Thursday, January 31, 2008

Forever

This site is right.

Americans under the age of 45 have never voted in a presidential election without a Bush or a Clinton on the ballot, either in the Presidential or Vice Presidential slot. (President George Herbert Walker Bush was on the winning 1980 republican ticket as Ronald Reagan's VP.)

If Hillary wins, the title of POTUS will have been held by either a Bush or a Clinton since 1989.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Remember: the enemy's gate is DOWN!

They are making a game based on the battleroom in Ender's Game. One can only hope that it ends up as real-time strategy instead of first-person shooter. It'll be great to see how the strategies in the book measure up to real life. Besides, how do you simulate "frozen legs" (in zero-G) in an FPS?

Monday, January 28, 2008

Measuring Good Luck

missingpoints classic: Measuring good luck
27 January 2003

Most malls have a kiosk that sells good luck charms. Mostly of Chinese origin, their wares include mirrors that you hang above your doorway and those insidious waving cats that are supposed to welcome the good luck in. Some of these cats even have a battery-operated "waving motion" that is just creepy. (Is that supposed to increase the luck, or just scare people into buying?)

These stores are reportedly doing well (And why shouldn't they? They have loads of lucky charms.), which just goes to show how much people believe in luck. But it's more than just believing in luck and fate. The faith in lucky charms also includes a belief that one can influence one's luck by wearing or hanging a charm somewhere in your house.

While a lot of people may dismiss these charms as nothing but balderdash, still you find many (these same people, in fact) buying them. It's the baka sakali attitude that says "malay mo, totoo pala," like a pagan version of Pascal's Wager. After all, what's the harm in spending a few hundred bucks on a figurine that also serves as a decorative piece?

But while I wouldn't mind plunking down a few pesos to buy a waving cat or an octagonal mirror, I will not pay someone a few hundred thousand to tell me that my house is arranged all wrong as an explanation for my bad luck.

It's almost Chinese New Year and every talk show will again have these feng shui "masters" giving their analysis as to how the arrangement of furniture affects the energy paths of the cosmos, in turn affecting the fortunes of those who live in that particular place. I find most of their suggestions and explanation amusing to say the least. One of them even suggested demolishing the Quirino Grandstand for better feng shui.

Their craft is based on the idea that there is energy all around us and that this can be harnessed through the proper interior design and architecture. The use of mirrors and crystals is supposed to enchance the good effects and minimize the bad and it is the job of feng shui consultants to tell us how we're supposed to do this.

This is where I start to become wary.

If, indeed, there is a scientific (meaning systematic) explanation for feng shui, then why do these "experts" keep spewing cliches and meaningless explanations? I'm all for acupuncture* since one sees the body's energy charts specifying the points where they should stick the needles, but with feng shui, it just seems like they just come up with cockamamie explanations that any con artist could concoct. I mean, anyone with a snake-oil seller's charm (and morals) can (and probably do) grab a compass and start rearranging furniture claiming that they block energy.

And get paid by rich gullible idiots for this.

I've yet to see a "money back guarantee" from one of these consultants. If they're so confident about their craft, then they should be willing to put their money where their mouths and compasses are. But no. Seriously, can I legally sue a feng shui expert if his re-arrangement of my house fails to produce results?

I am willing to pay an interior decorator a reasonable sum of money because his promise is to create a house that looks good. If it looks pleasing, then the money is worth it. But the promise in feng shui is good luck, and that I cannot measure. Which begs the question: how do you put a price on something that does not guarantee results?

The good luck charms I can understand. They're trinkets and jewelry, items with production costs. But to actually pay for a service that promises everything but may end up producing nothing (without any guarantee)?

Good luck. He needs more than a waving cat to convince me.

------------
*Not anymore. Acupuncture, like Feng Shui, refuses to subject itself to double-blind testing and as such, cannot be considered a real science.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Teaching at Rallies

A great idea by the striking TV writers: Teaching Thursday, where veteran scribes open themselves to questions from beginners and aspirants. It fills up the picket line and allows newbies to hobnob with those who get paid a lot (but not from new media) to do so. It also keeps strike activities interesting.

Comedy

Jane Espenson links to George Meyer's profile on The New Yorker (via The Simpsons Archive). It's interesting to learn that the trademark humor of The Simpsons (which I attributed before to "Airplane" and its ilk) is mainly because of one man -- the man also responsible for Letterman smashing or throwing things off roofs (a gimmick Dave still uses).

