Valleywag's Ryan Tate hates the term "Fox News Bonehead"

In my multi-part blog entry on Erin Andrews (which included the video above) I ran across an little gem by now-Valleywag Editor Ryan Tate regarding the website activities of one Fox News correspondent Courtney Friel, who was one of the guests of Fox News star blowhard Bill O'Reilly on the matter of the nude video of ESPN's Erin Andrews. I got after Tate for using this title:

Secret Bikini Shots Of Fox News "Bonehead"

Because I was under the impression that Tate was using someone else's quote to about her to channel (a popular term now) his perception of Friel. I was under the impression Tate himself believed Friel to be a "bonehead" because in the blog post he didn't write the text to separate himself from what he wrote. Well, the ever-observant Tate saw my blog post and sparked a great and friendly email exchange (Ryan's cool) where he wrote:

I quoted the term, twice. Why do you quote things you don't
necessarily agree with? Usually because they're interesting. That
doesn't mean you think they're true. In this case, we have an anchor
who has stirred up a lot of critics. I can't say I agree with them,
because I haven't watched her show and never professed to. What do I
have to go on? What I do know is how she's handled the critics, and
what she's said, which is what I wrote about/ Hard to do that without
quoting the critics.

and...

That's because I didn't rail against the term. I'm not saying I knew
it to be wrong; I knew not whether it was correct or incorrect, and
did not pass judgement on it either way. The post you quoted wasn't
about whether she was a bonehead, it was about her removing racy
pictures from her own website, and more broadly how she presented
herself (the "horse dick" video). Her critics are relevant in this
context because it's a possible explanation for her pulling the
images.

This was a far cry from the exchange I had with Kara Swisher of the Wall Street Journal, who employed the same device regarding Twitter in stating that it was "simple", which I disagree with. Where Ryan was cool, Kara was nasty and overbearing, basically ordering me to make a change without explaining why she used someone else's quote about Twitter.

Kudos to Ryan!

As one who's paid to give an opinion, I'm used to those who write or say "I think this" or that, rather than hide behind a quote. But at least Ryan gave me his point of view separate from what he wrote and without the insults and orders Swisher threw at me.

Sgt. Lashley's Letter To Prof. Gates: I Am Not An Uncle Tom

From PoliticsNewsPolitics on YouTube:

Sgt. Leon Lashley, the African-American cop on scene when James Crowley arrested Professor Henry Louis Gates, writes a letter saying that he is not an "Uncle Tom" and regrets being known as a "black sergeant." He asks Prof. Gates what he can do to make things better, and let him know if he did anything wrong.

CNN's Don Lemon reads the letter to viewers

Obama "Beer Summit", Crowley Press Conference - history!

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



YouTube ,Yahoo, MySpace, Metacafe, DailyMotion, Blip.tv, StupidVideos, Sclipo and Viddler

Thursday, President Barack Obama held a "Beer Summit", as some have called it, with Harvard Professor Henry Lewis Gates, Jr., Cambridge Police Sergeant Officer James Crowley, and Vice President Joe Biden, bring an end to an unfortunate but necessary event in American Cultural history, and starting a new chapter in American race relations.

It was the first time in American and world history a sitting president met publicly with a white police officer and the person the officer arrested, a black man. And to add to the moment, the president is African American. I think the teachable moment President Obama referred to was that two gentlemen of seemingly different stripes but of one culture can not only meet, but (as they agreed to do) meet again and again.

 

Sgt. Crowley assists Prof. Gates as President Obama leads the way

President Obama issued this statement:

"Even before we sat down for the beer, I learned that the two gentlemen spent some time together listening to one another, which is a testament to them," the president's statement said. "I have always believed that what brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart. I am confident that has happened here tonight, and I am hopeful that all of us are able to draw this positive lesson from this episode."

And I think everyone did, even if Sapporo, my personal favorite beer, wasn't on the menu, (Obama had a Bud Light, Crowley chose Blue Moon, and Gates had Samuel Adams) it was still gratifying to see the four men sit together and talk. It provides a great example for a country that seems ready to split over differences of opinion. We have to get to the point of communicating openly and often and without fear. While it's hard to know exactly what was said between the men, we can read between the lined in Crowley's press conference - in the video - when he said "We agreed to disagree." It's not hard to determine what they disagreed about.

In the arrest of Gates, basically because Crowley judged him to be disobedient after what turned out to be a case of a mistaken 911 call in since Gates was entering his own home, Crowley said he was "going by the book" or word to that effect. But the whole point of critics of racial profiling is that the "book" argument is used all the time. The "book" is tossed out when an officer uses his or her own personal emphathy, and please don't tell me this isn't done. Water Goldstein over at the Huff Post has a great blog on why white guys like him come away from such encounters gaining the help of an officer, and not handcuffs.

Gates and Crowley say: "time to move forward"

In the website "The Root", Professor Gates, its editor and chief, wrote:

Sergeant Crowley and I, through an accident of time and place, have been cast together, inextricably, as characters – as metaphors, really – in a thousand narratives about race over which he and I have absolutely no control. Narratives about race are as old as the founding of this great Republic itself, but these new ones have unfolded precisely when Americans signaled to the world our country’s great progress by overcoming centuries of habit and fear, and electing an African American as President. It is incumbent upon Sergeant Crowley and me to utilize the great opportunity that fate has given us to foster greater sympathy among the American public for the daily perils of policing on the one hand, and for the genuine fears of racial profiling on the other hand.

In his press conference held after the "summit", Crowley said that both he and Gates would talk again as soon as next week.

That the two plan to meet and seize the moment to create a lesson for America is really exciting. I really believe God made this happen. It's too good to be true that a professor of Black Studies and a police officer who's also an expert in racial profiling are working together and have this exchange to build from. That's a miracle.

Toward American Culture

I hope people realize from this that we really are one people and there's much that binds us together below the surface. I don't know if it's from reduced education spending, longer work hours, or what, but we seem to be less patient with the idea of study and more willing to just go with our prejudices, but that's countered by the ever-more-well-mixed society we live in. We have extremes like the thoughtless Glen Beck (who said the President was racist in a horrible misuse of the term) and the thoughtful Gates and Crowley right before us. With a little communication we'll have more people like Gates and Crowley and far fewer people like Glen Beck.

NFL Commissioner Press Conference on Michael Vick - full text

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



The Michael Vick issue has drawn a variety of views and opinions like mine above, but only one person has the ability to determine his football future and that's NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. A press conference was held Monday in New York where Commissioner Goodell presented his decision regarding the former Atlanta Falcons quarterback, but we've only seen bits-and-pieces of text. Here's the full press conference transcript, courtesy of NFLMedia.com

NFL COMMISSIONER ROGER GOODELL


Press Conference – Michael Vick Conditional Reinstatement

July 27, 2009


NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell: Good afternoon. As all of you are aware, I’ve made my decision regarding Michael Vick and I would be happy totake your questions. But before we do, I would just like to make a couple of points which I hope will be helpful inputting it into context.

First, and most importantly, we all want to recognize that the conduct that Michael engaged in was not only horrific, but it was cruel. And we all certainly recognize that and I believe after meeting with Michael that he recognizes that also. We engaged in a very thorough process. It was very carefully done and very thoroughly done. Multiple members of our staff were engaged as well as me. We went through his court records. We went through evaluations. We went through decisions. We know all the terms of his parole. We went through every detail, including about a four-and-a-half hour meeting with Michael last Wednesday here in the New York area. So we take this as a very serious matter. We’re dealing with a young man’s life. Our process was similarly reflective of the seriousness of that.

