Celebrity Apprentice winner 2010: Bret Michaels or Holly Robinson Peete

See: celebrity apprentice 2010 winner, celebrity apprentice 2010, who won celebrity apprentice 2010, holly robinson peete, sharon osbourne

The Celebrity Apprentice winner for 2010 has not been named, but there's enough Internet buzz to push the subject to the top of trend boards. Last night's Celebrity Apprentice was a bit of a disappointment to this blogger because Donald Trump and his children revealed their view of how the game of business success should be played: be nasty.

Being nasty was always the message of The Apprentice series, but perhaps due to a number of personal factors those patterns in the way Donald Trump looks at life became more pronounced to this blogger.

To cut to the chase, The Apprentice concept is a study in what happens when you chose to give power over you to someone else. In Maria Kanellis's case, the WWE Diva got fired for a "locker room" comment about Curtis Stone that had everyone laughing.

But at the time, Trump was looking for someone to fire. That's the game. But it's not a game to play with celebrities. College graduates are one thing but to set up a show that humiliates powerful people is playing with future PR fire. I think that's what Donald Trump has done in the case of Celebrity Apprentice. But Mr. Trump might say, "That's the way the game is played. You can chose not to play."

The Celebrity Apprentice winner for 2010 comes down to Bret Michaels or Holly Robinson Peete since Sharon Osbourne cried her way out of a potential win. Rocker Bret Michaels has to be the sentimental favorite because of his brain hemmorage and his fight to survive. But that has little to do with winning Celebrity Apprentice. From the cold view of playing the game Holly Robinson Peete was hands down the better player. Peete was aggressive, assertive, combative, smart, ruthless, and smarmy. That was how she came accross and that's what is takes to win The Apprentice, period.

Note that I did not say I liked the way Holly played it.

What do you think? Who should be the Celebrity Apprentice winner 2010? Take my poll:

More opinion surveys on pollsb.com

Stay tuned.

Pretty Wild is Pretty Ridiculous By Nikky Raney

E!'s controversial reality show Pretty Wild has always been one of my guilty pleasures, but after last night's episode I have started to look past the sensational entertainment and realize I am guilty of being sucked into the questionable content of this show.

I was initially drawn to this show due to my interest in the "bling ring" burglary scandal that involved a group of young adults who were accused and then put on trial for participating in the burglaries of various celebrities. Alexis Neiers was one of the girls involved and I had a soft spot for her.

These girls are very articulate and seem to be well poised in the way they present themselves in front of the cameras during interviews. Even when they are doing outrageous things, they still remain articulate and speak in an adult manner. These girls have a mature vocabulary and seem to be reasonably intelligent.

Last night's episode drew the line. I could accept the Adderall dispensed by Andrea Arlington, the mother of Alexis and Gabrielle and "adoptive" mother of Tess Taylor, I could accept the outrageous behavior, and I could even accept Alexis' reaction to the Vanity Fair article published about her.

The Vanity Fair article especially made me feel for her because I watched the interview happen. The journalist comforted and consoled Alexis as she cried and eloquently explained herself. Alexis had been so excited and expecting the article to be all about her and improve her public image. From the looks of the interview I also expected that. When the article ended up showing an entirely different side of the story I actually felt resentment toward Vanity Fair. Under no circumstance should a journalist tell the source that the article is going to be one way and then have it turn out the next. I was also appalled at the lack of fact-checking.

The part that bothered me the most was that most of the people who read the article probably never watched an episode of Pretty Wild, and never watched the interview take place. Although Alexis is shown in the show complaining and crying over the fact that the article listed she was wearing one outfit when she was really wearing another, that was something that when watching the interview take place Alexis really emphasized. It may have seemed like a minor slip up, but with something so minor it was probably overlooked during the fact checking. No matter how insignificant a statement may seem that is no excuse to get it incorrect. Even though most rolled their eyes and thought, "Wow, she's complaining because the article got what kind of shoes she wore wrong," when the article says someone wore 6 inch heels to court when she really wore a smaller heel, that actually alters the perception of the way the person presents herself in a professional setting.