The article, written in 2000, also notes Meyer's dismay at situation comedies then ("Friends" being at the top of the food chain), which are subject to the "tyranny of live studio audiences." half a decade later single-camera comedies like "Arrested Development" and "30 Rock" are on the rise bearing the unmistakable mark of Meyer (through Dave, SNL, and The Simpsons).

* * * * *

Telling a joke (much less crafting one) is difficult, especially long, convoluted stories hinging on a proper set up and a punchline delivered deadpan. It doesn't require practice as much as it needs a decent understanding of how humor works. Joey de Leon calls it "abnormalizing the normal," which is a less telling deconstruction than the one Meyer offers:

He remembers being particularly struck by a parody of "Dennis the Menace." He told me, "It was a cartoon that showed Dennis coming into the house holding a skull, and the caption was something like 'Hey, Mom, look what I found in Mr. Wilson's head.' That absolutely put me away. The next day, my stomach muscles hurt from laughing. I felt like I'd been worked over by bullies."

Meyer still admires that cartoon, because, he says, it led him to a significant insight about humor. "It jumps a step, and to me the best comedy always jumps a step," he explains. "Dennis could have said, 'Mom, I killed Mr. Wilson and here's his head,' and Mrs. Mitchell could have said, 'Oh, Dennis,' or something like that, and I still would have thought it was pretty funny, because part of the humor for me was simply that a kid had killed an adult. But, Jesus, what a great joke.

De Leon's definition fits Dennis killing Mr. Wilson (which is abnormal in itself); Meyer's example takes it further by juxtaposing it with the banal (and common Dennis the Menace line) "look what I found!"

The Simpsons often jumps a step. One of my favorite jokes is when Homer, banned from Moe's bar, shows up dressed like the Monopoly man calling himself Guy Incognito. The guys then beat him up and throw him outside where the real Homer then walks past him. Brilliant.

Which reminds me; I really need to include a session on humor in my Lit class.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Teacher's Notes

I have a new blog called Teacher’s Notes, which is exactly that: notes for my various classes. The entries are basically recaps of each session – like Television Without Pity, minus the snark.

For my students it’s a quick reference in case they missed anything while dozing off in class (beats text or email) or (and I’m hoping this is the case) they want to learn more. Summarizing the discussion includes placing links to various resources that I mentioned in the lecture as well as other relevant stuff I stumble across online. The entry on poetry reading, for example, links to YouTube clips of Slam Poets as well as source sites like poemhunter or poetry.org.

The other thing I’m trying to do is capture the feel of my classes. Any former student will tell you that my lectures (when I’m in the mood) are filled with non-sequiturs, jokes, and weird segues. I am of the school of public speaking that treats lectures as performance pieces.

So check it out. I’ll welcome comments from non-students and alumni. Maybe it’ll result in better discussions.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Virtual censorship

This piece on indie filmmakers being censored by the MTRCB is significant because the reasons for the films' X rating is clearly subjective.

Produced by Southern Tagalog Exposure, “Arrovo” is a satire on President Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration. The MTRCB declared the film “too one-sided,” and said it “undermines the faith and confidence of the people,” thus the “X” rating.

Since when is a classification board fit to judge whether a film “undermines the faith and confidence of the people?” Besides, as the director said, they are not required to air both sides. They are not journalists doing a public service; they create art.

But the scarier rationale is for "Mendiola," which according to the MTRCB, “has a tendency to incite sedition and rebellion.

Back in high school Constitutional Law (we used Isagani Cruz's textbook, not the sissy high school social studies crap) we were taught that the the "dangerous tendencies" doctrine has been scrapped in favor of "clear and present danger," the rationale being "dangerous tendencies" can be defined subjectively, as is the case with the MTRCB ruling on "Mendiola."

The third film was X'd because it “has no redeeming value and is therefore unacceptable for commercial screening.”

Since when does a movie need a "redeeming value" in order to be viewable? The fact that a film is made is value enough in itself, it doesn't need to conform to any moral standard. This crap is the reason behind disclaimers in heist films like "The Score" and the Tom Selleck one when they were shown here.

The MTRCB aren't technically banning anything, though. They're just barring commercial screenings by virtue of the X rating.

Saturday, January 19, 2008

Rock Engine, yeah.

The Philippines are Asia's Rock Engine says Bruce Northam on the Gibson Guitar website. Visiting Malate and Palawan, Northam mentions Arnel Pineda, the Hobbit House, karaoke, and the fact that musicians (and not DJs) rule the music scene.