As you know, he can sign now with an NFL team. He can practice without delay with an NFL team. He may play in the final two preseason games of this preseason. And once the regular season starts, he can practice if the team so chooses. And I will decide within the first six weeks of the regular season when and whether he will be reinstated to play from there.

He has been very open and fully cooperative as well as his advisers and his counselors. I will say that one of the most important things that we talked about is that nobody gets through life alone. That you always have to have a mentor. That you always have to have somebody who will give you guidance and support at critical moments. Michael needs that right now and I have asked Tony Dungy to play a more formal role on my behalf but also on Michael’s behalf to serve as a mentor to Michael to help him and guide him through some very difficult decisions he’s going to have to make going forward. I do not expect he will be his only mentor,but Tony will be a big part in determining who else will serve as advisers to him. But I know Tony and Michael, who I spoke to earlier today on a conference call, both take it very seriously and are committed to making sure that they work closely together to make better decisions going forward.

I do believe that this transitional approach that we have outlined for Michael is the best thing for him, that it has the best opportunities to lead to success for a young man who has his life ahead of him. Whether he makes it on the field in the NFL is something that will be determined on the field. But he has some big decisions off the field to make in the way he conducts himself. I think he is at a point right now where he is prepared to make those decisions and hopefully conduct himself in a more positive way. I have said repeatedly,and many times before, that playing in the NFL is a privilege, we are held to a higher standard and it is not a right to be an NFL player. I think Michael clearly understands that is his responsibility and I think it is his opportunity now to earn that privilege back again. And that is up to Michael.

But one final point before I take your questions. As I’ve said many times before, I am very proud of NFL players. They do incredible things and exceed the standards that we set for them. And they do that both on and off the field. And I am proud of the things they do off the field. Obviously when you are dealing with 2,000 young men, you are going to have mistakes, bad judgments, and people are going to do things that you are not proud of. Obviously this is one case. But I hope something positive can come out of something that has been a very tragic circumstance and hopefully people will understand that the individual here has the right to earn that opportunity back again. He will be held accountable for that. He will be held accountable for his life management plan that he submitted to me, the things he says he is going to do, and I will make sure that he does that in responsible fashion, as will Tony.

Have any teams expressed an interest in signing him yet?

That’s not something that I would get involved with. I work for all 32 teams. As far as what team signs him, that’s an individual club decision and they’ll have to make that individually with him and negotiate.

On Michael lying:

He was not candid with me. In fact, prior to starting the hearing we spent a few minutes together and it was the first thing he raised with me. That he was disappointed in himself. That he was direct in the fact that he lied about his involvement in dog fighting. And I accept his apology. I understand. I don’t like being lied to like anybody else. But this is something that we have to move forward from. Michael understands that I am judging him on his activities going forward, on the words that he said to me, and on the conduct that hopefully will support the words he expressed to me personally.

What needs to happen in the next 12weeks for him to be reinstated?

A number of things. First he would have to sign a contract with a team. He will have to begin the process of getting re-acclimated into that community and that team. He’ll obviously want to relocate his family. He’s been very clear about that. He will have to get a support system around him. He will continue to go through the programs of his parole and also the programs that the NFL has designed for him. He will work very closely with Tony and me if necessary to make sure that we are providing the support necessary and the guidance. But he has a very difficult transition ahead and we want to support him in that and give him that opportunity. But he recognizes he has to earn that and his actions will have to support that.

Should Vick not sign with any team during the preseason, will the parameters of this reinstatement change? Have you looked into or discussed that possibility, if he doesn’t have the opportunity with a team during preseason?

Well that’s not something I can control. Of course individual clubs and Michael and his team will have to make that decision who he signs with ultimately. I don’t expect I would modify the terms of what I call the transition plan in any marginal way, but I’ll leave that option open if necessary – but I don’t see that as being something that I would engage in.

PETA has said that they had wanted you to have him undergo a psychiatric evaluation to show that he is truly remorseful and that if not they would consider protesting any team that would sign him. Did you have him undergo any evaluations?

Yes, in fact we worked with animal rights activist groups and we are clear: we worked with their medical professionals about the aspects of our evaluations. Michael fully cooperated with all of those tests. Those tests did not indicate there was any reason he couldn’t make a transition forward, but they also recognized that counseling and other aspects of support will be important for him going forward.


You mentioned there’d be an NFL component to his program as well, things he would have to adhere to. Could you elaborate on what that means beyond obviously the probationary things you have asked him to do legally?

Well the primary one is the role of (former Indianapolis Colts Head Coach) Tony Dungy. I believe that Tony is a very successful individual, he is somebody that I respect his judgment, I think he is wise and will give good counsel. I think he is committed to helping Michael asa young man – not as a football player. He’ll try to do what he can to help him reestablish his life and help him move forward. That’s the first thing that has to happen here. All of the conditions which we have outlined in the letter – which we will be happy to provide you with – we will hold Michael accountable for. He will be responsible for fulfilling those,and they will be part of my judgment about how long the period of time is before I’ll allow him to play in regular season games.

Did you feel a sense of urgency to make the decision quickly? Obviously it’s only been a week since he completed his federal term. How much of a relief – I don’t know if relief is the right word – but how much of a relief will it be for you tohave made this decision quickly?

Relief is not a word I would use here. I believe that it was my responsibility to make a thoughtful, clear decision, and to do it on a very timely basis. I am not here to punish anybody; we’re here to extend player’s careers rather than limit player’s careers. That is important for us to do as long as they recognize the standards by which we are going to hold them accountable and everybody in the NFL. I believe Michael understands that. I believe he deserves the opportunity to earn his way back onto the field – but he will have to earn it. It is up to him now, and we will support him the way we have outlined in my decision. I believe that I had the responsibility to make a decision as quickly as possible, one that was fair, and I hope this one is seen as fair – although I fully recognize that some people won’t agree with it.

About how many people played a role? Obviously this is your decision and your name is attached to it, but I know NFL security, probably owners and coaches, players past and present probably played some role in you formulating your final policy.

Well I believe very much in getting a variety of opinions to get a broad perspective. I reached out to a variety of leaders of our country, our society. I’ve talked to a number of current and former players, I’ve talked to a number of current and former coaches, I’ve talked to former and current executives – but I am very cautious about competitive issues here. I would not involve someone that would be involved potentially in Michael’s interest as a football player. I was interested in Michael as an individual and what we could do to help reestablish his life and get him involved in a positive way regardless of if he played football. I do believe very much in getting perspectives, and I believe that has served me very well in making decisions. As you pointed out, ultimately, at the end of the day, I had to go into a room and make a decision. I reached out to a number of people, including DeMaurice Smith (head of the NFL Players Union), former players, and coaches and I believe I had all the perspectives I needed to make this decision.

Did you talk with any of the sponsors of the NFL, any companies and what their reaction would be? Was there anything you would bounce off of them?

I didn’t – I can’t specifically recall contacting people in that context. From time to time I may have spoken to a CEO about how to make decisions like this and what are the important factors even though the circumstances, I presume, would be wildly different. But I never thought about it in the context of the commercial success of the NFL. That’s never been a factor for me from day one. The intent here was to do the right thing with a young man’s life and for the game of football and the NFL, and that’s what I tried to do.

Oakland Shootout and Sideshow - a review

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



On YouTube.com

Yesterday I posted a blog entry which contained set of videos from the YouTube channel of "EASTOAKLAND106", and contained scenes that were shocking. One showed two young black men basically exacting an ugly form of "street" justice on a white man in East Oakland. The other videos were created during "The Sideshow", an activity featuring muscle cars revved to full-throttle by their drivers, spinning donuts in the middle of the intersection of 106th and Mac Arthur Blvd. The YouTube channel contained other videos that together gave the viewer a real picture of what was going on (or "going down") in that part of Oakland.

