Bourdain Tells of Beirutis' Shattered Hope and Competency of Military in Time of Chaos

Popular travel channel host, Anthony Bourdain, spent a week in Beruit; and while his first two days were "paradise," the rest of the week he spent there was permeated by chaotic violence. While standing with his Sunni, Shiite, and Christian companions, gunfire erupted while Hezbolla supporters displayed their support of the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. From that point on, Bourdain witnessed events we could all hope but never be witness. As such, Larry King of the Larry King Live Show interviewed him on his experiences.

While Bourdain offered insightful and inspiring answers to the questions he was asked, King's disposition was of a simplistic interrogative manner. His questions were short and to the point, leaving Bourdain unlimited expansion in his answers. Perhaps the most pressing question he asked was, "would you go back, Tony?" This question seemed to drive home the points Bourdain had been making up until then; he had explained how hopeful and welcoming the Beruitis had been, how there was a sort of refreshing feel to the place as though it were, "kind of a dream version of what we hope the Middle East to be some day." The people were "sophisticated, largely English speaking, food centric, and friendly." This of course was in reference to the city before the subsequent bombings and violence. He applauded the military's competency in the matter and questioned the disorderly actions of the embassy. Despite all of the trauma and grief he had documented during the week he was there, Bourdain said, "I would love to go back. I- I will- it is great unfinished business with me that I have yet to be able to show the world what was possible in Beirut, how good the food, how nice the people I met, how hopeful a situation I saw for only two brief days."

It seems this near perfect interview lacked only the mistake that King did not ask Bourdain  how close he had been. Had he ever feared for his life while completely encapsuled by such danger? While this question could edge on a sort of  gutsy sensationalism, it seems a more candid choice of question, one I might have asked, though perhaps not on television. The only other mistake seemed to be that more time had not be allocated for the guest to share his experiences in the eloquent way he does on his show Anthony Bourdain: No Reservations. 

The Future of Journalism

The atrocities committed upon journalism by John Levine and Nicholas Lemann, the deans of the top two journalism schools in the nation, have revealed a sort of mutiny by the fosters of the journalism profession. If they, the few who are at the top of their field, who are teaching a new generation an art they have practiced for years, have a dreary look at the future of journalism, or have in fact become a part of the scandalous acts which could destroy the profession, then what is the point of stepping onto a sinking ship? As a journalism student, should I remain dedicated to the art if it is being ruined by its dedicated forerunners through poor esteem and unsavory action? Let us hope that perhaps those who will become the wise and travelled of this profession retain their standards for the sake of future journalists.

       A provost is, according to dictionary.com, is an administrative official at a college or university. A provost was also once considered a prison warden, though this term is now obsolete. (Perhaps college and prison have more in common than the obvious horrible food.) A provost is the chief academic officer who is responsible to the chancellor, or president of the college or university. The dean reports to the provost.  The common areas of academia which the provost oversees are the libraries, admissions, student services, information technology, and academic facilities.

Six Word Biography

Indecisive; but I might not be.

Albany Relocates to Arctic Region For Few Days

Only those who had no choice faced the bitter cold at Suny Albany this past Wednesday as the campus morphed into an icy concrete fortress of academia. Due to an overnight snowstorm which brought ice, rain, wind, and of course, snow, the few brave souls who didn't use the tunnels slipped and slid their whole way to class.

"It's nice, if you find death pretty," joked Joseph Stepansky, a student at the University. He was dressed in at least three or four layers, with his coat zippered only partially. He had no hat, but it was obvious he was cold by the redness of his ears and the way he shivered as a gust of wind easily found its way to our already chilled bones. Behind him, the trees wore coats of an ethereal looking whiteness; every branch, every twig was encapsuled in all of winter's icy glory. The concrete walkways of the podium were solid sheets of ice, all but a few paths which had been furiously salted and plowed. 

There was a sort of serene silence about the campus, as though the storm had brought a clean, revived energy to the area. The dirty concrete was now covered in a new coat of white, and even in the dull gray light of day, the campus shone with a bright glow. The thick blanket of snow muffed any sort of shouts or noise, thus one was left to cacophony of their mind's rambling. 

As Joseph stood, obviously longing for the warmth of the indoors, he offered one last thought, "winter has a good way of sticking around longer than you want."  It cares not for how far you must walk to class, nor how much it cramps your social life; winter must be here to stay for at least a while. And in Albany, it will most definitely be a good deal of time before the campus begins to shed its icy layering.