I had defended the show against those who harshly criticized it, but last night I can't think of a way to justify what I saw.

Tess Taylor has previously been a Playboy cyber girl and is reportedly going to be on the cover of an upcoming issue of Playboy.

Last night's episode had close ups of the naked Tess Taylor, blurred of course, posing nude in her shower as her "adoptive" mother took photos. The reason was to prep her for her Playboy shoot, but taking naked photos of your own daughter (even if she isn't your biological daughter) doesn't seem like something that can be justified.

The episode goes on to show Alexis and Tess taking their 15 year old sister lingerie shopping and ooh-ing and ahh-ing about Gabby's development into a woman.

I suppose that I can justify my interest in the show by the scandalous actions, or the fact that I am a 19-year-old girl who, despite my love for serious news and journalism, is still interested in the celebrity gossip.

Am I still going to watch the season finale next week? Yes. Do I still feel bad for the outcome of Alexis' trial? Yes. Will I continue to tune into this show if there are more seasons? Yes.

I guess that the biggest part of having a guilty pleasure is that after the fact you feel guilty that you take pleasure in it.

Written by Nikky Raney

Check out my personal blog The History of Journalism

Have anything you want me to write about? Let me know!

(photo above taken from Worldcorrespondents.com)

Miley Cyrus' impact on girls and sex - Dr. Christina Villarreal

Miley Cyrus has continued to land in the media spotlight since a copy of her sexually charged lap dance with 44 year old director/producer Adam Shankman surfaced on media websites such as tmz.com . Miss Cyrus has been trying to shed her clean cut Hannah Montana image for quite some time. She recently released a racy music video for her latest single, "Can't Be Tamed," where she is shown wearing a black lingerie-inspired bodice and thigh-high boots while dancing on a pole, as seen in many strip clubs. Miley Cyrus is a celebrity who clearly has a strong influence over young girls; many of whom will inevitably emulate her. Are her recent, sexually charged choices encouraging young female fans to engage in similar behaviors? What are the long term implications for girls who begin sexual activity at an early age? The excerpt below was taken from an article published in on June 26, 2003 by Kirk Johnson, Ph.D., Shannan Martin, Lauren Noyes and Robert Rector.

Negative Consequences of Early Sexual Activity


"Beginning sexual activity at an early age is likely to have permanent negative consequences on the lives of young women. These enduring negative effects can be physical, psychological, social, and economic. The harmful effects are most pronounced for women who begin sexual activity in teen years; many will be passed on to future generations. Data from the NSFG showcase the negative consequences of early sexual activity, which include the following:


• Beginning sexual activity at a young age greatly increases the probability of becoming infected with sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Girls who began sexual activity at age 13 are twice as likely to become infected by an STD as girls who started sexual activity at age 21.


• Women who begin sexual activity at an early age are far more likely to become pregnant and give birth out-of-wedlock. Nearly 40 percent of girls who commence sexual activity at ages 13 or 14 will give birth outside marriage. By contrast, 9 percent of women who begin sexual activity at ages 21 or 22 will give birth outside marriage


• Women who begin sexual activity at earlier ages are more likely to become single mothers. Women who became sexually active at ages 13 or 14 are more than three times as likely to become single parents than are women who commence sexual activity in their early 20s.


• Early sexual activity seriously undermines girls’ ability to form stable marriages as adults. When compared to women who began sexual activity in their early 20s, girls who initiated sexual activity at ages 13 or 14 were less than half as likely to be in stable marriages in their 30s.


• Early sexual activity is linked to higher levels of child and maternal poverty. Some 27 percent of mothers who began sexual activity at ages 13 or 14 were living in poverty at the time of the survey. By contrast, 11.7 percent of mothers who began sexual activity in their early 20s were poor at the time of the survey.


