Barack Obama Before SF Chronicle Editorial Board - Does Well But Chron's Questions and Intent Are Suspect

Senator Barack Obama appeared before the San Francisco Chronicle's Editorial Board today and as this video shows he performed well. He answered questions in incredible detail and showed great thought on the issues of the day. Senator Obama has particularly clear command of the matter of the security industry problem and the politics behind the heath care issue as well as energy policy.

I think where he seemed to confuse SF Chronicle Chief Phil Bronstein is in the statement that he "generally uses the truth" where Obama was explaining that he's not going to say something that makes a Democratic collegue look bad.

It seeme to me that Phil was more looking for weakness in what Obama said than paying attention to context and words. For example, Obama -- on the issue of how to exact change in the health care system -- said that it was necessary to use (not his exact words) some shame, by having a more open process so that one can hear if a legislator was on the side of the insurance providers, or not.

But Bronstein seemed to focus on just the use of the term "shame" and took that out of context to apply it in a general sense but forgetting the orginal conversation. That's what ones does when they seek weakness -- they don't see that the weakness is not there because the desire to be "right" in their search overwhelms any sensible thought and consideration.

I'm also very surprised that in the Internet capital of the United States there was no question regarding technology! How the Chronicle coule miss that is beyond me.

Also, Senator Obama, after the questions were over, said "Maybe we should adress this off the record," in a conversation about "experience" but the camera kept going. That was when Phil Bronstein tried to zero in on the way that Washington is caused to change in policy response. You know, the "shame" conversation. At that point, I expected the camera to be turned off, but that didn't happen. That's not right in my view. Off the record is off the record. Period.

I'm also interested in why the SF Chronicle made the video public so that Senator Obama's opponents -- who did not go before the editorial board, yet -- can see the cast and base their responses on it. The only way to blunt this obvious development is to have a nearly totally different set of questions. Otherwise, the process is not fair at all.

Let's keep an eye on what the Chronicle does.

Mark Morford - In SF Chroncle, Columnist Says We're Getting Dumber, but Fails To Define What Dumb Is

I just read San Francisco Chronicle columnist Mark Mulford's column where he claims American kids are "dumber than dirt". The main problem I have with such articles is, first, they fail to define what "dumb" is and second, they seem to yearn for a "happier time." Also, they seem to place the author in the position of "I'm better than you." Oh yeah? Says, who?

So I can't take the article seriously from the perspective around the question of correctness.

I do think that we have not shown kids the importance of critical thinking. It's just fine to watch TV -- one gains information that way. Information on our society, especially from the various news sources. But we're in trouble when we don't question what we're told.

I also think we've not shown kids the importance of being social and polite. Leave the text messages alone and talk. Say excuse me when you pass by someone. Manners are the glue that holds society together. I'm concerned that we're not making sure we have a good supply of that glue in store.

Letter To SF Chron's Phil Bronstein - In Ellen Lee's YouTube / CNN Story, "The Man" Is Zennie Abraham

In Ellen Lee's YouTube / CNN Story, "the man" she referred to is me...

Zennie Abraham.

Phil, Ellen knows who I am. We met several times, first through mutual friends at a tech function, then again at Vloggercon where she knows my friend Dina Kaplan of Blip.tv (who reintroduced us) and, where she said she'd call to ask me about Sports Business Simulations and video-blogging.

She never did.

Now, I was one of six blacks out of 300 people in attendance, and live in Oakland.

Then I saw her again -- but said nothing -- at the Vloggies. Then I've been at Web 2.0 and other events. And I continue video-blogging and running my online simulation company.

After following Ellen's request to call her, and hearing nothing back, yet seeing person after white person being presented by her in the SF Chron, I felt there was a problem and did in express this concern to her, but no feedback. Hey, it's a hard subject to adress, but it's something that must be done.

Now, YouTube commissioned me to make a sample video to show the nation how a debate question is to be asked. It's at
http://www.youtube.com/debates

I'm featured promimently in the video -- I'm first and credited. She could have tried to contact me; she did not.

So Ellen writes this, and starts with "a man stands in front of a check cashing center..."

That man is me.

What's the deal Phil? Is Ellen's prejudice against me for whatever reason so great she can't even bring herself to get the real story, let alone explain it even if it involves a Bay Area resident, and particularly someone of color making a mark in Video-Blogging?

This is troubling to me. I hope you agree and investigate this.

Best,

Zennie