I made the decision to create the blog to get the attention of the normally placid blog reader, tossed a steady diet of texts about celebrities, sports, and Erin Andrews. These videos showing the real life in East Oakland are there, but bloggers generally ignore them. I thought it was time to change that state of affairs, so I did.

The reaction on my blog Oakland Focus was basically normal, one email of concern about what's happening in that part of our city. But on SFGate.com, the website of the San Francisco Chronicle, it was different. At first, some were hostile, angry that I placed such videos up for public view (forgetting that the videos were already up and out in the open on YouTube), others accused me of trying to "glorify" what they saw as "black culture". Still, others said that by installing that blog post I was simply advancing how whites saw blacks. All of these views I take issue with to a degree.

Yes, I know the old saw that "if it bleeds, it leads" but my intent was to poke and prod at a system of local bloggers that has ignored East Oakland. While there's a blog called "Oakland North", which focuses on a part of our town that, considering the Rockridge scene, can be as sexy as it is charming, there's no blog called "Oakland East" or "East Oakland" for that matter, and some of the blogs that certain Oakland Councilmembers read give only one view of Oakland. And SFGate.com and the w Oakland Tribune website only report crimes that happen in East Oakland, but don't give one an idea of what it's like to be there. So, with the help of the SFGate staff, that all changed.

I thank the SFGate's Vlae Kershner for taking the daring leap of giving my post the visibility "above the fold" of the front page and in the face of the visitor. The result - in part because of this and because of Google News and the way I designed the post to trigger it - was 149 comments, and it was gratifying to see the outpouring of emotion, the dissension, and eventually the melding of views and ideas. People who started out far apart were able to find common ground: we agree that some set of policies must be enacted to change East Oakland beyond just "more cops" and even though some don't think anything we try will work, they agree something must be done.

I still favor a return to a manufacturing-based economy in East Oakland. I'm tired of seeing whole states like Alabama work to bring auto plants and steel plants to those areas, while people here who have low-skills struggle to find work while the government tells them to get "retrained" for jobs that others move here to get, and land them. California as a whole has forgotten how to compete for industry, and has become lazy: more willing to build prisons and lock people up than assure the maintenance of a well-funded education system and a great jobs-building economy. The objective should be "a job for everyone" and not "I will arrest you."

All that and we're surprised at what we saw in East Oakland, or for that matter, the riots after the shooting of Oscar Grant? That is us, not the black "us" or the white "us, or the Asian or Latino "us", but us as Americans, or as Oscar Goldman said to "The Six Million Dollar Man", Steve Autin, "This is your arm, Steve." We have to deal with the reality we face and change it.

Some lament the passing of "old media," and I certainly mourn the loss of giants like Walter Cronkite, but new media - open, in your face, connective of everyone, and rapid in motion - is the social mirror we've never had before. We can see who we are, talk about what needs to change, then go out and do it.

Michael Vick - The "Anti-Vick" team list

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



After much discussion, polling, and commenting, Michael Vick's back in the NFL. As I mention in my video created two day ago, he has to wait six games (which I called a suspension but as it turns out, it's not). Rather than blast another post about Vick's return, I took a look at the results of my poll (still a small majority favored Vick's return to the NFL this season, including me), and waited for more information. During that time, several NFL teams openly expressed their lack of desire to have the double-threat quarterback join them, but it took my friend Mike Florio of ProFootballtalk.com (the "TMZ.com" of the NFL) to make an "anti-Vick" team list. He updates the list periodically; here's what it looks like as of this writing, and Mike has notes explaining if the teams made their views known before or after Vick was invited back to the NFL by Commissioner Roger Goodell:

Atlanta Falcons
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (Pre-reinstatement)
Detroit Lions (Pre-reinstatement)
New York Jets (Pre-reinstatement and last week)
New York Giants (Recently)
San Francisco 49ers (Pre-reinstatement and post-reinstatement)
St. Louis Rams (Pre-reinstatement, and possibly post-reinstatement)
Dallas Cowboys (Pre-reinstatement and recently)
Washington Redskins (Pre-reinstatement and recently)
Houston Texans (Pre-reinstatement)
Indianapolis Colts (Pre-reinstatement)
Seattle Seahawks (Pre-reinstatement)
Buffalo Bills (Post-reinstatement)
Cincinnati Bengals (Post-reinstatement)
Miami Dolphins (Post-reinstatement)
Kansas City Chiefs (Pre-reinstatement and post-reinstatement)
Philadelphia Eagles (Post-reinstatement)

Here are the teams that to my knowledge have not made a statement (if you have new information, please let me know:


Oakland Raiders
Cleveland Browns
Houston Texans
Chicago Bears
Minnesota Vikings (Didn't say "no," but did not say "yes either)
St. Louis Rams

No statement from the Raiders

Now before you scream "The Raiders have said they will pass on Vick", no they didn't say that, a San Francisco Examiner columnist speculated they would do that, and it showed up in Google News. Offically, the Silver and Black have said nothing. Moreover, it's in the Raiders history to give a player like Vick a chance and if he's still able to run as he did two years ago, could give a defense fits in a kind of "Wildcat" formation with running backs Michael Bush and Darren McFadden.

Coach Tony Dungy is Vick's NFL-appointed mentor

Tony Dungy, the legendary Super Bowl-winning former coach of the Indianapolis Colts, is Vick's NFL-appointed mentor. Commissioner Goodell himself asked Dungy to help in this role and he could not have made a better choice. Dungy has taken his time to counsel men in prison and many players and former players look to him for advice. Based on what Dungy wrote, Vick may not be in a hurry to play football In his blog, Dungy explained:

I believe it (allowing Vick to return to the NFL) was the right call and I am glad that Michael is going to get a chance to re-start his football career. But, more than that, I’m happy with the position Michael has taken. I’ve met with him twice and spoken with him on the phone a few other times and I believe he is really focused on putting his life back together. Sure, he would love to play football in the NFL again, but I think he has other priorities. He has missed his family and looks to get those relationships going again, especially with his three children. I think he realizes not only how important they are to him, but also how important he is to their development. He has missed 18 months of that development and he wants his whole family together again.

With that, look for Vick to keep a low public profile and catch up with his family. Football's there but what we all forget is he's been away from society for two long years. He's got a lot of catching up to do. Heck, he's not even on Twitter!

Hands On Gourmet- Tip: How to Cut a Cantaloupe Melon

My friends from the great company Hands on Gourmet talk about the proper way to peel a melon. For more go to http://www.handsongourmet.com

John Edwards has a sex tape?

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



In the story that will not die, we now learn that John Edwards, the former North Carolina Senator and VP running mate to John Kerry, now reportedly has a sex tape. According to Rush & Molloy, the gossip columnists of the New York Daily News, Edwards former aide Andrew Young just finished a book proposal that described first, that he is not the father of the child of Rielle Hunter, John Edwards mistress, second, that Young just happened to see a sexually-explicit videotape as he was unpacking after moving to California from the East Coast, where he lived with Rielle Hunter, Edwards' mistress, and Young's wife and family.

The story is known by now: in August of 2008, after the heat of the Democratic Primary had cleared and just before the Democratic National Convention, former Senator Edwards admitted he cheated on his wife Elizabeth starting in 2006, while she was battling breast cancer. The scandal was originally reported by the Enquirer as far back as November of 2007, and just a few blogs, including Zennie62, then called "Zennie's Zeitgeist" followed it.