• Girls who begin sexual activity at an earlier age are far more likely to have abortions. Nearly 30 percent of girls who started sexual activity at ages 13 or 14 have had an abortion. By con- trast, some 12 percent of girls who began sexual activity in their early 20s have had an abor- tion.


• Beginning sexual activity at an older age is linked to higher levels of personal happiness. More than half the women who began sexual activity in their early 20s report that they are currently “very happy” in life. By contrast, only a third of women who began sexual activity at ages 13 or 14 report that they are 'very happy'."

In light of these statistics, parents must aim to play an active role in educating their children about their sexuality and the consequences of their choices. Unfortunately, many parents struggle to see their own children as sexually active (but believe that everyone else's kids are), as seen in an article titled Parents don’t think own teens are having sex.

Leave your thoughts, questions or concerns below to continue this important dialogue, or email me directly for professional work referrals at christina.villarreal@gmail.com, or view my website at www.drchristinavillarreal.com

References:

THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF EARLY SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND MULTIPLE SEXUAL PARTNERS AMONG WOMEN: A BOOK OF CHARTS. Written by: ROBERT E. RECTOR KIRK A. JOHNSON, PH.D. LAUREN R. NOYES SHANNAN MARTIN.

YouTube turns 5: remember the vloggers

While this vlogger and YouTube Partner since 2007 was struggling to figure out why a portion, but not all, of his prized two-year old NFL Draft videos were removed and placed "on hold" due to a so-called and obviously mistaken "terms of use" violation, YouTube was celebrating it's fifth birthday.

YouTube now has approximately 2 billion views each day.

Since there was no reason for some of the Zennie62 NFL Draft videos to be placed in status - no copyrighted music or unauthorized NFL Draft access - it was hard for me to stop, stand up, and salute.

Let's put this all in its proper perspective: YouTube has played a large an important role in my life. YouTube staff has been good to me and  extended invitations to me to come to events.  YouTube Founder Chad Hurley has always been very nice to me.

But something is happening that I warned of in one of our meetings at YouTube Headquarters: YouTube is getting too big too fast. YT is growing in such a way that its making errors with YouTube Partners that would have not happened years past, like the one with my NFL videos.

I've taken time to write this and design it so that it would be seen and by a lot of people. The point here is that YouTube is like the small town person who grew up, went to Hollywood, and forgot where it came from. In befriending Oprah Winfrey, CBS, and David Letterman, Conan O'Brien and Katie Couric, YouTube forgot about people like Renetto and vloggers like me.

Just take one look at the YouTube Turns 5 page, and the video timeline doesn't have a single vlogger on it. It has people who produced shows like LonelyGirl, which everyone thought wasn't real at the time, and one-hit wonders.  Where's Renetto?

What about the first YouTube As-One Meetings at Pier 39 in 2007? The one where YouTube's Marketing rep came out and passed out t-shirts and video bloggers boarded planes from as far away as Ohio to be in San Francisco?

And the videos listed on the front page are by people who never heard the term "vlogging" let alone can claim to be vloging pioneers.  They're just names like Katie Couric; proof that YouTube saw stars and kicked its long time friends to the curb.

Chad Hurley's direction for YouTube is such that it's always seeking new partnerships and going into new areasof business. While that's fine, it always places YouTube in the insecure role of trying to make friends with people who represent companies that just don't like them or understand what they do.

Movie studios and record labels are not ran by tech people; they don't get YouTube, they certainly fear it, and in some cases are trying to gouge royalty money from it.

Meanwhile the YouTube Partners, the people YouTube created who just make commentary and vlog, people like me who you know as Zennie62, sit as second-and-third players to the studios, comedy shows, and entertainers.

But vloggers can best explain YouTube to potential advertisers.  Vloggers are the first-responders to tech changes.  Vloggers are the ones who don't need a studio to make content.  We're like Iron Man and the camcorder is our suit in a case.

Vloggers are the ones who can best show others how YouTube can help them. We are the people who talk to the school teachers who just want to tell their story and work with the newspapers that just need a push. We keep it simple: we get a camera, point it at our face, and let her rip.

