zoot Perspective’s evaluation of the next 15 months of the Presidential race is that we need to elevate the level of debate. We need to be asking the right questions and demanding that our politicians give us real, honest answers. I only get one vote, but I am going to make you earn it, Mr(s). Soon-To-Be-President.

If you enjoy the work of the Zoot Perspective, please visit my GoFundMe page, to help support me on my journey. Thank you very much.

For more content from ZPMedia, visit www.zootperspective.com.

January 26th: Social Media Finding Their Niche

The ways in which we communicate continue to grow and develop as we not only create new and innovative ways to connect, but also advance the ways in which we use existing media.

In a recent report by the Pew Research Center, the 2014 report on social media usage revealed some very interesting insight into the most popular social networks and the demographics who use them most frequently.

Facebook was discovered to be the most “popular” social media site, with 71% of internet-using adults having accounts. At first glance, this appears to put Facebook at the forefront of the social media world, but, upon further inspection, this may not be the case. The 71% from 2014 is exactly the same as it was in 2013, which seems to indicate that there has been no growth in Facebook activity in the past year.

While Facebook remains consistently popular, Instagram, Twitter, and Pinterest all saw spikes in total percentage of use, with Pinterest seeing a heavily female bias. This seems to indicate that, while not matching the sheer numbers of Facebook, other social media are continuing to reach a meaningful audience and spread use of their applications.

Most interesting to me, though, was the proliferation of “multi-platform use,” which increased by ten percent from 42% to 52% this year. This means that more and more, users are choosing to diversity their content consumption and production to different platforms.

What this indicates is that there is a shift from the ideas of social media when they were first gaining traction to now. It used to be that the purpose of a social network was to house any and all elements of social life. Facebook was the home base for all chatting, photo and video sharing, networking, and resume building. Now, you have the opportunity to create a Facebook profile to house your “friends,” an Instagram account for photos, a LinkedIn for your professional growth, and Pintrest as your crafting showcase. Lest we forget Twitter as the place to engage with life’s daily activities, all of a sudden social media become less of a website to visit and spend time on, and instead turn into the outlet for which we share our lives, as well as consume the lives of those in our communities.

Some like to claim that Facebook is dying. I don’t really believe that to be the case. What we use Facebook for is changing, and Facebook has, since it’s inception, been fairly clear about their desire to keep up with the demands of its users. Facebook has turned into your homepage. We don’t consider the time we spend on Facebook because we are so often using it as a launching point for other websites. We click on videos that take us to YouTube. We click on articles that take us to blogs and news sites. We click on photos that take us to Instagram feeds. To say that Facebook is no  longer viable is to ignore the central purpose of Facebook, which is to catch the things that will be most especially interesting to you.

As these trends continue, we should expect to see continued push for specialized media that attempt to target a specific niche clientele. The expression “you can’t be everything to everybody” is proving especially true, and has created the opportunity for specialized networks, rather than catch-all social environments.

In the grand scheme of things, social media are still brand new. We are very much learning how to use them both to get our messages out, as well as to receive messages that we find personally meaningful. We will continue to see more and more people using multiple social media at the same time, while also seeing the prevalence of niche apps competing against “catch-alls” like Facebook. While none will match the sheer population of the Zuckerberg giant, each will have more impact within the specialized community that is more thoroughly engaged with the site.

January 21st: Strength of a Union

A transcript of the State of the Union Address can be found here.

Last night’s State of the Union was a social media explosion, as has become the case for most events of its size and nature. The resounding opinion was that this was Obama’s greatest one yet, and that his confidence and determination brought new hope to a presidency that has, in recent months, seen a dramatic decline in support.

As a nation, it is great to see our leader demonstrating such bold strength and confidence. It inspires those feelings within ourselves. What happens today, the day after such a declaration, though, is what defines its success.