Rielle Hunter was an amateur film-maker Edwards befriended in New York City in 2006, but the friendship turned into two things: a $200,000 video job for Hunter and an affair for Edwards. Then - aide Andrew Young told the media - or those new media types paying attention - that he was the person who had the affair with Hunter and evntually got her pregnant.

This video I created gives you a look at what Rielle Hunter did for Edwards on the campaign trail:



Now Young's changing his story, claiming there's a sex tape and he has it, stating that he's not the father of Hunter's child and that Edwards is, and throwing Edwards so far under the bus he's going to be ran over by it and have skid marks on his back.

Yikes.

The question is why, after all this time, would Andrew Young do this to his former boss? Loyalty can last forever, can't it? According to the Huffington Post, Young feels "betrayed" by the "once-friendly" Edwards family. That turnabout may have come at the hands of Elizabeth Edwards, as the NY Daily News claims it was she who blamed Young for being an "enabler" of Edwards affair with Hunter, even to the point of arranging cell phone calls between Edwards and Hunter. Reportedly, Ms. Edwards threatened to leak information about Young's criminal past.

Yikes.

And The Enquirer, which rose from tabloid obscurity to gain mainstream media attention by breaking this story, reports that Young expressed displeasure with Edwards after he visited Hunter just after the child was born last year. Then, just after Edwards admitted his affair in August of 2008, Fox News ran a post presenting Young's unfortunate past of arrests. Young, with his image damaged, felt backed into a corner and like any wounded animal, struck back with this new story. The real story.

(Some websites, like the Enquirer claim the story of Young's past came up in The Daily Beast, but that's not true. It was Fox News.)

That the Edwards matter has degenerated to this point is sad to say the least. A once-promising man and family have essentially reduced themselves to the point of slinging mud at former friends and vice versa and who knows who else is next, given that Elizabeth Edwards is writing a book too.

Yikes!

Erin Andrews voted most influential TV reporter

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



From the "You've gotta be kidding me" department, we have the news that ESPN's on-air reporter Erin Andrews has been voted "the most influential TV reporter" in a contest established by website Mediaite.com. If you're wondering just who Erin Andrews is and have been under a rock, first consult my video above, then come back here.

To recap, Erin Andrews is the ESPN reporter that was the focus - literally - of someone taking a peephole camcorder video of her in the nude, in a hotel room. The suspect has still not been identified or captured as of this writing, while some believe it may have been a co-worker at ESPN. With that action, Erin Andrews has emerged from unknown to known, and to "most infuential reporter" in two-weeks. Before we look closely at that, let's see who she passed up to gain the lofty title.

The Mediaite Power Grid contains 290 reporters in its selection field for the category of "TV Reporter". Overall, Mediaite ranks 1,500 personalities in 12 categories. Anyone can send an email to be listed, at powergrid@mediaite.com, but once there, Mediaites' system takes over and its not perfect, at least at first. But I argue that it is depending on how the results are used. Let's look at Mediaite's explanation for how it ranks TV reporters, where Erin Andrews is listed, first:

TV Reporters are individuals who report news stories on-air for a television network. Their rankings are determined based on: appearances/mentions on television as compiled by the media monitoring service TVEyes, ratings of that network or program, Online Buzz of proper name, Blogs Buzz of proper name, and Twitter Followers (if applicable). You might at times see an individual ranked higher than any of their individual metric rankings — keep in mind that our algorithm weights some metrics more than others.

And here's the complete list of metrics used, straight from Mediaite's FAQ page:

Metrics

Twitter Followers – This metric is an individual’s total number of Twitter followers, if applicable. (Individuals who do not use Twitter will not be penalized.)

Google Buzz of Name - This metric is the number of relevant hits yielded by a Google search of an individual’s name. Irrelevant hits, such as those for similarly-named individuals, are filtered out. For instance, the Google Buzz metric for James B. Stewart, the writer and reporter, filters out hits for Jimmy Stewart, the actor, and for James Stewart, Jr., the motocross racer.

Google Blog Buzz of Name – This metric is the number of relevant hits yielded by a Google blog search of an individual’s name. Irrelevant hits, such as those for similarly-named individuals, are filtered out. For instance, the Google Blog Buzz metric for James B. Stewart, the writer and editor, filters out hits for Jimmy Stewart, the actor, and for James Stewart, Jr., the motocross racer.

Google Buzz of Affiliation or Title – This metric is the number of relevant hits yielded by a Google search of a television program, print publication, or online publication. Irrelevant hits, such as those for similarly-named titles, are filtered out. For instance, the Google Buzz metric for Vanity Fair, the Condé Nast magazine, filters out hits for the Thackeray novel of the same name.

Google Blog Buzz of Affiliation or Title - This metric is the number of relevant hits yielded by a Google blog search of a television program, print publication, or online publication. Irrelevant hits, such as those for similarly-named titles, are filtered out. For instance, the Google Buzz metric for Vanity Fair, the Condé Nast magazine, filters out hits for the Thackeray novel of the same name.

Ratings of Columns - This metric is the ratings of this individual’s columns published, either exclusively online or through a publication’s website, over the past 180 days as determined by Technorati.

Print Circulation – This metric can be one of two things. For newspapers, this metric is the total average paid circulation per week. For magazines, this metric is the total paid and verified circulation per issue.

Unique Online Visitors – This metric is the estimated number of visitors to an online publication’s website in the past month, as determined by online reporting site Compete.com.

TV Airtime (through TVEyes) -This metric is the total number of times an individual appears or is mentioned on air in the previous week on a selection of U.S. cable channels, local network affiliates, and international television news operations. These statistics are reported by the media monitoring service TVEyes.

Time slot Ratings - This metric is the total viewership of the program, as extrapolated from Nielsen-reported television ratings.Note: in some cases television ratings have been adjusted for individuals who appear on programs that only air once per week, or are part of a larger ensemble cast.

Network Ratings - This metric is the total viewership for all programs managed by a given television executive, as extrapolated from Nielsen-reported television ratings. In the case of broadcast networks, we are using Prime Time network ratings. Cable Networks, however, we are using the average total day rating. Note: in some cases television ratings have been adjusted for individuals who appear on programs that only air once per week, or are part of a larger ensemble cast.

Radio Ratings - This metric is the average total number of listeners for a given radio program as extrapolated from Arbitron’s radio listenership ratings that are publicly available or self-reported.

Company Valuations - This metric is the estimated total valuation of all media companies in which an individual owns a significant stake. Non-media companies owned by an individual are not counted; however, any media company in which the individual holds a partial stake is counted at full value.

Personal Net Worth – This metric is the estimated net worth of an individual, including media, non-media holdings, and other components of personal wealth.

Number of Employees – This metric is the estimated total number of people employed under an individual, whether at an entire media company, a network, an individual publication, or a television show.

Looking at the list, Erin Andrews shares the stage with such luminaries as ABC's Jack Tapper (ranked number 2 today), MSNBC's Chuck Todd (ranked number 3 today), and others like CBS News' Morley Safer and Mike Wallace (number 4 and number 5 respectively). The highest ranking woman other than Andrews is Savannah Guthrie, White House Correspondent for NBC News at number 6 on the list. The reason Andrews is the most powerful on this list is - and Mediaite explains this - directly related to the buzz she's gotten due to this whole peephole video affair.