I love his description of, well, almost any street in Malate:

Manila’s Malate nightlife district alone has dozens of sing-along bars with non-canned music ranging from sitar and bongo duos to American Idol-style contestants. In five bars lining one street, one might find a rock band, a musical comedy, a trio of women singing and dancing accompanied by a keyboardist, a jazz singer/pianist, and an acoustic guitar duo. Serving 50 cent bottles of cold beer, outdoor bargain cafes and traveler’s hangouts abound, and each spins tunes from their massive, classic rock and blues CD inventories.

He features the Blue Rats' Cowboy Santos mainly because (I presume) he plays at the Hobbit House AND has a classic Gibson. He fails to mention, though, that Cowboy is also famous for being the son of the Queen of Pinoy Rock who is rumored to have banged Clapton when he performed here in the 70s.* Guitar skills via osmosis, anyone?

----------
* Of course it can't have been part of the article; Clapton favored Fenders since the late 60s. Plus, the more obvious fact that you don't really talk about your mother's rumored indiscretions with a foreign reporter.

Preparing for the Report

Neil Shubin (of Tiktaalik fame) recounts his preparation for his "Colbert Report" appearance on Pharyngula. Interesting reading, especially his insight on adapting the precise scientific vocabulary to a serve the needs of a five-minute segment on a comedy show whose main character parodies an ignorant conservative rabble-rouser.

The cool thing (among many) about Colbert is that he helps real scientists, using his character's silly questions to serve as platforms for the better ones like Shubin or Neil deGrasse Tyson to make their points. The ultimate compliment (as mentioned by the commenters) is when Colbert seems to step out of character to ask a real question.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Nothing but air

I was expecting a scaled down MacBook like the old Powerbook G4s. I was itching to buy an ultraportable that had at least as much power in it as similar offerings from Lenovo and Sony. For something that costs somewhere in between a MacBook and a Pro, I was expecting a bit more features.

But no, Jobs had to give us air.

The MacBook Air is thin, but that's basically it. It ain't lighter than your basic ultraportable, it has even less features than the Sony or Lenovo equivalent, and it's still wide.

The last one misses the point. No one who carries a laptop on his back says, "gee, if only this were thinner." We look for lighter and smaller. The footprint is important because a smaller one means we can carry a smaller bag. A smaller form factor means we can plunk it down on a coffee shop table and still have space for food and drink.

I do understand what Apple is trying to do. Losing the optical drive and playing with Flash memory is the direction of mobile computing. Heck the DVD installation via wifi (included in the firmware, IIRC) is semi-revolutionary in itself. But having only a single USB port, no LAN jack, and an internal battery (plus the exorbitant price of the SSD version) is a dealbreaker for me.

Ah, but expect decent sales nonetheless. Jobs's RDF is still working. As for me, for PhP20K that Eee PC is starting to look good.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Say what?

How can we expect sane decisions from a man who changes his mind in the span of a sentence?

“I will not stoop to the lowest level that these press photographers think who they are [sic]. But henceforth no press photographer can enter this office. If they enter this office I will throw them out.”


Don’t mind the faulty grammar but do note the (lack of) logic. He vows not to “stoop to the lowest level” yet retaliates against the photographers’ boycott by banning them from his office.

Oh well, my mother was right when she said “di kasi dapat pinapatulan ang ulyanin.”

Begging to sell

A couple of cute kids approach us at a coffee shop. They’re selling yema, trying to use an uncomfortable mix of charm and awa to do it. Unlike sampaguita vendors on the streets these kids are relatively well-dressed and polite, telling you that they need the money for baon for school.

Perennial pilosopos, we ask them why they’re not using yema as baon for school.

The kids smile, unsure how to answer, and back off.

I follow the kid with my eyes, trying to see if he has a handler. I’m sure they have one. These are not enterprising kids with backyard lemonade stands; they have supplies and a script to sell it with as well as the means to get to a mall and set targets. They’re selling to strangers in a mall, not friends and relatives and neighbors. And while some of them may think they’re playing, there is actual money involved here.

It’s not an isolated phenomenon. Anyone who’s been in a mall the past few months has encountered these kids, probably waving them off or giving some excuse. No katok on your car window or the traditional patatawarin po (please forgive me) for them. Somehow it doesn’t seem appropriate.

Their strategy is sound. After all, a few pesos for yema hardly seems expensive when compared to the hundred peso mug of coffee you’re drinking. Surely, the kids need it more than the Tantocos.

But somehow I can not bring myself to buy from them.

As a rule I do not give to beggars. I donate to charitable institutions because my money will be better used by a large organization with a plan to lift people out of poverty. I don’t have much to give, so I try to spend my donation money the best way possible.

I am also a cool customer. Being in business myself, I know how difficult selling is. I try to get value for my money but I’m not the type who makes tawad just to save a few bucks. Those vendors did not go into business to give their goods away.