Compound Interest

While keeping your savings underneath you mattress may seem a secure location, your money is not living up to its full potential; when it's resting safely in the hands of the bank, compound interest may be applied to it. 

This interest is money you are given for allowing your money to be loaned out in the bank; this compound interest also works the other way, in that when you borrow money, you must pay the bank a fee for using it. Back to savings: in reality, your money does not just sit in a drawer in the bank, but it is loaned out to other bank patrons. For allowing this transaction, the bank awards a certain amount of interest. Let's say for example, you deposit one hundred dollars into a bank account, with a compound interest rate of 10% applied annually. If you were to leave it untouched for three years, your new balance would be $133.10, according to www.moneychimp.com; for just simply allowing your money to sit, you earned $33.10, not bad for not doing any work. 

However, the simple idea of not spending any of that $100 dollars could be a challenge for many. Yet, if the initial deposit were a bit more, perhaps that urge would be quelled; imagine what $20,000 could do!

Lawmaking in New York

Getting  a law passed in New York appears to be quite impossible to the average man, and unsurprisingly it actually is; with bureaucratic red tape wound so tightly around legislation of laws, it is virtually impossible for anyone other than those sitting the the state offices worrying about their high cholesterol to make any great idea into a law. Sure here and there a few upright, progressive people made it into the legislative branch, but I pessimistically believe they are few and far between. And while lobbying can bring the common man's needs into the light, it can only go so far. Lawmakers will only pass what they see fit, or what helps their personal agenda.

In order for an idea to become a law, it must be first be proposed as a bill; then, its next step toward becoming a law is in the hands of the Governor, Head of Senate, and Head of the State Assembly; these three decide whether the bill will live or die, in a private meeting, not accessible even through the Open Meeting Law. This seems a bit odd, since the public should be aware which potential lawsare being tossed out  with the half eaten lunches of these bureaucrats. If the bill makes it through  this meeting, it next heads to the assembly, which has a party caucus , yet another private meeting to which the press is not allowed. While I can sympathize with the idea that politicians don't want a crowd of journalists barging in and demanding facts, this caucus seems like it should be accessible; at least the assembly could have some sort of press release about it. After the bill passes through this, it must be approved by the Senate and Assembly. And eventually, with enough luck it will become a law.

On a Federal level, and in an attempt to make this red tape a bit easier to understand, laws are made through a system in which the Senate and House of representatives propose a bill (usually an idea of a politician, perhaps promised during his or her election campaign); only Congress has this power of proposition. The bill is then passed on to the appropriate committee for editing and analysis; this committee can choose to change the language of the bill, refer the bill to another committee, or report back to Congress. The committee's analysis is then sent back to be voted upon. The next bill must then pass in the Senate and House, after which it must be signed or vetoed by the president. If it is successfully signed, the bill becomes a law; if not, the bill is then sent back to Congress and a veto-override could be a result, in which case the bill becomes a law.

While the First Amendment guarantees the freedom of speech and assembly, it does  not guarantee that lawmakers will listen. So this brings us to the question, what is one to do about this? You can't do much other than lobby and petition your heart out! Make yourself heard, and perhaps those few who will honestly listen to the public without holding their own interests first will facilitate the changes you seek.

(Rereading this, it sounds a bit charged and pessimistic, but actually my beliefs are not this heated on the subject....)

Muckraking in the Twenty-First Century

If one were to call to mind the story Gene Weingarten, of the Washington Post Magazine, wrote regarding the indifference of subway patrons, he or she might not instantly compare him to Ida Tarbell or Upton Sinclair; but at a closer examination, Weingarten is revealing truths and short comings  of humanity just as they did. Admittedly, indifference of passer-byes to street performers does not do such ostensibly irreparable harm to society as say, dangerous and unsanitary factory conditions, but still, it does reveal a facet of society which may be in need of an examination.

Has society become so numb to anything but the destination, that there's no time to stop to enjoy the journey? Would it really take that long to stop, and listen to a song, an expression of one's soul, a look into a fellow man's (or woman's) mind? Could that two minutes really make a difference in the grand scheme of things, beside preventing you from being the by a car that you might have been hit by had you been two minutes ahead of yourself? 

