Claiming the Freedom Friday, Feb 10 2012

Good. All the noise has settled down. The crowds are gone and the parades have ended. The “I Have a Dream” re-enactments are over and we’re getting back to Life as usual.

Let’s not let it be too much of the usual. Let’s take some time to reflect and then push off into purposeful inroads for making this year one that marks bolder efforts to kill the forces that suppress. Let’s consider two aspects of what became Affirmative Action in the United States. Let us reflect on why Dr. King took some of the steps that he did. It’s important to remember the circumstances of the day that brought a nation into agreement that things must change. Equally important is giving recognition to the major (and even minor) contributions the Black race of America has made throughout the centuries and history of the making of this country.

As a Southern Baptist preacher, King was raised to have the humility typical of the Negro race. But his education showed him another side of life that was different from subservience. His delving into history and culture made him aware of Martin Luther (from whom he and his father were led to change their family name) and adopt the philosophy of peaceful resistance.

Where at first blush, the traditional Negro spirituals conditioned the people to acquiesce to the insults and harm as they passively waited for deliverance to come at someone else’s hands, King began to teach that change would only come by taking the reigns of the Horse of Deliverance. That horse had to be led quietly and determinedly lest the momentum of the effort be suppressed. So King led the peaceful marches. They let no stones, no feral dogs, no fire hose sprays turn them from their mission. They let no one turn them around from their mission to find civil Freedom, Oh, Freedom.

Even at the threat of death and mob riots, teens (surrounded by National Guardsmen) attended school at Little Rock High School and desegregated the halls, classrooms, and campus. We marched to Washington and demanded suffrage and equal civil rights in word and deed, not just on paper. There were sit-ins at diners and coffee counters as the would-be patrons were assaulted with various types of food and beverage poured over their heads and bodies.

These insults were televised on national news coverage and in print. In Southern towns and cities, word spreads quickly. On hearing of the events, others of the community joined in the quest for equal service and it happened. The economic pressures of no revenue while attempting to maintain supplies and stock became the straw that broke the dam.

Like their cousins of another age (Jewish slaves of Egypt), Black Americans strove against the many obstacles to suppress and negate what could have been contributions to the wealth of a nation. In those days, it took a leader with a vision to keep people focused on not only reaching the goal but clinging to the prize lest it be wrested away. By symbolic acts, they were admonished to press on for rights and freedoms by not acquiescing and passively waiting for someone else to carry the banner of agitating for their citizenship rights. Instead, under King’s leadership, they were encouraged to press on and to Keep [their] Eyes on the Prize.

Leave a Response »

 

Perfect Equal Opportunity Wednesday, Nov 5 2008

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) was established forty years ago to address the various forms of discrimination affecting those desiring to work in this country. Discrimination reared its ugly head of denial in many ways — as to gender, religion, race, color, or national origin. As time passed, we finally recognized the injustices borne by other populations such as those with disabilities and older workers. Title VII addressed these and other restrictive practices that caused social loss as well as economic. The EEOC continues its work in parsing out what is legal and what is not, how a claim should be filed and which party has the burden of proof under certain circumstances. And we move along the path of progress in making a level playing field for all participants in the employment game.

The EEOC deals with employment. But let us look at raw equal opportunity in order to investigate the underpinnings of the ethical employment perspectives. Let us consider how the common denominator would be structured in order to determine whether some issue is fair or not fair.

Saturday morning I overheard the ultimate example of equal opportunity. I’ve seen it in play in a few other situations. But it was finally articulated in no uncertain terms. A brash young woman was quite loud and didn’t care how many could hear her matter-of-fact pronouncements as we jerked and lurched along the boulevard in an over-crowded bus. Another passenger was bumped and thrown about the aisle as there was only standing room left. The young woman shouted her warning, “I don’t care what you age is, your sex, or your abilities. It doesn’t matter how big you are or what disabilities you have. If you [insert personal accident], I’ll knock your block off.”

About two weeks before this moment in time, another young woman (who was not riding a bus at 3 AM) of a similar personality and demeanor had something interesting to say to her housemate. There was an issue with regard to who could use the occupied bathroom, compared with the one not in use on the other side of the hall. The shared use did not appear to be a major issue as one person was putting medication and wrappings on a sore while the other pressed and styled her hair.

But the one doing the hairstyling wanted the entire 100 square foot room to herself. She screamed a demand and threat. “Get out of here! I’ve already jacked up your left eye. If you don’t get out, I’ll do the same to the right eye. I’m already psychotic. But this time I’ll kill your a–. And I’ll use this hot, flat iron pressing comb to do it.” In other words, the speaker was completely aware of the harm she’d done before and had no remorse for her actions. In fact, she had no qualms about committing the same acts again, but to a heightened degree — to death. Like the passenger on the bus, the victim’s age and other qualifiers were of no concern. The only concern was the integrity the speaker wanted for her right to possess the space.

This type of thinking is quite simplistic. There is no good, no bad. Just entitlement to rights for the self. If we look at this reasoning in the employment industry, we can see that it would be the ideal starting point. It is entirely possible that the EEOC could be replaced if this type of thinking were universally used. The basic question would be, “Can you do the job?” If the answer is no, then you’re not hired and the search continues. If the answer is yes, then we allow the candidate to start but evaluate them very carefully. If they make a mistake, they’re out. After all, we can’t afford to keep paying for something someone cannot do and keep replacing the resources they’ve spoiled.