These yema kids are making a travesty of commerce AND mendicancy by merging the two.

If you’re going to beg for alms, then beg. I may give you something out of the goodness of my heart. Don’t sell me something and tell me it’s for school. That’s why I don’t buy sampaguita from vendors either. I find it offensive whenever they say “bilin nyo na ito para makauwi na ako.” Like they’re implying I’m the one to blame for their staying up late. I’m not.

Neither am I to blame for your lack of school baon. Just sell me the damn yema.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

We're not the customers here

The thing we have to understand about network television is that audiences are not the customers; we’re the product.

Which explains everything: from the lowest common denominator mentality to cheap production values to the obsession with ratings. Network television operates to get as many eyeballs as possible in order to sell this to advertisers for as high a price as possible.

Television shows, in the words of scriptwriter Larry Brody, are simply bait.

They’re there to make sure that the people turn on their sets and watch at certain times of day. Noontime shows, which used to be musical variety, have become game shows with sexy dancing girls. It’s the cheapest way to pack a studio with balikbayans, get viewers to watch (and text in), and fill up two hours. No ideas required aside from the original game concepts.

They’re there to make sure we watch the commercials in between instead of zipping or zapping. Teleseryes don't have bumper screens anymore. The seconds saved are sold as ad space and, perhaps more importantly, the viewers dare not look away even during the break lest they miss something.

So the consumer rants about product quality don't really register with the networks. We’re not the ones buying (remember, it’s free), we’re the ones being sold.

Thursday, January 10, 2008

News for the stupid

In the 2004 elections we were silently complaining about the race horse / cockfight mentality of news media. The focus was not on the issues or qualifications but statistics: how many votes did each candidate expect to get? It was lazy journalism at best, giving people what is easy to understand without delving into plans and proposed programs.

Roco pledged to outlaw contractualization, which should've been covered (by Businessworld at least) but was relegated instead to inside pages. The money shot during that "covenant with the urban poor" event we cooked up was Roco playing billiards with squatter teens.

Cool pic, but they totally missed the point we wanted to make.

Today the media is no better, and it's not just local. John Hockenberry's article in Technology Review on network news recalls how he fought to cover news that was, well, news post-9/11 only to be chided (ironically) for missing the point.

... I had been in Corvo's office to propose a series of stories about al-Qaeda, which was just emerging as a suspect in the attacks. While well known in security circles and among journalists who tried to cover international Islamist movements, al-Qaeda as a terrorist organization and a story line was still obscure in the early days after September 11. It had occurred to me and a number of other journalists that a core mission of NBC News would now be to explain, even belatedly, the origins and significance of these organizations. But Zucker insisted that Dateline stay focused on the firefighters. The story of firefighters trapped in the crumbling towers, Zucker said, was the emotional center of this whole event. Corvo enthusiastically agreed.

Like our local news reports, the focus is on telling a story. Which is fine if you're writing a television show, not when you're trying to practice journalism. The article goes on to show how clueless US networks are regarding technology and focusing on lowest common denominator stuff like "To Catch a Predator" instead of following up on the Nigerian scam sting or porn spammers.

Local news is bereft of analysis and relevance. The Quiapo fiesta yesterday could've been the source of so many interesting leads but the major reports are all about the crowds and the devotees. They could've just pointed a camera at the crowd sans commentary and ended up with the same amount of information.

Where are the obtuse angles? Devotees preparing their kids to take their place risking life and limb for the chance to carry a statue is child abuse. Grown men who philander and spend all day scratching their balls (and all night drinking) while their wives and kids work make a sacrifice once a year and think that their god looks favorably on them. Where's the statement by the Church saying that real grace comes from faith and good works and not from a face towel rubbed against a statue?

It's all money shots without insight. Like the glaring difference between something like "Lust... Caution" and gonzo porn.

But the depressing similarity is with the editorial choice dictated by corporate needs. Hockenberry writes:

In 2003, I was told that a story on the emergence from prison of a former member of the Weather Underground, whose son had graduated from Yale University and won a Rhodes Scholarship, would not fly unless it dovetailed with a story line on a then-struggling, soon-to-be-cancelled, and now-forgotten Sunday-night drama called American Dreams, which was set in the 1960s. I was told that the Weather Underground story might be viable if American Dreams did an episode on "protesters or something."

At about the same time TV Patrol was running reports on vendors selling F4 posters. Which should be non-news except "Meteor Garden" was currently being touted as the next big thing.

At least the NBC decisions were a lot less garapal.

Bad SF

Hells yes!

