January 13: The Talking television

The lady on the television actually spoke to me the other day. Well, maybe not to me in particular, but the audience. On Sports Center, two analysts were debating whether or not Russell Wilson was going to beat Robert Griffin III in their playoff meeting. As the debate began, the moderator prompted the audience to tweet their opinion to their page, and the percentage of voters for each side would be displayed. Throughout the rest of the debate, the stat bounced back and forth, and the TV personalities reflected on their opinions with the help of the public poll.

This is just the beginning of the new generation of audience participation within television. TV has been speculated upon for its longevity, because many believe that the lack of interactivity will make viewers bored with simply viewing TV content. With the appearance of social media within the media, a new niche was born.

It started with ESPN’s show “Sports Nation,” which features a series of debates each day, with the conclusion to each debate being the voters’ response, which had been collected online over the course of the day. As that show grew more and more popular, the form of interaction spread to other shows on ESPN and beyond.

Even beyond the world of sports, social media has grown to allow for participation by the audience. Just yesterday, CBS advertised a new episode of Hawaii Five-O in which there are three possible endings. The audience has the opportunity, during the course of the hour long show, to vote for whom they think is the murderer. At a certain point, the network will take the result of the vote and change the content to reflect what the public decides. Twitter has, in this instance, totally changed the landscape of television, and the way in which viewers relate to it.

This form of interaction creates an instant investment of viewers in their media. A person can actually engage with who they think should be the “correct” suspect, and thus be more willing to stick it out to the end of the show in terms of viewing, so as to see if their opinion reflected that of the nation as a whole.

On the other hand, viewers may feel a sense of loss as the suspense of the show is taken away. There will no longer be true “surprises” in the show, because it will simply be the answer that is most popular, not the most creative or most well written.

This then, of course, leads to an incredible shift in the production of such works of media. First of all, actors will need to now shoot several different versions of each piece, in that they will need to create the content for each individual situation. Additionally, the writers will have less ability to impress their own views on the works, and will be even more at the mercy of the public entertainment.

This is only one episode of one show. But in reality, it is a test for all other media creators. If this show is a success, you can be sure that more will follow. As twitter becomes more and more influential, it will become more and more pervasive in different elements of media and life as a whole.

January 6th Action vs. Justice

As a part of RA training this past week, there was a strong focus on social justice, which has been one of the staples of ongoing training seminars throughout the year. For several hours we discussed social justice, and the different ways that it could be achieved. Unfortunately, the group did not necessarily have a full grasp as to what social justice is, and, sadly, few people truly do. On a college campus, what students should truly focus on is social action, not social justice. Social action is the form of acts that individuals can do to try to make a positive change within their communities and environments. Social justice, on the other hand, is the act of totally eradicating a certain problem from the globe, making it a non-issue. Very few examples of social justice exist in our world, as that would require a total fix of the problem. An example of social justice would be that all people have food to eat all the time, therefore erasing hunger from the list of problems plaguing human civilization. Social action would be sending food to an African nation struggling with emaciation. The trouble with the confusion is not simply logistics. The issue becomes when an organization tries to convince people that social justice is something achievable. It is a form of setup for failure. If the problem is not completely finished, the group must have been unsuccessful, even though any contributions of social action are, in many ways, solving a problem, even if not the problem. The real root of the issue is the difference between action and intention. Social action is an act that can be done, something physical, tangible, and quantifiable to make the world a little better. Social justice, on the other hand, is the intention of making the world better, the wish for better, the ideal of better. Another issue with misinforming individuals on the difference between social action and justice is the difference that can arise in the eyes of different types of people on social justice. There is not a single answer to what is and is not socially “wrong,” and therefore leads to questioning about sweeping statements of the need for justice. Some may not believe that solving problem is necessary. They may not even believe that such a problem is even a problem. Therefore telling a collection of over 300 RAs that the goal is social justice is misleading, and can lead to a sense of helplessness. The best way that the University can educate its staff is to encourage a diverse form of social action projects. Some may focus on one issue, others another, but that will allow students to truly feel connected to the projects that they are doing, and they can feel a tangible change happening in the world. Social justice can also be taught, but it must be done in such a way that individuals understand the loft of such a goal, and understand that they cannot achieve social justice alone, but rather that they can act toward making the world a better place as a whole.