Is this fair to the newcomer, the one with little to no experience? Of course it is. The newbie should be watching and paying attention in order to gain understanding of what’s expected. If they dont’ understand, then they should be asking questions. More than that, they should be practicing so that they can do what’s necessary exactly as it’s supposed to be done. Don’t violate anyone else’s space. Don’t destroy resources. Just use what’s absolutely necessary and do what’s expected.

Who pays for the beating suffered by the one who accidentally steps on a foot or commits some other indisgression? We’d have to determine what the ethical issues are in order to make a determination. We’d have to find what the los is and its gravity compared with the punishment. But this is definitely a world of perfect equal opportunity.

Leave a Response »

 

Who Decides What’s News? Saturday, Jul 14 2007

It was two years ago on August 7 that we learned of Peter Jenning’s death. For me, it was a major blow (but not as big as the one that would hit that coming December). This man, journalism public figure, model, was one of my news reporter ideals. His cutting edge work throughout the decades put the issues in front of us and made us think about what they meant. Then he allowed us to put the pieces together for ourselves. He covered the news in the remote areas of the world. He covered the schisms of our social fabric and the tragedies compounded by tragedies.

Jennings was the ABC World News Tonight anchor. But on his death, he was remembered by the media, on rivals CNN, CBS, in Newsweek, and on the BBC, to name a few.

Hearing of his death and short-lived illness on the night of August 7, that I was struck motionless. As the special announcement played out the milestones of the icon’s life, the reasons why it was such a blow became increasingly apparent. It was reporters like Jennings who served as the models of my inquisitiveness, stabs at journalistic integrity, and an insistence on looking at the world and the meaningful issues rather than the tried and trite.

The final blow was learning that Jennings was born on July 29. No wonder! I thought as the pieces fell together. No wonder there are so many similarities, so many common roads and endeavors, the same fire.

So in reviewing Jenning’s life, and the other hallmarks who are, or were, models for me, the question begs asking. In media, who is it who decides what the news is? Is it the Managing Editor, the publisher, the advertisers, or the public? Who decides what is newsworthy and how long is it newsworthy?

In asking these questions, the events surrounding the Paris Hilton detention become striking. The fallout of poor little rich girl having to stay in that horrid jail with all of those jail people. Not able to use nail polish remover. Having to endure a constantly buring overhead light and an unsheathed toilet. House arrest in her 4,000 square foot house would have been much more civilized. But where would the time for contrition and genuine remorse have emerged?

For two weeks, we endured the Paris Hilton comedy as she used the legal system to do whatever she wanted, all the way up to determining that the last court hearing should be done via teleconference. She even doctored up her release after serving a scant two and a half days in jail. And all of this was news — matters of importance to the general public for the sake of their betterment and social welfare.

But the pivotal question looms before us as the Paris falling action subsides. Delgadillo, his governance, and his family have suffered some interesing public revelation while sweet Paris (who he prosecuted to the fullest for serving her full time) sat quietly in her confines. Who determines what is news and how long is it newsworthy?

Perhaps the answer to the questions were answered on June 26 during the Los Angeles County Supervisors Hearing. The area behind (and also in front of) the plexiglass was filled to overflowing with all manner of media. One of the reasons for their presence was the Supervisors’ deliberations concerning closure of the King-Drew Hospital. Another had to do with Sheriff Baca’s handling of the Paris Hilton incarceration.

Cameras were poised. Microphones were wrapped and held to just the right position. Notepads and pens were held at the ready and hasty notes were made about the proceedings. Sheriff Baca entered the auditorium and cameras panned then returned to the focus on the Supervisors and their witnesses.

After a time of sitting in the auditorium, The Sheriff left the room. The media quietly filed out behind him as public testimony regarding the closure of King-Drew Hospital was being offered. A ripple of amazement was quieted in short order as Supervisor Yaroslavsky announced, “Now you see who ranks as far as news coverage. Paris Hilton is being released from jail and the media need to cover that.” The audience was assured that there would be a one or two minute break while the media filed out and the hearings could then resume.

NOTE: Baca’s stress and strain showed through his need to acknowledge each and every person he passed as he made his way to a seat in the auditorium. His condition became acutely obvious as I left the Hall. I doubt that he recognized or even remembered me from the past, yet he had gracious acknowledgements for me. His voice was strained. His eyes seemed to look at the person but they merely saw an image before him as the two attendants ushered him back into the auditorium. He seemed like a person going before a firing squad.

What is newsworthy? Who determines what captures the intellect and attention of the public? That moment in the Board of Supervisors auditorium seemed to answer the questions. The most important issue of the day was the poor little rich girl who gets whatever she wants. The general public’s consciousness and urging toward critical thinking about meaningful issues that affect local as well as global welfare gave sway to whether Paris Hilton lived in a jail cell or walked out of a detention facility.

I look forward to those who follow in Jennings’ footsteps. I crave the days of consuming the news for the value of the information it provides and its informativeness. I yearn for the questions the media will force me to ask and spur me to research. Meanwhile, we have a duty to ourselves and our information driven needs to demand that we receive true news that is full of the information. And we also need to demand that the answers not be spoon fed to us — as though media has the right opinion and is telling us what to think. We need to demand that the facts be laid out in a clear and unbiased manner and allow us to draw our own conclusions.

Who makes the decisions? Those who cause the news wires to survive with our consuming dollars because we who watch the news also drive what is considered “news.”

Leave a Response »