Entertainment Weekly isn't exactly an "intelligent read" but this open letter to the Sci-Fi channel hits it right on the spot. While US cable is now the source of good, original, groundbreaking entertainment, the Sci-Fi Channel continues to give us crap. Heck, HBO is beating the to the punch with the upcoming "Preacher" and ASoIaF minis.

Science Fiction fans are among the most intelligent people out there. And (in the US at least) they have money. Why does the channel dedicated to the genre cancel "Farscape" and produce crap like "Mansquito?"

The MST3K treatment is fun occasionally but when it's done all the time it ceases being camp and self-deprecation and turns into the very creature it parodies. "Battlestar Galactica" is ending and there are no more "Dune" sequels to be made but instead of trying to create the next great SF series they do "Flash Gordon" and turn it into "Sliders."

Sunday, January 06, 2008

Why I write

...is for another post. But this is why Damon Lindelof writes.

The piece is brilliant. You can just imagine him sitting in front of a computer typing away what comes to mind and producing, in essay form, a kick-ass episode of "Lost."

I want to be able to do that.

Saturday, January 05, 2008

Consultant

When I was a kid I asked my mom what Dad’s job was. She told me he was a consultant, which, to a kid, sounded weird. They used to ask you that in grade school – what your parents did for a living – and I found it uncomfortable answering “consultant” or “businessman” when other kids were saying “doctor” and “lawyer” and “engineer.” It was difficult explaining it to a class (and a teacher) who didn’t know what to make of it. I wasn’t as cool as the kid whose dad flew planes or built buildings.

[Aside: “Entrepreneur” would’ve been nice but it wasn’t in vogue back then. Neither was “homemaker” so a number of us wrote down “housewife” for our stay-at-home moms.]

To a kid, jobs are clear-cut: policeman, firefighter, teacher. Even if we barely understood what the job entailed, it comforted us to have a name and an image that we saw in schoolbooks to attach to our parents.

My dad carried a briefcase, occasionally.

Now, some 20-odd years later, my father’s retired and I’m the consultant. And while the tools of the trade are laptops and cellphones – I lug around a backpack instead of a briefcase – I still can’t explain to a child what exactly it is I do.

Consulting is a catch-all. I was technically a Department of Education consultant in 2001 and (together with other members of Raul Roco’s staff) became “evidence” of graft and corruption in government. Of course that was only if you lumped us together with the typical government consultants who collected six-figure fees but rarely showed up (if at all). We weren’t like that at all. Think Mandy in the first season of “The West Wing;” we had no official positions but did a lot more work than the regular salaried staff.

Consultant is what they call you when they think you have something to offer but they’re just not sure what, or if they want to give you a job but can’t get you to sit your ass down from 9 to 5. We have “terms of engagement,” which is a fancy way of saying “what we need to do in order to get paid.” (It is implied that anything more will be charged accordingly.)

Basically people tell consultants their problems and we give our opinions. But unlike a friend over lunch or coffee, the consultant offers justifications (research, studies, and sound reasoning written on paper) to give the impression that he knows what he’s saying and that he’s worth what you’re paying him.

And most of the time we are.

Paying someone for their thoughts is expensive, with neither party knowing if they’re really worth it. My former professors consulted for large companies, charging 50 to 100 grand a day, spending it in a conference room telling their clients what’s wrong with their companies. Of course, there’s always a caveat. They (actually, we) tell them no one knows their business more than they do and no amount of research is 100% accurate in prediction.

That’s when we sometimes feel we’re not.

For the consultant there is always a nagging feeling that he’s putting one over his clients. Half the time I’m thinking “this is so fucking easy.” I just write down what I learned in school and what I read in books and what knowledge I gained from experience. I spend half an hour thinking about a problem and spend the same amount of time translating it into something my clients can understand, taking care to use enough jargon to sound convincing and enough lay terms to be comprehensible.

[But then again you count how much your education cost and the books and trade papers and the perceived value of your natural smarts and you begin to think you’re the one being had.]

Job descriptions are easy for a kid. A firefighter puts out fires, a policeman catches criminals, and a doctor heals people. But it’s never that simple. Cops’ and doctors’ and lawyers’ actual responsibilities are a bit more complicated for typical nine-year-olds to comprehend. In fact the job descriptions we find in elementary schoolbooks are just the aspect that’s easiest to understand.

Mom was never able to give me a decent description of what Dad did for a living, except he went to an office (occasionally) and carried a briefcase. What she should’ve told me was that people asked him questions and he told them what he knew.

Which, come to think of it, would’ve been pretty cool for a nine-year-old to say in class.