December 31st. The New Beginning

It has been several months since I last wrote a post for the blog that really started my writing. I worked on this site for two strong years before taking almost a full year off. And this is my post to say that I’m back. For a long time, I was trying to post both a blog and a newspaper column with the IDS, my school newspaper. That was exhausting. I ran out of gas for writing. I wasn’t able to do all of what I wanted, and this was the first thing I cut. But I came to realize, the more time I spent away from my own personal writing, the more I missed it. This site is not for the purpose of writing for a specific audience. I lost sight of that for a while. I was writing for the way that people would interact with my words or my thoughts. I was engaging in a form of self-censorship. I wasn’t staying true to what I really wanted to say. Now, though, I need this blog. I need a place where I am free of editors, of word-counts, of suggested topics. I need a place where I can not only post my thoughts, but strengthen them as well. Because as my fingers type out the words running through my head, my mind tackles the issues that I have been fighting to get my head around in the first place. The truth of the matter is that I love to write. My life goal is to write a book. I have begun that process, and along the way I realized that I was missing a way to interact with myself. I had tried several different ways of expressing myself, anywhere from keeping a daily journal of my thoughts to having people with whom I confided in. I quickly realized, though, that the best place to do my writing was actually right here, on this blog, where I started. So for the next year, I am going to return to the writing that started me off. I am going to post once a week, every Sunday, and continue to develop my writing skill, as well as the way that I interact with my own thoughts and emotions. Along the way, I’m not going to write for anyone but me. Anyone who wants to read, I encourage you to do so, and I hope that you will approach me with any comments or critiques that you may have. I hope that the community around me might be able to grow from my experience. But first and foremost I’m going to post what matters to me, and I’m going to write to become a better person. I’ve always stayed away from making New Year’s resolutions, because I believe that it is my job to be getting better every day, not just on the first day of every year. But this, my blog, the site of my deepest thinking, is where I am going to start again, this year, to try to grow by thinking, writing, and assessing exactly who I am, and who I want to be. Let’s see where I go.

Baseball off paper

Going into this baseball season, more than any before, Sabermetrics were the hot topic of conversation. New technology exists that allows teams to analyze so many different facets of the game that nothing is left up to chance. From pitch location, hitting directional splits, and defensive positioning catered to each batter, men with laptops have just as much sway in the clubhouse as do men with gloves and bats. The Houston Astros made a big leap in this area of the game, hiring a former rocket scientist to serve as “Director of Decision Sciences.” This position basically requires the analysis of statistics and trending geometrics to determine who should be playing different positions at any given time. Two players in particular this season came up early that were about to be hurt by their statistical trends: Derek Jeter and David Wright. Both appeared to be downward tracking in their careers, Jeter because of age and Wright because he simply plateaued too early, and was preparing for a downturn in his career numbers. Well into the second month of the season, baseball scientists are looking pretty dumb. Jeter is leading a struggling Yankees team and hitting for the third best average in the American League, while Wright is leading the batting race, sitting right at around .400. What is it, then, that allowed to two New York baseball team leaders to make such big numbers in the first quarter of the season when expectations were so low? No matter how accurate the statistics are, there is one thing that can never be truly quantified on the diamond, and that is heart. These two, and plenty of others, play with more heart than their earlier statistics may show, and don’t’ seem to mind having a deck seemingly stacked against them. If baseball was simply based on statistics, where the more likely event always occurred and no mystifying acts of heroism occurred, fans would most definitely lose interest, and quickly. It isn’t in the ability to predict what will occur that makes baseball so moving. It is the surprise, the ache of rooting for your team, the elation at a home run, the disgust at a loss, and the emotions that come with running as hard, pitching as fast, and simply playing as enthusiastically as is possible. It isn’t about telling me how well they are going to do, but in actually seeing it happen that makes the game of baseball so thrilling. So Sabermetrics can take a backseat to pure, unadulterated play.

Entering the Box

Throughout my life, I have come to understand what “God” means to me in a variety of different ways and a variety of different times. I would go so far as to say no year went by when my perception of God remained the same from the year before. I think this is a fairly common thing because I believe that a great many people have experiences throughout their life that change their perspective, whether it be because God feels particularly close, particularly distant, or anywhere in between.

In recent years, however, I have been intentionally pursuing opportunities that cause me to challenge my belief in God. I feel, to some extent, that my ideas along this path will be stronger if they can stand up to the challenge of disbelief, the challenge of being challenged.

Since I joined NFTY and began my first term as Religious and Cultural Vice President, I found that I wanted to be able to form some form of connection with God, because I felt an obligation to be able to have a personal understanding if I was going to be any form of spiritual leader.

Along my three terms, I have changed my views, changed my understanding, and changed my perception of God multiple times. But one of the things that I learned was to “hide my belief” in different places. When I say hide my belief, I mean that I would find things that inspired me, that drove me to have a better understanding on myself and my perception of God, and to save those for another time when I may be less firm in my faith.

The strongest of these items is the book “Have a Little Faith,” by Mitch Albom. This book is one that, whenever I feel distant from God and from my understanding of personal faith, I crack out my copy, spend a two-day period fully engrossed, and come out the other end feeling spiritually rejuvenated. Every time I read the book, I take something different out of it. But, at the same time, I believe that this book is a way in which I stay anchored, grounded, and reverent of my faith.