The primary focus of last night’s speech was to highlight the progress the country has made in the past several years, and note areas where the president would like to see progress and, in some cases, where he refuses to accept decline. The speech’s thesis statement was that “the shadow of crisis has passed, and the state of the Union is strong.” Comforting words, no doubt, for a nation that needs a little hope, amid a world that continually looks to be falling apart.

The idealism was palpable. A strong focus was placed on the middle class, centered around the notion of equalling the playing field, not for the purpose of dragging down the elite, but for the chance to elevate those who do not get a fair chance. He said “That’s what middle class economics is -- the idea that this country does best when everyone gets their fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.” One country, striving together to lead the world is exactly the type of image that we all need to hear about. The challenge becomes making it a reality.

Now, as we review the materials, it will be easy to slip back into the partisanship that has plagued the last six years. We leave the shared goals of a strong, united nation because of the distraction of the details along the way. Yet, in President Obama’s speech, he speaks directly to this issue. The words that ring clearest today for me from last night are when the president addressed not only the possibility for disagreement, but rather the need for it.

He said “If we’re going to have arguments, let’s have arguments -- but let’s make them debates worthy of this body and worthy of this country.” Obama knows that he will not say some magic words and suddenly have Republicans and Democrats getting along. He knows that the gridlock will continue, and that the aisle will continue to divide us. But the point of a speech like this is to remind us that there IS an option, that we can find ways to disagree while also striving for the shared goals of a single nation.

We now need responses from two different groups to turn last night’s emotion into today’s action. We need President Obama to continue to play that role that he did last night. We need him to continue to be sassy, to be strong, to be willing to have meaningful debates and be ready to listen. We need a leader who will be willing to stand above the drama of Washington and steer the country as a whole where the people need and want it to go. We also need Congress to have listened. The time for crossed arms, grumpy faces, and fingers in our ears are gone. We can’t afford that anymore. Representatives of the people in the federal government owe it to this nation to continue to work for what is best for the country, not what is best for keeping one’s seat or pandering to a certain demographic.

Some might say that these are dreams, fun to talk about in a speech, but impossible to get done. This isn’t what real government looks like, they might say. The problem is, government ceases to look as it should, and we now have the ability AND the need to fix it.

Last night’s speech concluded with another powerful statement. In his conclusion, he said “We’ve laid a new foundation. A brighter future is ours to write. Let’s begin this new chapter -- together -- and let’s start the work right now.”

Last night’s speech brought with it a heavy dose of idealism. Idealism is nearly impossible to actually enact. There are pitfalls and there are challenges. Yet, that is why we set the bar so high: so that we know that this country can be the greatest in the world, if only we were willing to make it so.

Well, let’s get to work.

What Can "Most Men" Do?

Social media has, since it’s very beginnings, been a vehicle for social change. This is, after all, the origins of this blog.

This concept reared its head when, after the shooting two weeks ago at UC-Santa Barbara, a group of men went to defend themselves on Twitter. They used the hashtag #NotAllMen, representing the sentiment that it isn’t a universal rule that men feel hate or rage toward women. The meaning was well-intentioned. It just didn’t go quite as these men had planned.

In response, the hashtag #YesAllWomen took off, and caught fire. The tweets center around calling into the spotlight the many ways that women feel oppressed or overlooked in society.

Two of the tweets I found online were particularly disturbing to me. The first was tweeted by an unknown account. It stated “#yesallwomen because “I have a boyfriend” is more likely to get a guy to back off than “no”, because they respect other men more than women.” Having never thought if this situation that way, this was a troubling observation. The behavior of these men demonstrates that they are only interested in the woman’s availability, rather than her decision-making. This devaluation is so subtle that most wouldn’t even consider it, but, when called out so bluntly, it is uncomfortably accurate.

The second tweet was one by actress and director Sophia Bush, who tweeted “I shouldn’t have to hold my car keys in hand like a weapon & check over my shoulder every few seconds when I walk at night #YesAllWomen”. This took me for a loop. The feeling of such fear that simple tasks, like walking home at night, can illicit is something that I, as a man, have never really experienced. I worked at a sporting goods store that sold pepper spray in a college town. I knew we sold almost two or three cans per day. I never really thought about why. Was that ignorant of me? Perhaps. Was it maliciously ignorant of me? Of course not. But that is exactly the point of the hashtag.