YouTube has forgot about us. YouTube needs to place more time and energy into creating a real place for the vlogger. Some have just got plain fed up, quit YouTube, and started their own efforts like Vloggerheads. They miss the old days when YouTube was used to have a real conversation about something.

Then, you didn't have to spend your days trying to get the rights to the Miley Cyrus Lap Dance Video, in a chase for traffic; you just talked. YouTube's system was such that the best conversations got the most views. Now we're dwarfed by CBS and The Associated Press, which gets prized web space by YouTube.

What about me?

Some of us have taken to do shows. Me, I am a vlogger. I'm not a show guy. I use YouTube to make video-blogs. That where all this started: using the camera to tell my story. It's fitting that YouTube, to celebrate its fifth birthday, is returning to a vlogging format as its foundation. Vlogging is what YouTube really is all about.

YouTube must concentrate not on being like Hulu, or getting movies onto its website, but helping its vloggers. Celebrate the longtime vloggers like me. I've been here since 2006 and a partner since 2007. Because of YouTube I've been on national television a bunch of times and started a new media company. While I owe a lot to YouTube, YouTube owes a lot to me as one of its ambassadors.

Remember the vloggers. And in doing so, give me the respect I deserve. Fix my channel. Adjust the automatic content evaluation system so it doesn't suddenly make mistakes with my two-year-old NFL Draft videos.

Mistakes that have hampered my YouTube account and threatened my pocketbook. Give me a place where I can video-converse with other vloggers and where viewers can find our vlog conversations. Focus on your small town friends. Your roots. Forget chasing Hollywood stardom, unless its us going to the Oscars as YouTube Partners.

Help us help YouTube.

YouTube turns five but forgets its roots: The Vloggers

While this vlogger and YouTube Partner since 2007 was struggling to figure out why a portion, but not all, of his prized two-year old NFL Draft videos were removed due to a so-called and obviously mistaken "terms of use" violation, YouTube was celebrating it's fifth birthday.

Since there was no reason for some of my Zennie62 NFL Draft videos to be placed in status - no copyrighted music or unauthorized NFL Draft access - it was hard for me to stop, stand up, and salute.

Let's put this all in its proper perspective: YouTube has played a large an important role in my life. YouTube staff has been good to me and  extended invitations to me to come to events.  YouTube Founder Chad Hurley has always been very nice to me.

But something is happening that I warned of in one of our meetings at YouTube Headquarters: YouTube is getting too big too fast. YT is growing in such a way that its making errors with YouTube Partners that would have not happened years past, like the one with my NFL videos.

I've taken time to write this and design it so that it would be seen and by a lot of people. The point here is that YouTube is like the small town person who grew up, went to Hollywood, and forgot where it came from. In befriending Oprah Winfrey, CBS, and David Letterman, Conan O'Brien and Katie Couric, YouTube forgot about people like Renetto and vloggers like me.

Just take one look at the YouTube Turns 5 page, and the video timeline doesn't have a single vlogger on it. It has people who produced shows like LonelyGirl, which everyone thought wasn't real at the time, and one-hit wonders.  Where's Renetto?

What about the first YouTube As-One Meetings at Pier 39 in 2007? The one where YouTube's Marketing rep came out and passed out t-shirts and video bloggers boarded planes from as far away as Ohio to be in San Francisco?

And the videos listed on the front page are by people who never heard the term "vlogging" let alone can claim to be vloging pioneers.  They're just names like Katie Couric; proof that YouTube saw stars and kicked its long time friends to the curb.

See, Chad Hurley's vision of YouTube is such that it's always seeking new partnerships and going into areas.  While that's fine, it always places YouTube in the insecure role of trying to make friends with people who represent companies that just don't like them.  Movie studios are not ran by tech people; they don't get YouTube and they certainly fear it.

