Am I missing something here?

I just checked my e-mail inbox, and my spam folder had no fewer than 67 (!) messages in it since yesterday. That's frightening enough... but all of them - yes, all of them - were advertising Viagra.

Is someone trying to tell me something?

Is Mark Starowicz a Prophet?

Okay, first off, for those of you who weren't paying attention, Mark Starowicz is regarded as one of the deans of serious TV documentaries in Canada.

In a recent Doug Saunders article about the current state of the media universe, Starowicz opined:

When linear time no longer governs the airwaves, it puts an end to the shared national experience. People no longer have anything in common with each other.

Now that's some elegant language. What he's referring to is the fact that video recording technology and online video streaming have made program scheduling largely irrelevant. People no longer build their lives around television program schedules; they can watch their favorite shows whenever it's convenient for them. Television no longer helps maintain the family construct; families don't sit together to watch Being Erica like they used to watch Don Messer's Jubilee.

[For what it's worth, I would argue that although TV may no longer be the Great Facilitator of family cohesion, it does serve a similar purpose within broader societal groups. I have plenty of friends and colleagues with whom I share regular discussions and debates about our communal TV-watching experiences. Shows like Mad Men or Dexter or the multiple shades of CSI have infiltrated the zeitgeist as much, or more, than I Love Lucy or The Honeymooners or Ed Sullivan ever did.]

But let's leave that debate to one side for the moment. I have to admit that when I first saw the Starowicz quote, the very first thing that I thought about was the last time I heard the words "linear time" used on television. That's right: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

I've always thought that Mark Starowicz was a little bit more intense than the average human being. Now it all makes sense! He's a Prophet! or a wormhole alien, if you prefer. Maybe that's why - according to rumour, anyway - they used to let him smoke in his office.

As another Star Trek character would say: fascinating.

Yikes...

Good news: the Conservative candidate in the Calgary-Glenmore byelection gets beaten like the proverbial rented mule. Premier Ed Stelmach's leadership - or lack thereof - is cited as one of the principal issues leading to the defeat.

Bad news: the candidate who wins the byelection is from the Wildrose Alliance, which is to the Alberta Conservatives what the Reform Party was to the federal PCs, lo these many years ago.

Only in Alberta will you find a rightist government being taken to task for not being far enough to the right. It is to weep.

Am I being petty?

I'm a little embarrassed to be writing this, but I can't get the thought out of my head...

The news wires are reporting that PM Harper is appointing former NHL coach Jacques Demers to the Senate.

Demers admitted in 2005 that he was illiterate. Since that time, he has been learning to read, but he is still unable to read or write at his grade level, so to speak. In spite of all his good qualities, Demers is not the guy I want to be reading legislation with a view to "sober second thought".

Maybe he misunderstood the job offer. Maybe he received a call from someone in Ottawa saying "Hey, Jacques, how about a job with the Senators?"

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, we have the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried from time to time. If this is Harper's idea of Senate reform, count me out.

Death wish

Wow, two blog posts in a day...

I'm sorry I didn't have a camera with me so i could record the moment for posterity. I was walking home from the grocery store yesterday when I saw a person who has obviously decided to shuffle off his mortal coil as soon as he possibly can.

Here's what this Darwin Award wannabe was doing: he was 1) riding a bicycle without a helmet 2) down the middle of the street 3) hands off the handlebars 4) talking animatedly on his cellphone 5) while running a red light.

Full marks for gumption. I hope his karmic balance is on the positive side, 'cause something tells me that this guy's a street pizza just waiting to happen. Sheesh.

University as career factory?

I read an interesting post the other day on Howard Bernstein's excellent blog, Medium Close Up. I agree with some of his points but I think he's fallen into a bit of a logic trap. Like many people, he believes that if one studies something in university, they should and must go on to a career in that area.

The concept isn't completely without merit. After all, very few people would study veterinary medicine if they didn't want to go on to a career as a vet. The number of available spots in vet. med. faculties is extremely small, and graduates of a vet. med. program tend to find good, stable employment. Bully for them.