Here is the most frightening part: this sense of fear is a learned trait. Mothers teach their daughters that they need to be afraid. Young girls learn so early that the world is a scary place, and they need to be prepared to protect themselves. I’m not saying that this isn’t true or necessary, but there is a certain part of me that asks the question: at what point do we create fear, rather than actually experience it? It this sense of danger actually perpetuating danger, rather than supporting security? We don’t really have an answer, and we aren’t at a point in society where we can really test the theory. All we know is that the number of women living in fear is too high, and we need to do something about it.

That being said, we know the origins of this situation come from men trying to say that not all males are looking to take advantage of women. Not all men are violent, not all men are hateful, not all men are chauvinistic. Yet all women feel the effects of these terrible experiences.

The really big, scary, tough part of all of this is what do we do. How can we fix this? How am I, as a man, supposed to help, if my behavior is already demonstrating the kind of values society is striving for? Of course, nobody has it perfect, and any man can learn how to be even more caring and respectful, but what are the men who are overall good people supposed to do to help?

The biggest danger of social media campaigns like this one is the precarious line between calling out a problem and shaming an entire group of people. The even tougher part is that, in this particular case, there is a lot of preaching to the choir. Those who are most likely to see, understand, and internalize these comments are actually the ones who are already behaving in respectful, thoughtful ways. We, as both men and women, need to begin to consider what can be done by the allies, the caring fathers, the loving boyfriends, the good guys, to help make the need for that deeply ingrained fear go away.

January 29th: The Big Cheese

During the Andrew Jackson administration, the story goes, a large block of cheese was wheeled into the White House. The purpose was to allow for all of those who were hungry to come and join the staff and cabinet of the highest office of the United States and share some food and discuss matters that would important to them.

This tradition was brought into common knowledge when it was featured on the West Wing, Aaron Sorkin’s masterful television show detailing the workplace environment of those working at the White House. In the show, the Chief of Staff brought back this tradition, or at least the part of getting some face-time with the leadership of the government. Throughout the seven seasons of the show, the White  House staff was visited by a wide variety of people with interests ranging from wildlife conservation to astrological concerns and even cartography issues. While many were ridiculous proposals and somewhat outlandish, all received the time and attention of those with some degree of power to act on the shared knowledge.

In a Youtube video that brought Bradley Whitford and Josh Molina together alongside Jay Carney, the White House Press Secretary, the White House announced their intentions to make this tradition come to life. For the first time, the White House has been accepting videos today to be answered by government officials. This will offer the opportunity for citizens, the day after Barack Obama’s State of the Union, to reflect on ways that their government can best serve them.

While the day in the West Wing was often thought of as “Crackpot Day” because of the prevalence of rather crazy ideas, this is an incredible opportunity for the government to be transparent and include the people in their deliberation. A government run for the people must have an idea about what the citizens deem important, and this gives all Americans the opportunity to have the ear of the leadership of our country.

The Obama administration won the presidency in 2008 because of their ability to understand the internet and social media, and how to use these tools to speak to an audience larger than any public appearance. This is yet another example of that understanding.

As is almost always the case, the State of the Union shed light on an incredible number of issues that are important not only to the Obama administration, but the country as a whole. Everything from the education system, the middle class, and international politics were called center stage to the forefront of the mind of all Americans. As incredible as it is that television has allowed all of the American citizens to get into the room for this address, there is an issue with translating those powerful words into powerful action. This year, more so than any in recent memory, the government looks incapable of making the kind of changes that Obama calls for.

This is where Big Block of Cheese Day comes into play. The American public gets to put the important questions to the government and get answers about not simply beautifully written words, but the actual actions that will be taken to make them a reality. Through this one day of internet communication, the Obama administration has the opportunity to use social media tools to communicate with its constituency in ways never done before.