But does that mean she's not powerful? Well, yes and no. Let's take the hard-to-stomach yes, first. Andrews has a platform that she and ESPN could use to gain ratings or for her to bring attention to a particular concern she has, like how women should be looked at by a different set of "metrics" in media. Regardless of the fact that she would be advocating for an end to the very thing that gave her a platform, she would have it to use for her soapbox. So far, she hasn't done that, and it's a huge error. Erin lacks a Twitter page, for which she could gain millions of new followers overnight to do with whatever she pleases in much the same way that Ellen DeGeneres used her millions of followers to advance an online petition.

That Andrews may not have liked how she got this platform is perhaps the main reason she's not using it, but it's a big error in judgment because given that her network rankings on Mediaite are at number 45, when the buzz dies down, her drop from number one's going to be a big one unless she has a new appearance on TV once during the next two weeks. So, you may ask?

The "So" is in dollar. Buzz equals bucks, my friend, and people want to see and learn about other people. That's what's missing from the recent blog by San Francisco Chronicle Editor-At-Large Phil Bronstein on the new narcisism in media. Hey Phil, it pays the bills, just ask Rush Limbaugh, who's following of 14 million "dittoheads" has him laughing all the way to the bank with a $400 million contract.

If Andrews plays her cards correctly she can build such a following, but she's got to get over the anger of what happened to her to do so. Whomever made the peephole video unwittingly gave her a weapon to change media for herself - it's up to her to use it. Andrews can parlay the attention into a business that uses her name to help other women in media get noticed the right way, not the nude way.

Chevron Richmond issue: new video shows job loss impact

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

Apparently someone was paying attention to my call for videos from last week's Richmond City Council meeting where I reported that California Attorney General Jerry Brown visited a packed council hearing room and got passed a resolution to allow him to get involved in the issue of the stopped Chevron plant construction order. A number of comments on my blogs pointed to video links but then out-of-the-blue, Chevron itself stepped forward with their video, and it's a good one:



The video shows the workers impacted telling their stories in much the same way that laid off plant construction electrician Dennis Roos told his story to me. The video was apparently created last Tuesday, at the Richmond City Council hearing. One worker in the video said "I've got a family. I've got four girls. I've got a house payment. A car payment. I was really dependent on this job." In the meeting itself, one woman said "I urge you to put yourselfs in our shoes. I've can't pay my taxes. I can't buy groceries. I can't feed myself and I can't support my family."

For me this is hard to take. Again, I can't understand why Contra Costa County Superior Court Judge Barbara Zuniga designed the decision in the way she did when there were so many creative policy roads she could have taken. If one wonders why California has an initiative process, here's an example. The thousands of people harmed by her action have no employment place to go. We're in the worst economy since the Depression and California's feeling the brunt of the pain.

Much of the Federal bailout money goes to new projects, but if they're stopped at the local level, then the jobs that were to be created are erased. In this case, Richmond residents, Judge Zuniga's own people, are harmed. You may call it a "tough, hard nosed decision" but I call it a terrible policy design, and my focus has been policy analysis for most of my life. Good policy works to form a set of laws that work for the best outcome for people on both sides of the equation, not just one side. It takes a level of creativity Judge Zuniga is more than capable of.

But what's done is done; it just needs to be fixed; these people are suffering. As I wrote before, the real little guy didn't win at all.

Again, I'm not questioning environmental concerns at all, just this "winner take all" attitude that comes with these battles of late in a complex system. And that's the point: our socioeconomic system is more complex than the activists - who always simplify these things without an understanding of how to find the main "drivers" in them - get.

A course in system dynamics (which shows how to "connect the dots" between one decision and its impacts) for all concerned - councilmembers, judge, company, workers - would help a lot. But frankly the workers don't need the lesson: they are the ultimate drivers here and have connected those dots. They make the plant run. They build new plans. They vote. They make purchases for families. And they breath the same air, so I know from conversations they're concerned about that too. And if they decide to ban together and take action, they could turn this bad decision around and make it so it doesn't happen again. They need their jobs back as soon as possible.

The overall lesson is for our legal and policy system to "get smart" and start making creative decisions that save California's economy but not at the expense of workers or the environment.

Alexis Cohen's Death caused by 23-year-old New Jersey man

From MTV.com - Police have arrested a 23-year-old New Jersey man in connection with Saturday morning's hit-and-run death of two-time "American Idol" contestant Alexis Cohen. The Asbury Park Journal reports that Daniel Bark was arrested at 6 p.m. on Sunday and charged with causing Cohen's death by reckless driving and then leaving the scene of a collision.

SF AIDS benefit features Jersey Boys, American Idol stars

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



On YouTube.com

This Sunday, August 2nd (yikes, two days before my birthday!) The San Francisco-based Richmond / Ermet AIDS Foundation (REAF.org) features the 15th annual presentation of "Help Is On The Way: No Business Like Show Business." I've attended this gala over the last four years and I've got to tell ya it’s a load of fun; a mix of a little serious, a lot of energy, and a ton of talent. (The video above is from last year's event, where San Francisco luminaries like Harry Denton were holding court in the pre-show auction lounge, joined by "Austin Powers", "Dean Martin", and others.) Before I explain why you should attend, let me give you some background.

REAF was founded by Barbara Richmond and the late Peggy Ermet in memory of their sons, John Richmond and Doug Ermet, who both lost their lives to AIDS. In 1995, the two women launched a musical AIDS benefit to honor their sons by raising funds for AIDS service organizations. Ken Henderson is the organization's executive director, and together with his partner Joe Seiler have produced the event with the founder Barbara Richmond. I started going to the annual event after some prodding from a good friend of mine who's on the foundation's board of directors and now it's an event drug I can't do without.

What "Help Is On The Way" is known for are appearances by name entertainers who, while they give their time for free, put in knock-you-outta-your-seat performances. Cast performers from the musical "The Jersey Boys" have graced the stage in the past and this year, show star John Lloyd Young comes in. The show has also been the focal point for "American Idol" stars and this year is no exception. Melinda Dolittle, who wowed Idol audiences in season six, and now has a new album called “Coming Back to You", will be joining him as well as the amazing Joely Fisher. Fisher's currently in a new Fox TV show called "Til Death" and is on “Desperate Housewives” as well, in addition to a wealth of credits on TV shows like "Normal, Ohio" and movies like "Inspector Gadget". I had the pleasure of meeting Fisher at last year's event; what an incredibly nice person she was to go with her many accomplishments.

With Fisher, Dolittle, and Lloyd Young comes the legendary actress Tyne Daly from the "Cagney and Lacy" TV series, and "Judging Amy". Carole Cook, who created the role of Maggie Jones in "42nd Street" and was the first to star after Carol Channing in "Hello Dolly" will come back for her 13th show. David Gaines, who played "The Phantom" in "The Phantom of The Opera" 2,000 times (not kidding), is on board, too. He will be joined by Bay Area-performer Maureen McVerry, Shawn Ryan of "America's Got Talent" (who comes back for the third time), the incredible dancers Cate Caplin and Gary Franco, who are coming for their seventh and third time respectively, and singer Welsla Westerfield, who's making her 10th show. Singer Jeanie Tracy comes for her first show as well as comic musicians BaulPointPen. Jon Maher's back and he's performed in 14 of the 15 annual performances of "Help is On The Way". But the one singer you've got to hear is Susan Anton.

This is Anton's fifth show and if you can sit through her performance and not come away breathless, something's wrong with you. I'm serious. Her career spans 30 years (she doesn't look at day over 30) from the play "Hurleyburly" to “The Ben Stiller Show” and includes most recently Eve Ensler’s “The Vagina Monologues”.