Meanwhile the YouTube Partners, the people YouTube created who just make commentary and vlog, people like me who you know as Zennie62, sit as second-and-third players to the studios, comedy shows, and entertainers.  But vloggers can best explain YouTube to potential advertisers.  Vloggers are the first-responders to tech changes.  Vloggers are the ones who don't need a studio to make content.  We're like Iron Man and the camcorder is our suit in a case.

Vloggers are the ones who can best show others how YouTube can help them. We are the people who talk to the school teachers who just want to tell their story and work with the newspapers that just need a push. We keep it simple: we get a camera, point it at our face, and let her rip.

YouTube has forgot about us. YouTube needs to place more time and energy into creating a real place for the vlogger. Some have just got plain fed up, quit YouTube, and started their own efforts like Vloggerheads. They miss the old days when YouTube was used to have a real conversation about something.

Then, you didn't have to spend your days trying to get the rights to the Miley Cyrus Lap Dance Video, in a chase for traffic; you just talked. YouTube's system was such that the best conversations got the most views. Now we're dwarfed by CBS and The Associated Press, which gets prized web space by YouTube.

What about me?

Some of us have taken to do shows. Me, I am a vlogger. I'm not a show guy. I use YouTube to make video-blogs. That where all this started: using the camera to tell my story. It's fitting that YouTube, to celebrate its fifth birthday, is returning to a vlogging format as its foundation. Vlogging is what YouTube really is all about.

YouTube must concentrate not on being like Hulu, or getting movies onto its website, but helping its vloggers. Celebrate the longtime vloggers like me. I've been here since 2006 and a partner since 2007. Because of YouTube I've been on national television a bunch of times and started a new media company. While I owe a lot to YouTube, YouTube owes a lot to me as one of its ambassadors.

Remember the vloggers. And in doing so, give me the respect I deserve. Fix my channel. Adjust the automatic content evaluation system so it doesn't suddenly make mistakes with my two-year-old NFL Draft videos.  Mistakes that have hampered my YouTube account and threatened my pocketbook. Give me a place where I can video-converse with other vloggers and where viewers can find our vlog conversations. Focus on your small town friends. Your roots. Forget chasing Hollywood stardom, unless its us going to the Oscars as YouTube Partners.

Help us help YouTube.

Hoaxes Reported = Compromised Credibility : By Nikky Raney

"In journalism there has always been a tension between getting it first and getting it right." -- Ellen Goodman

The urge and sensation of being the "FIRST NEWS OUTLET" to release information seems to be more important than being the first news outlet to release the RIGHT information. The balloon boy hoax is only one of the many hoaxes that have been covered & reported by even the top news sources.

I personally try to get as many interviews, secondary research, etc. before submitting an article (or blog entry). I have recently noticed that the "blow-by-blow" practice of journalism has been resulting in questionable credibility.

When a credible news outlet puts out an article and then follows up on the coverage of it over the course of a week one would expect that all this research and coverage going into the article is being done thoroughly and to the best of the ability to serve the readers. When the outlet then, after days of reporting this story, reports that the entire story ended up being a hoax it compromises the integrity, credibility, and principles of the reporter, editors and the news outlet as a whole.

If these reports are being covered for days straight it is inexcusable for why the information was not fact-checked. I know how it is working on a deadline, but there are ways to report these stories that you are unclear of. Instead of being one of the many news outlets reporting without deeper fact-checking or research, do the research. If you feel the need that the article needs to be covered (you obviously don't know it is a hoax yet), if you are unsure about it and cannot 100% say that you have fact checked the article to all your abilities (as well as an EDITOR), then report about the other media. Talk about the many headlines out there about "Insert Story Here," but discuss the recycled quotes, lack of research or (obvious choice) answer the questions that the other news outlet doesn't.