I don't think, though,that you can use the same argument for those who study journalism. Bernstein writes: "If we opened more places in the schools – and we do seem to do this all the time – we would fill them instantly. But does anyone tell these kids there are no jobs for them? I have never seen it. Worse, the schools continue to accept these students knowing there are no jobs. It is morally wrong."

With respect, it's not morally wrong, and the argument is specious. If one were to accept Bernstein's viewpoint uncritically, it would be "morally wrong" for universities to accept students in any number of fields of study. How many history majors end up as professional historians? What proportion of math majors end up making a living doing math? What about anthropology? religious studies? comparative literature? Surely Bernstein can't be arguing that these fields of study aren't worthy, or that enrolment in these areas should be severely restricted.

Even the (Canadian) college system, which is much more geared toward career preparation than knowledge for knowledge's sake, has come to the realization that sometimes - just sometimes - people study something because they're interested in it. The line of demarcation between colleges and universities is dissolving as (some) universities are developing more of a market focus, and (some) colleges are increasing the breadth of their course offerings to allow students to enjoy the intellectual challenges of learning, rather than just stuffing knowledge into their brains with the goal of hopefully building a meaningful career.

Another thing that's developed over the past number of years is that the entire concept of "career" has changed. I'm now in my third career - maybe even my fourth, depending on how you count 'em. Each was a perfectly valid career path, and each career has helped lay the foundation for the succeeding ones. Many of my friends and colleagues have had similar experiences.

Coming back to the journalism-specific issue that Bernstein raises in his blog post, I'm a proponent of the j-school-as-a-professional-program model. In other words, I think that by requiring a person to develop their critical thinking skills - and a little real-world knowledge - before they enter a journalism program, one is likely to come out with a better "product". As an old boss of mine used to say, it's easier to take someone with some life experience and teach him what he needs to become a successful journalist than it is to take someone fresh out of j-school and teach him how to be a real person. In the interest of full disclosure, I should point out that I'm probably partial to that point of view since that was the rationale he used when he hired me as a reporter.

There. I'm glad I got that off my chest. As always, your mileage may vary.

Context is everything

Anyone who's known me for any length of time knows that I think context is essential. It's impossible to properly understand the meaning or import of anything that's said or written without understanding the context in which the utterance is, well, uttered. Not knowing the context often paves the way to misunderstandings. Sometimes those misunderstandings are tiny, sometimes they're huge, and sometimes they're just hilarious.

To wit: I was looking up a few articles online to get more info on the numerous ethics complaints that have been filed against Sarah Palin over the past months. Predictably, the chattering classes and the blogosphere are all atwitter over the bona fides of the accusations and what she should do, or should have done, about them. (Just as an aside, now that "twitter" has taken on an entirely new and somewhat different meaning, are we going to have to redefine "atwitter"? I'm just sayin'...)

Anyhoo, I stumbled across a recent column by Timothy Shriver in the Washington Post that caught my attention. At least the first paragraph of it did. I quote:

Amid all the babble about Sarah Palin's recent resignation as Alaska's governor and amid all the speculation about her potential presidential bid, few have noted a new job for which she is eminently qualified: civil rights leader for people with intellectual disabilities.

If I'd been drinking coffee I would have done a spit-take. Was this guy serious? Was he actually suggesting that Palin become the poster child for stupid people?

Then I went on and read the rest. Ohhhh, I get it now: Shriver goes on to explain that because the Palins have a child with Down Syndrome and Sarah has a high public profile, she should use him as the poster child and herself as a shill. Hardly better, in my view, but ever so slightly more noble.

I have to admit - to my shame - that I like my initial context-free interpretation better. If anyone thinks that's defamatory, go ahead and sue me.

Maybe Scotiabank is right

Hey, maybe I am richer than I think.

The hot news on today's wires is that Shaw Communications is buying three television stations from CTV - for a buck apiece. Heck, at that rate I could buy... let me just rummage in my pocket here... hey, an entire nationwide network!

Maybe I should keep an eye out for interesting offerings on eBay or Craigslist. "Older terrestrial-broadcast television network for sale. Analog only - no digital. Selling as-is, where-is. No returns or refunds. We accept PayPal! No bids from Nigeria or Italy please."