The show starts with a pre-event Gala Reception with choice offerings from some of San Francisco's best restaurants and Northern California's best wineries and distillers. Steak? It's there. Noodles? Yep. Merlot? Certainly. But the impersonators are a kick, as the video shows, with "Marilyn Monroe" and other stars. Plus, there's a silent auction for those who want to win, say, a vintage guitar used by a certain rocker. The reception starts at 5 PM, with the show itself at 7:30 PM this Sunday, August 2nd at the Herbst Theatre, 401 Van Ness Ave.

"Help Is On The Way" benefits four Bay Area AIDS service agencies including Aguilas, AIDS Legal Referral Panel, PAWS (Pets Are Wonderful Support), and Shanti. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, State Senator Mark Leno, and SF Treasurer Jose Cisneros are the event's honorary co-chairs. Come down, and have a great time, and I've got to be frank, for those single straight bachelors holding out because you think it's not for you, get over it! There are a lot of great looking women there, everyone's nice, and its for a real good cause.

For ticket information visit www.reaf.org or call 415-273-1620

Sarah Palin fairbanks Governor's Picnic

Sarah Palin's last day in office as Governor of Alaska is today. Whatever the reason, I think she made a big mistake in stepping down.

President Obama's beer bust with Gates and Crowley: a beer poll

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



YouTube.com , Yahoo, MySpace, Metacafe, DailyMotion, Blip.tv, StupidVideos, Sclipo and Viddler

What started as a calamity threatening to divide America has seemingly ended in a planned beer bust at the White House, courtesy of President Barack Obama himself. The ill-advised (in my opinion) arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Lewis Gates by Cambridge Police Officer Sgt. James Crowley four days ago caught the attention of the nation, but it was President Obama's comment that the Cambridge Police "acted stupidly" and the rather terrible response by the Cambridge Police Union at its press conference , which created a much-needed national conversation about race, law enforcement, and American culture.

Regardless of where you stand on this issue, there's no doubt that it has been the political talk of the day, even if much of it was disjointed, nasty, and ignorant, especially online. My first video blog, which asserts that Professor Gates was arrested for being an "uppity black man", has drawn over 355 comments on YouTube.com alone within one day, pushing it to over 2,700 views and the 14th most commented on video in the "News and Politics" section of the giant video-sharing site as of this writing. While demographic data is not yet complete, I can say just by combing through all of the comments that the viewers were overwhelmingly male, and about 80 percent white and 20 percent "of color" at first, then on the second day more people identifying themselves as black (who really knows in the comment section, right?) pushing the result to about 60 percent white to 40 percent of color.

Some of the comments were nasty and some were excellent, but the one I liked best of all was not on YouTube, but on Facebook and made by my long-time friend and Oakland, Bret Harte Junior High School classmate Lars Frkyman (who stared with my other long-time Oakland friend from the same school and from Skyine High School, Bill Boyd, in my "Star Trek Review" vlog), who wrote (and I reprint this with his permission):

You keep fighting that good fight against prejudices. As a white guy growing up in Oakland I was beaten several times cause of the color of my skin by a bunch of ignorant angry...fill in the blank.Later in life I've been hassled by white cops because of the length of my hair and my unshaved face. I think it must be human nature to exert power over anything, whether it be pit bulls, gray hounds, the homeless, gays, women, men you name it, humans will abuse it. I guess the sad fact is there's a bully in every crowd. We've come a long way but we sure do got a long way to go eh?
ps Obama's right..stupid cop! No apology necessarry
Lars

Lars is right. The Crowley / Gates incident was one of institutional racism on the part of Crowley, versus classism on the part of Gates. Crowley keeps saying "I went by the book" which opens the door to the kind of racial profiling African Americans and others are just plain tired of. "Going by the book" just means that Crowley didn't use his own judgment in the matter, plus he let his ego get in the way when he realized this "black man" was yelling at him and not following his orders. Gates' was angry that Crowley entered his house (without a search warrant) and from his point of view did not show him his police ID or look at the professor's identification, and so was going to "inform Crowley of who he was".

Two yaks ramming heads. Only one of the yaks, Gates, represented a group of people who'd had it. Racial profiling has been the bane of the African American existence for too long, and Obama's comment that the "Cambridge Police acted stupidly", even if his words may have been poorly selected, was right on and struck a cord from sea to shining sea.  For Crowley to behave with the proper judgment in this case, many agree, would have been to make no arrest at all. But some officers are hard-wired to feel (not think) they have to make an arrest if the person's black, at least that's the perception of most African American (especially in the wake of the Oscar Grant shooting) and many whites too, like this commenter on my first YouTube video on this issue:

ALL of you are blaming everyone but whos responsible. First the media was the first person to play the race card to be exact it was CNN. Why because it will sell they know it why dont you? I am irish and white my family came to america in the 1910's we where hated by EVERYONE but my family overcame and if you want to blame someone blame the press they are the ones who plaster black men on the news every damn day and now you wonder why people are scared of blacks. All of us need to put this down.

Or just have a good, ice-cold beer or two! In fact, that's what President Obama, Sgt. Crowley, and Professor Gates plan to do at The White House. According to Obama, it was Crowley's idea, and Gates accepted the invitation. In a statement provided to "The Root" , a website covering news from a black perspective where Gates is editor-in-chief, he wrote:

"..if we can all use this to diminish racial profiling and to enhance fairness and equity in the criminal justice system for poor people and for people of color...After all, I first proposed that Sgt. Crowley and I meet as early as last Monday. If my experience leads to the lessening of the occurrence of racial profiling, then I would find that enormously gratifying. Because, in the end, this is not about me at all; it is about the creation of a society in which 'equal justice before law' is a lived reality."

Ok, fine, now what beer should they drink?

The Beer Poll

Having gotten past the arguments, we can watch Obama, Gates, and Crowley have a beer, but what brand? You can pick the beer in my poll below:

create fun quizzes & tests on pollsb.com

As of this writing, Budweiser has the lead over Pabst Blue Ribbon by 12.5 percent. No one picked Miller, while my favorite, Japan's Sapporo beer is even with Pabst Blue Ribbon beer, and 12.5 percent picked "Other" beers. In the interest of real diversity, pick Sapporo! But that written, the day Obama, Gates, and Crowley meet for a beer should be called "National Raise a Glass for Diversity Day."

Seriously.

I think it should be a day that people of different stripes deliberately get together to just get along, get to know each other, and have fun. Considering how far America's come in being a true melting pot, it's not hard to do at all.  But the rule should be to have a beer with someone who's of another background and race from your own.  That would be huge!

Henry Louis Gates arrested for being "uppity black man"

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com



YouTube, Yahoo, MySpace, Metacafe, DailyMotion, Blip.tv, StupidVideos, Sclipo and Viddler

It's all over the Internet: Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates was arrested by Cambridge police officer Sgt. James Crowley after trying to pry open the lock, which was already damaged, to his own Cambridge home with the help of his driver, who picked him up from a trip to China. President Obama, in a press conference on his health care initiative, chimes in by saying "the Cambridge Police acted stupidly."

President Obama's totally right. Here's why.

Professor Gates problem was that he was being "an uppity black man" against an officer who looked for "uncommon" versus "common" elements to connect with Gates - no connection, or "uncommon leads to an arrest. On the plane from Chicago to Atlanta yesterday, I was in first class on United Airlines (the luck I enjoy as the son of a former employee). There was a gentleman, white, in his 60s, who looked at the open seat next to me, and me, and kind of frowned. I didn't care. He sat in front of me.

As the drinks he had flowed he started talking loudly about President Bush and Republicans and how Nixon was right, and all that jazz which I though was funny, frankly. But - and I have this on camera - I could not help but notice how he was TRYING to connect with the man next to him, who was white, and older.