I never thought that I would do this, but I am going to give credit where credit is due. TMZ.com has been the first to report many stories (Michael Jackson's death), and then all the news outlets followed. Maybe the reason TMZ's articles seem more "credible" is because of the "evidence" within the videos. TMZ usually is only reporting based on what clips are seen in the videos. I am not advocating for paparazzi, nor am I saying that TMZ is a more credible source of news, but what I am saying is that even though TMZ is none of the above - the stories started at that site are accepted as credible and are used to fuel the news for other outlets.

I am sure there are times when it is inevitable for these things to happen, but it seems like these "hoax" stories are being published by MULTIPLE news sources. And they are the SAME hoax stories. How are the 100s of news outlets all being tricked. Are the people they interview great manipulators, or are the journalists spending less time fact-checking/interviewing/editing and more time making sure they put out the information first?

The future of journalism is worrying me. I am honestly worried. I believe in fact-checking, copy-editing, reporting, interviews, secondary research, AP Style, attribution, and credibility. I don't want to be the "first" to get the news out there, I would rather be the ONLY one not putting out the story, than to be one of the many putting out a story that ends up becoming a hoax.

I will assure you the blogs&articles I write will always be checked and edited. I will admit when I am wrong and if I have made a mistake. I am not saying that I may never end up reporting a hoax, but I am saying that I am going to do everything I can to make it damn near impossible.

I think that journalists need to go back and review some things from the Society of Professional Journalists (or renew their membership).

The blog writing I am doing for Zennie62.com will include some "future of journalism" blog entires as well as entries about "celebrity/entertainment" news, because I have some guilty pleasure writing to get out of my system. (I'm a 19-year-old college girl, of course I have some interest! I may subscribe to Newsweek, but I also subscribe to Cosmopolitan!)

By the way: Media outlets are STILL doing follow up stories on the balloon boy hoax.

Cheers,

Nikky Raney

Contact Me

"A journalist is basically a chronicler, not an interpreter of events. Where else in society do you have the license to eavesdrop on so many different conversations as you have in journalism? Where else can you delve into the life of our times?" -- Bill Moyers

Written by Nikky Raney

If you have anything in particular you want me to write about send me an e-mail.

I will try to incorporate more photos/visual into my posts

This entry originally was originally posted HERE

Oakland Montclair Home Invasion attempt; suspects at large

According to the City of Oakland, Ca, Yahoo! Cleveland Heights Neighbors Group, two African American men attempted a home invasion on the 500 block of Montclair 5 AM, May 10th. This is the Oakland Yahoo forum report:

Sorry (and scared) to report another home invasion robbery attempt. My neighbor just informed me that there was a home invasion and robbery attempt at the house next to him. This occurred on the 500 block of Montclair Saturday Morning at about 5:00 am, the suspects are two young, African American males (no other description). The main house is a rental and the owner and his family live in the in-law downstairs.

The suspects gained entry through a back upper window by stepping up on a garbage can (not sure if the window was locked or not). The upper unit was empty, so nothing was taken. The owners downstairs heard the noises, came up to investigate and the suspects fled.

Unfortunately that was not the only crime of that kind; note the word "another." Below is an edited letter detailing another crime attempt on the 600 block of Athol in Oakland:

My friend and neighbor across the street asked me to let everyone know what happened this morning. Two men with knives broke into her house while she and her 7 year old son were sleeping, around 5am. One of them held her while the other took her laptop, family jewelry, and bank card -- all right in front of her son.

They managed to get in through a tiny window on the side of the house which was cracked for air. An important fact to note is they broke in on the side of the house that is next to a house that the neighbors recently moved out of -- they knew that no one would hear them because the house next door was empty.

Please be more aware of keeping your windows closed at night and your doors always locked. Also, some people may not be aware that when calling from a cell phone, 911 gets routed to the CHP somewhere else. Remember to dial the following emergency number if using a cell phone: (510) 777-3211. You may want to program it into your cell phone.

For those who are concerned about any possible Oakland racial witch-hunt that could unfold from this, the best way to avoid that is for everyone in the neighborhood to know and talk to each other. That calls for you, yes you, to reach out to people who don't look like you just to know who they are.