The behind-the-scenes reason for this blog post is that the documentary “God in the Box” is being shown tonight at Indiana University. I will be in attendance. This will be the second time I will be viewing it. The first time, I was at my home away from home, the URJ Kutz Camp. The camp staff brought in Nathan Lang, the director and creator of the film, to show it and discuss it. Over the course of the film, my perception of God was thrown totally to the wind, and I was forced to come to terms with how my beliefs fit in with the information I was getting. Does my belief in God stand true because of what I am hearing? What do I do if I want to change my view on God? How do I fit into my Jewish community if my views change?

As a person who is looking to give my entire life to religious practice and leadership, God is an important part of my future. So having some form of understanding of my personal spirituality is pretty important. I know Rabbis who are pretty set in their unwavering belief in God. I know some who do not necessarily even believe in God. Yet, even disbelief is a choice to believe in something.

In viewing this film tonight, I know that I am taking where I am as a believer and going to come out differently. And, frankly, I’m pretty excited about it. I can’t wait to see how my belief is adapted to fit my new understanding. Even though I have seen the film before, I am a different version of myself from the one that I was when I saw it the first time, and I’m sure there will be a whole new version of myself on the other side.

Heretic and Innovator

I haven’t blogged in several weeks, which is most likely because of the number of transitions going on in my life. With my involvement with NFTY changing and eventually dispersing, I have had to come up with new ideas for what my Jewish and secular leadership is going to look like in the coming years.

Part of this involved reading and writing an incredible amount. The topics dealt with a little bit of spirituality, a little bit of philosophy, and a little bit of leadership self-help material. Overall, I began writing my own ideas down, and creating a new sense of what it means to lead, what it means to follow, and what it means to make a difference in the world.

In my Jewish History class, I came to an interesting realization: most of the people we were studying created their greatest works or contributions to society in the last half of their lives. Whatever the reason for our studying them, it had something to do with what they did at the end, rather than at the beginning. I think this was startling because I would most definitely prefer to be in the first half of my life, and by a wide margin. That being said, I refuse to believe that everything I do from this point until I’m a “mature adult with life experience” will but useless.

I am calling for more action and seriousness put toward people of younger ages. Better yet, I’m calling for the elimination of age from discussions regarding leadership. It shouldn’t really matter how old someone is in terms of their ability to lead, inspire, or think. Whether it be direct campaigns for social justice, works of literary brilliance or anything else for that matter, age should not be anything short of a statistic.

Another element of my gleanings has to do with the boxes we create to limit our creativity. This is, in short, the only way that we are able to process our thinking, because without some form of order, we would have very little ability to focus. That being said, we are cramping our own style. The ones that we call heretics shouldn’t be seen as crazy. When the heretic becomes the innovator, we know that we are creating an environment that is open and willing to change with the times.

Changing the culture of an environment is the only way to change how things are done. Without some form of shift, there is no way that we can actually change the end result, only the way that we get there. Being willing to change the culture of your surroundings, though, requires not only the vision to make it happen, but also the intentionality associated with making a decision. You can’t change a cultural mindset by accident. You have to do it with a purpose, which necessitates leadership, bravery, and innovation.

I don’t know what my life is going to look like a year from now, but I refuse to let my surroundings continue to be imperfect if I have the means to do something about it. I am willing to sound like a heretic for the time being, if that means that with it will come a cultural shift and, one day, the acceptance of change as not a scary negative, but rather a necessary positive.

Making the Cut

I wonder if a driving instructor’s son is petrified of getting in the car with his friends. If so, I know how he feels.

Going to school five hours away from home required me to find a new place to get a haircut. This being the first time I was away from my barber/father for an extended period of time. I went into downtown Bloomington and found a place that had the look and feel of an authentic barbershop. My dad even did the work of bringing in free clippers to give to the man, so that my haircuts would come for free for a little while.

The first time I went, the man was nice, gave me a free haircut, and wished me a good few weeks until I came back next time. With how often I was able to go home first semester, I only went in one time during the first four months of school. Second semester, though, I went a full month before cracking and deciding to make an appointment. When I walked in, though, I found that the old man had retired. In his place was a young, bleach-blonde kid, who was dressed more like a frat boy than the hair-sculptors that I was accustomed to.

I sat in the chair and told the guy what I wanted. I should have known how the rest of the experience would go when he asked me “So you want a 1 guard along the back?” I guess I am cursed with having a trainer and technical expert as a father, because I know that no respectable barber would ask the question like that.

When the dust had settled, I think I walked away with a pretty good haircut. Was it as good as what I would have gotten from my father? Of course not. But it will most definitely do for the next few weeks. Plus, the barber had a good attitude, and I enjoyed making small talk, which is a very different experience when you don’t have to live under the same roof as the guy.

When the cut was over, I had to do something I’ve never done before: I had to actually reach for my wallet. The haircut was reasonably affordable, but the thought of paying for a haircut was definitely not one that I had ever considered.

Overall, the barbershop that I went to did an excellent job of attempting to keep up with my exceptional expectations. It was a enjoyable time, and definitely the second best option to my own basement.

End result: I’m waiting until I go home for the next one.