By contrast, he never tried to connect with me.

Had the man next to him been black, that would not have happened, and that's the problem. Racism in part is the assumption that you are not like me from the start just because of your skin color. If Officer Crowley had tried to calm Gates down, walked around the house and noticed photos on the walls, etc, he would have quickly picked up that it was Gates home. But because he wasn't looking for common elements or to try and calm Gates - he wanted to have power over him. He was offended that the Professor did not defer to him, and thought "He's not going to dance, so I'll teach him a lesson." So when Gates wasn't calming down and obeying orders, Crowley arrested him.

And that's the rub.

Police officers in the old days knew their neighbors and were more peace officers than military actors. Moreover, there's a common habit, 1) militaristic behavior and 2) of trying to put down someone black who's smart and assertive or just has the appearance of decency. This doesn't happen all the time, but I've been a victim of it, too. In 2006 a California Highway Patrol officer body-slammed me on his car just because I shed a tear after realizing I was going to be arrested after passing a field sobriety test and after going to the officer because a person was tailgating me so close I thought I was being followed (and I didn't say anything to contest the officer, but someone told me "I sound smart"). I'm serious.

On the other hand I personally know a lot of officers - many in the Oakland Police Department and the Alameda County Sheriff's Department and yes on the California Highway Patrol - who have far more self-control and intellect of action and also said the officer who body-slammed me was "out of control". But the bottom line is police officers nationwide - mostly white, a few "of color" - are almost hard-wired to think of a black man as bad "just because", and regardless of the look or background of the person, and that's got to change.

A good friend of mine in law enforcement said the problem is "a lot of these officers they bring in who are white or not black at times, don't have experience with blacks. They may have grown up in the suburbs and then only when they become an officer do they have contact with blacks." And then it's too late.

The lack of exposure to people of color, especially those who's "made it" and don't fit age old stereotypes, is hard to shake and explains why President Obama's so important to our future. Seeing a black person in the role is what America needs to advance. America must move beyond the shackles of racism if the nation is to come together as one people and solve our economic problems - the real big issue before us.

Officer Crowley, if he's an expert in racial profiling and how not to use it, should have known that he should not have treated a distinguished Harvard professor like that, especially someone who's black and walking with a cane! Indeed, he should have known who Professor Gates was right off the bat.

That he didn't is alarming.

Marina Orlova talks about the Blunderbuss: HotForWords

Marina Orlova's terrific show has a new and interesting segment on a kind of shotgun called "The Blunderbuss."

Erin Andrews peephole tape draws Bill O'Reilly, Michelle Beisner

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

The search trend that will not die, "Erin Andrews peephole tape" just drew in its latest mainstream media victim of the drug of titillation, Bill O'Reilly, then for good measure, Jason Witlock of the Kansas City Star unwittingly throws Michelle Beisner into the mix.

Now, Michelle Beisner's the top search on Google Trends because of the Erin Andrews peep show video scandal, Witlock digging up that story, and the male desire to see her, too, (90 percent of my 34,000 video viewers - as of this writing - on this matter are men) and Bill O'Reilly has the nerve to bring two more blondes on his show to talk about a blonde, Erin Andrews, who's privacy was violated, and show the offending video mainly because CBS decided to do it first within the mainstream media camp! Oh brother.

Plus, what we have is a great case of racial profiling.

My video on this matter (which has one very cool photo of Erin Andrews just being the normal person she is and using an Apple MacBook) of the CBS action stands:



And regarding, Bill O'Reilly, I will add more. First, I did not embed the video of Bill's show for obvious reasons, but for those who feel I should at least reference it, here it is - LINK - within a great blog post by Will Brinson at FanHouse, who takes the popular conservative hothead to task for his segment. Second, I'll go a few steps beyond where he went.

What Bill O'Reilly does is add sauce to the "Erin goose" by inviting Fox News.com correspondent Courtney Friel and Fox News assignment editor and blogger Jane Skinner on, both blonde and famous for errors of a titillating nature. In Skinner's case, she's known for mistakenly saying "top cock" rather than "top cop" twice in a Fox News broadcast, leading to a yet another viral video on YouTube. Friel's claim to fame is posing in a bikini for the soft-porn magazine Maxim. Gawker discovered the photos after Friel removed them from her website.  Then, Gawker's Ryan Tate (who's now the editor of Valleywag) wrote a new post about her pictures, calling her a "bonehead" in the process.

Bonehead? Bonehead? That is racial profiling, folks, piling on the classic "dumb blonde" image, but more on that later; O'Reilly uses titillation to talk about, well, titillation.  What was done shows the primal genius of Fox News and explains why their ratings are so high.  Bill's 100 percent correct that what was done to Erin - and I stand corrected that it was in a hotel room and not an athletic club as I reported - is cyberstalking.

But given that the audience for this news is male, Bill should have had Fox News male anchors on his show talking about the matter, and not Jane Skinner and Courtney Friel.  Why?  Because first, it would send a message that men in media have a level of respect for their female collegues, second, the obvious question given the backgrounds of Frier and Skinner is "Have you been cyberstalked?" but Bill didn't even go in that direction and thus had the wrong guests on.  He focused squarely on the view that a crime was committed - and he's right - and that's it.  But in fashioning the segment O'Reilly caused a "snails tail" relationship: we talk about the blonde with blondes who have the same level of Internet popularity as the blonde, just like Michelle Beisner. 

Who?

Michelle Beisner's described by Witlock as "former Denver Broncos cheerleader and aspiring D-list Hollywood actress-type. Blonde. White Woman" (but forgot to note, or perhaps didn't care to discover, or didn't see it as important that Beisner's an NFL Network correspondent) who's innocent reply to a text sent by ESPN's star anchor Stuart Scott (who's black) was picked up by an over-the-shoulder peering Al Daulerio - a sports blogger and editor with Gawker media product Deadspin - at a Super Bowl party, then was repeated by Daulerio in Deadspin.

The result was to imply that Scott and Beisner were having an affair as opposed to what commonly happens in the days leading up to a Super Bowl (I've been to seven of 'em): the late night search for a way to get into the next party and go all night long.  I'd bet even money that's what the text was about; Beisner may have contacted her friend, the well-connected Scott, who's married, regarding help getting into another party.

Deadspin has never appologized for the blog post.

While Witlock is correct in bring up how Deadspin poorly handled that story as well as  how Deadspin started reporting on the Andrews video, Witlock's depiction of Andrews and Beisner (Andrews as "Barbie" and Beisner as "D-list...Blonde. White Woman" rather than NFL Network correspondent) is tasteless and smacks of the same racial profiling we complain about as African Americans. (And I will follow up later, on regarding what happened to Professor Henry Louis "Skip" Gates at the hands of the Cambridge Police.)

No one wants to be placed in a box where they're expected to be a certain way because of their race and sex.  Just because someone's white and blonde doesn't mean they don't know anything; in my experience, perhaps as a reaction to society, it's the reverse.  I had a long tearful talk a while back with a friend of mine who's in San Francisco real estate (and blonde, and tall, and attractive, and smart) about this because she'd had it with people at the time and went on a drinking binge.  (She's fine now.)

It doens't matter if the person's white and blonde, or black and male, we as a World industrial society must stop placing them in a box assuming that they're dumb or dangerous.  Bill O'Reilly did this, Jason Witlock really did it, the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" (to quote President Obama), and Erin Andrews and Professor Gates have been the victims of it.

Enough, already.