Perhaps this speaks more to the idea of human perception. While Weingarten persuaded a world class musician, Joshua Bell, to perform on the street for his experiment into public norms, only a small fraction stopped to make a donation, or at least even take a listen. This seems a bit insane, since as a professional musician, patrons pay a large sum to listen to him, but when able to listen for free, they essentially ignored his presence. I can only relate this to the idea of the generic brand and name brand; even though the less expensive brand may be of the same quality, many will go for the name brand because it feels more acceptable. Or perhaps, they ignored him because of the setting. Who would expect to find a man of his talent playing incognito in the street? This might even further bring one to ponder whether Bell is only held in such high esteem because he performs in such affluent surroundings. (Absolutely no offense should be taken toward Bell's talent! Any famous musician X could be inserted into this scenario.) Could it be that people only gave him a chance, or even the time of day, because they were told he was an important musician who could only be enjoyed under the lights of a theatre, and thus paid $100 plus for a ticket to see him? What if society gave every performer, those on the street included, the same benefit of the doubt as they do an established musician? Perhaps new and talented musicians would be discovered and brought to fame, rather than thrown money at in the street while the world hastily runs to its next meeting.

Thus, the human condition of perception is a concept we must each individually examine. We must not feed into the haste and status quo of society; we must live for ourselves, and if that means stopping to watch a man play a harmonica on the street instead of stopping for coffee then so be it. And yes, there is not much we can do to change our innate beliefs, but it might be worthwhile to work at changing the perception that only worth while art can be viewed or listened in a purchased setting. Here's an idea, stop and look at some graffiti next time you see some; look at the blend of colors, the message it's trying to convey. You may be surprised by what you see. 

On a larger scale, perhaps perception should be geared toward a more laid back, open minded lifestyle, where we have the time to stop and glance at he world around us, the fruits of life, not rush past them because we have more important, might I add, more boring, things to do.

John Merrill: Plagiarizer or Not?

It's debatable whether John Merrill was merely borrowing a few quotes from senior staff writer, Anna Koeppel, or whether he was lifting her hard work and journalistic ability for his own. While Koeppel wrote a news article explaining a new department at MU, Merrill wrote a column regarding the nascent of the department. He used the same quotes as she did; however, he added a bit of his own spin and wit into the story. HE could totally have avoided the accusation of plagiarism had he simply given Koeppel credit for her quotes. It seems that his punishment for the aleged plagiarism was a bit harsh, as he was fired from The Missourian the next day. Had he been a bit less careless, this unfortunate occurrence would not have been. As an alternative, a more reasonable punishment would have been suspension form the paper and a formal apology. Instead he was dealt a hand of shame and a damaged reputation. It doesn't seem to me that he plagiarized; he was just too lazy and caught up in his own work to realize that it is essential to give credit where credit is deserved.

The Electoral College

It seems there is a great divide between those who condone the use of, and those who despise the existence of the Electoral College.This body of electors, whose quantity is equivalent to the number of senators and representatives for each state, meet every four years to vote for the president and vice president. The problem many find with this system is that they are not directly voting for their nation's leaders. However, in reality, the Electoral College makes representation more equal. For instance, the East Coast, is a densely populated, most urban area; and as a result, many of its inhabitants have similar views on what the nation needs. In, let's say, Iowa, for example, the land is more sparsely populated and of a more agricultural nature. Thus, it is obvious that the people who live in such drastically different areas have different needs and beliefs. If we were all to vote directly, these people living in less populated regions would hardly ever have their needs met; for if they cant vote for the leader who could help them, the leader who more urban people voted for, then the Iowan farmers would be forever overshadowed by petitions for safer subways and taller buildings. 

What Exactly is News?

Most people have a good idea of what news is; its the filler in the newspapers, the stuff the news casters rant about in a professional way. In today's world, you would have to be living under a rock to not have even the faintest idea of what is happening in the world; and even there, it's likely a newspaper would find its way under with you.

However, even if people have a basic understanding of it, there exists some deviation in what exactly people consider worthy of being called news. Personally, it seems that pretty much anything that could help to inform people or hold relevance in their lives could be considered worthy of the title; from the smallest story about a farmer who lost his dog, to coverage of the presidential race. Even if you personally could care less about a certain story, someone, somewhere was touched, or intrigued, or informed by the story, and that is what journalism boils down to; with all of the seasonings of writing ability and a plethora of knowledge, the fact is, that if you, or I, or any journalist influenced the life of someone else, or even the World, we have done our job.