Erin Andrews peephole tape draws Bill O'Reilly, Michelle Beisner

More at Zennie62.com | Follow me on Twitter! | Get my widget! | Visit YouTube | Visit UShow.com

The search trend that will not die, "Erin Andrews peephole tape" just drew in its latest mainstream media victim of the drug of titillation, Bill O'Reilly, then for good measure, Jason Witlock of the Kansas City Star unwittingly throws Michelle Beisner into the mix.

Now, Michelle Beisner's the top search on Google Trends because of the Erin Andrews peep show video scandal, Witlock digging up that story, and the male desire to see her, too, (90 percent of my 34,000 video viewers - as of this writing - on this matter are men) and Bill O'Reilly has the nerve to bring two more blondes on his show to talk about a blonde, Erin Andrews, who's privacy was violated, and show the offending video mainly because CBS decided to do it first within the mainstream media camp! Oh brother.

Plus, what we have is a great case of racial profiling.

My video on this matter (which has one very cool photo of Erin Andrews just being the normal person she is and using an Apple MacBook) of the CBS action stands:



And regarding, Bill O'Reilly, I will add more. First, I did not embed the video of Bill's show for obvious reasons, but for those who feel I should at least reference it, here it is - LINK - within a great blog post by Will Brinson at FanHouse, who takes the popular conservative hothead to task for his segment; Second, I'll go a few steps beyond where he went.

What Bill O'Reilly does is add sauce to the "Erin goose" by inviting Fox News.com correspondent Courtney Friel and Fox News assignment editor and blogger Jane Skinner on, both blonde and famous for errors of a titillating nature. In Skinner's case, she's known for mistakenly saying "top cock" rather than "top cop" twice in a Fox News broadcast, leading to a yet another viral video on YouTube. Friel's claim to fame is posing in a bikini for the soft-porn magazine Maxim. Gawker discovered the photos after Friel removed them from her website.  Then, Gawker's Ryan Tate (who's now the editor of Valleywag) wrote a new post about her pictures, calling her a "bonehead" in the process.

Bonehead? Bonehead? That is racial profiling, folks, piling on the classic "dumb blonde" image, but more on that later; O'Reilly uses titillation to talk about, well, titillation.  What was done shows the primal genius of Fox News and explains why their ratings are so high.  Bill's 100 percent correct that what was done to Erin - and I stand corrected that it was in a hotel room and not an athletic club as I reported - is cyberstalking.

But given that the audience for this news is male, Bill should have had Fox News male anchors on his show talking about the matter, and not Jane Skinner and Courtney Friel.  Why?  Because first, it would send a message that men in media have a level of respect for their female collegues, second, the obvious question given the backgrounds of Frier and Skinner is "Have you been cyberstalked?" but Bill didn't even go in that direction and thus had the wrong guests on.  He focused squarely on the view that a crime was committed - and he's right - and that's it.  But in fashioning the segment O'Reilly caused a "snails tail" relationship: we talk about the blonde with blondes who have the same level of Internet popularity as the blonde, just like Michelle Beisner. 

Who?

Michelle Beisner's described by Witlock as "former Denver Broncos cheerleader and aspiring D-list Hollywood actress-type. Blonde. White Woman" (but forgot to note, or perhaps didn't care to discover, or didn't see it as important that Beisner's an NFL Network correspondent) who's innocent reply to a text sent by ESPN's star anchor Stuart Scott (who's black) was picked up by an over-the-shoulder peering Al Daulerio - a sports blogger and editor with Gawker media product Deadspin - at a Super Bowl party, then was repeated by Daulerio in Deadspin.

The result was to imply that Scott and Beisner were having an affair as opposed to what commonly happens in the days leading up to a Super Bowl (I've been to seven of 'em): the late night search for a way to get into the next party and go all night long.  I'd bet even money that's what the text was about; Beisner may have contacted her friend, the well-connected Scott, who's married, regarding help getting into another party.

Deadspin has never appologized for the blog post.

While Witlock is correct in bring up how Deadspin poorly handled that story as well as  how Deadspin started reporting on the Andrews video, Witlock's depiction of Andrews and Beisner (Andrews as "Barbie" and Beisner as "D-list...Blonde. White Woman" rather than NFL Network correspondent) is tasteless and smacks of the same racial profiling we complain about as African Americans. (And I will follow up later, on regarding what happened to Professor Henry Louis "Skip" Gates at the hands of the Cambridge Police.)

No one wants to be placed in a box where they're expected to be a certain way because of their race and sex.  Just because someone's white and blonde doesn't mean they don't know anything; in my experience, perhaps as a reaction to society, it's the reverse.  I had a long tearful talk a while back with a friend of mine who's in San Francisco real estate (and blonde, and tall, and attractive, and smart) about this because she'd had it with people at the time and went on a drinking binge.  (She's fine now.)

It doens't matter if the person's white and blonde, or black and male, we as a World industrial society must stop placing them in a box assuming that they're dumb or dangerous.  Bill O'Reilly did this, Jason Witlock really did it, the Cambridge police "acted stupidly" (to quote President Obama), and Erin Andrews and Professor Gates have been the victims of it.

Enough, already.

Are the "Obama's foreign born" folks being racist?

I'm not sure most of the people who are harping on this "birth certificate" issue even believe it's true; I think they're mostly looking for something to badger the winner with. It's amazing what people will do when they're feeling bitter.

Are there racists among them? I assume so, but I'm not sure what fraction it is, let alone if it's the majority. As for the rest of them, logic isn't at issue with most in this situation. It's an emotional response, just as many reactions are in the political arena. There were nut-cases dogging every President in recent memory, forcing them to spend time and attention on trivia - taking their time and energy away from the larger problems facing the people of this country.

Many of them, in this case, have trouble feeling any sort of sense of commonality - or community - with the duly elected former Senator for any number of reasons: some because he's not white, some because he's a Democrat, some because they think he's trying to impose socialized medicine, some simply because they thought we were doing well under the previous administration.

Right or wrong isn't at issue - logic won't change their position; they aren't open to debate, they aren't even listening. Sadly, it's the same sort of "we vs. they" thinking that is so easy to see as problematic in places like the middle east, but when we're caught up in it ourselves we lose our objectivity. It's great in a game of bridge, or as a fan at a sporting event, but inappropriate and counterproductive in this case.

So they pick something to hammer away at, something that doesn't sound - on the surface - like they can't abide a Democrat, or a man who's not another good ol' white guy, or whatever their particular thing is, in the White House. It's a mantle of plausible deniability, distancing their words from their true objection. As such, they're no more objective, or amenable to logical discussion of facts, than the Emperor in the parable that teaches us (or at least tries to) about keeping our perspective.

It doesn't take mental illness, or racism, to account for what's going on. All one of these conspiracy theorists needs is to be a little bit stubborn: pleased to believe that you can't call them anti-black, or anti-Democrat, while they hide behind the story that there's something suspect about a guy who beat out their guy.

In due time some will realize, like the emperor with the "new" clothes, that they've not got even one scrap of evidence to hide behind.

Some few may even expand their view, and decide our President is a lot more like them despite having parents of different colors, and a lot more interested in their welfare than, for instance, a Saudi prince.

But the man's only been in office about 7 months, and that's not a lot of time to win over the opposition while he's busy trying to dig us out of the hole the economy fell into during 2008. He's adopted an ambitious agenda: health care reform alone would be a major task, but he's working international diplomacy, education, and climate reform as well. He's got supporters who think he's not moving fast enough on their own top priority, be it civil rights for gay couples or reforming and regulating Wall Street.

The extreme cases, of course, will remain unswayed no matter how much success Obama has. Like extremists for other points of view elsewhere, they will make a lot of noise because they crave the attention more than anything.