Captions please, Candidates.

The airwaves are full of debates and speaking events and predictions and (dare we say it) television commercials in the markets headed for primary caucuses and elections. There is one thing wrong with many of those TV ads. No, it’s not that they exist or that they’re misleading (although that can be true). I’m not even referring to the shady third party issue ads that crowd the screen all too often.

I’m talking about closed captioning.

The FCC has rules and guidelines for captioning of television shows, whether recorded ahead of time or aired live. Commercials, however, are still inconsistent. Some have captioning, some don’t. And many, all too many candidates bypass the time and the cost of captioning their commercials.

Think of those with hearing losses. Baby boomers raised on loud music, senior citizens with age-related hearing loss, millennials brought up on ear buds – all of these people are likely to miss the details in a well-made commercial. Then bring in those hearing problems not listed above — people with hearing aids or cochlear implants for whatever reason, from illness or hereditary conditions, from environmental problems like combat noise, among others. The size of the group grows.

Think about it. If you’re a candidate or working for a candidate, do you want to leave all of those voters out of your audience? That’s what happens if the ads aren’t captioned.

Closed captioning isn’t free. It costs money, and it costs time. However, paying the captioner and taking the time to load captions into an ad are investments. If those captions help a candidate to connect with voters, this additional cost of doing business can reach voters who may not have heard the candidate’s message – literally.

Readers, do you watch television with captioning on? Do you notice when a show or an ad has captioning – or doesn’t? I’d love to hear from you in the comments.

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

Simple Truths in the Online World

On rambling through too many emails:

Unsubscribing to an email list doesn’t mean I no longer support the cause. I can support, even donate, to a cause without needing to read daily requests for more money.

Online petitions have become so easy to sign that they are often meaningless. See above: begging me to sign petitions get deleted immediately. See this post for one that put me over the edge.

Subscribing to my favorite blogs saves me time. I don’t waste time clicking only to find that my blogger friends have been too busy to post.

Since I teach online, I’m glued to a computer screen much of the day at work. I love my work, but it means I spend less time online at home. My eyes and my mind need to rest.

I found out through Facebook that a recently retired teacher is running for office – a seat on the county board. He will do a great job on the board; now I need to decide how deep my role will be in helping him get elected. No emails, please; let me think this out on my own.

Ah, the online world. Take it or leave it, love it or hate it, it’s changing the world around us.

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

Online Petitions and Me

I don’t sign online petitions anymore. I didn’t sign very often in the first place, but it just seemed… too easy. Too easy to do, too easy to share, too easy to forward. Frankly, most online petitions are simply too easy to make a real impact on any issue of real importance.

And now, with people worldwide misled by Netflix signing in droves to request a pardon for a murderer.

I’ll keep this short, folks. Steven Avery murdered a young woman named Teresa Halbach. He lured her to his home, raped her, killed her, and even invited his nephew to watch and join in.

The evidence was clear. Making a Murderer disregarded a great number of facts  The producers of the one-sided series created their own reality, one that did not coincide with the reality of the investigation and trial. All appeals for both the killer and his nephew have been exhausted. The courts have reviewed the records in detail and stated that the jury was right; the man was guilty as charged.

Here’s what hurts. The murder took place not far from our city. We watched this unfold as it happened. We saw the missing person reports. Chuck was part of the media team that covered the trial. I had nightmares then and they’re starting again because La Petite is, like Halbach was, a professional photographer.

Those who sign petitions and comment online without the facts are making a major mistake. This murderer doesn’t need a pardon. He doesn’t need a new trial. He needs to serve his time – and even that can never atone for what he did.

 

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

As Seen On TV

I had to read this three times before I really believed it was on the air, in the crawl at the base of the screen on a local shall-remain-nameless evening news show.

The Wisconsin state assembly passed a bill doubling the limit on campaign contributions and allowing candidates to coordinate with shadowy special interest groups without debate.

I’m not sure which is worse: the obvious bias or the split-all-to-heck descriptor. No, I take that back. The worst part of this sentence is that it’s true. The state assembly passed, without debate, a bill raising the ceiling on campaign contributions, among other changes. Meanwhile, voters are still waiting for a response to Russ Feingold’s proposal, The Badger Pledge.

I guess I’ll just keep going to work, grading essays, teaching students how to coin a phrase better than our local news folk.

Grammar Police

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

Refugees are welcome here, Governor and the rest.

Dear Governor Walker;

I am concerned and rather embarrassed that the governor of my fair state has followed the Republican pack and denounced refugees that might seek a home in our state. Demonizing displaced Syrians is no way to lead.

Sincerely welcoming Syrians, Daisy

Dear Speaker Ryan;

Using your newly acquired soapbox to encourage prejudice and bigotry does not make you look strong; it makes you look uninformed and weak.

Seriously doubting the Speaker, Daisy

Dear #12 (Aaron Rodgers, if anyone needs a reminder);

In your position as award-winning NFL quarterback, you often have opportunities to speak to many. In denouncing the rude person who shouted anti-Muslim sentiments during the moment of silence, you used that opportunity to make a strong statement. The teacher in me loves that you used the phrase “prejudicial ideology” – the human in me loves that you took a stand.

Packer stockholder and lifelong fan, Daisy

Dear Senator (not for long if I can help it) Johnson;

I’m really getting tired of the misleading third-party commercials. If you can’t control them, you could at least show your disapproval by signing and honoring the Badger Pledge. Unless, of course, you approve of those negative ads – or enjoy their twisted support.

Decidedly Democrat, Daisy

Dear Russ (Feingold, that is);

I respect and appreciate your grass roots strategies. You are reaching out to everyday, ordinary people, and that’s where you’ll learn what Wisconsin citizens really need. That’s also how Wisconsin citizens will get to know you again and vote you back into the Senate where you belong.

Progressively Yours, Daisy

 

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

Does wifi matter?

One of the biggest trending topics from the recent debates was this: the wifi passwords at each venue.

Username: RNCDebate

Password: stophillary

They thought they were clever – forcing every member of the media or other attendee who wanted wifi to type “stophillary” into their devices.

Ha-ha. The decision makers forgot a key detail: Democrats had a debate coming up very soon. Predictions, anyone? Results:

Network name: 13MillionNewJobs

No Password. The Democratic Party is the party of inclusion and we believe in expanding access and economic opportunity for all.

There you have it, readers. The Democrats stayed classy. They resisted the opportunity to attack any individual, and instead restated their own agenda.

Taking the low road with tacky humor points: Republicans.

On the high road with positive attitude and strategy points: Democrats.

I know which organization I’d rather support. Now, please, can we move on to serious issues? You’re welcome.

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

There is hope in our younger generation.

An encore only because I’m no longer teaching fifth grade history. If I were, I’d have a whole new collection of student answers, and a whole new feeling of hope for the future.

My students were learning about the Articles of Confederation and the events and debates and compromises leading up to the writing and ratification of the United States Constitution. As I corrected their tests, a trend emerged in the essay questions – a rather thoughtful, insightful trend..

I can’t post the specific question, but I’ll just tell you that they were discussing the creation of the Constitution and interpreting George Washington’s warning against the destructive nature of political parties.

Actual student answers:
-“I think Washington wanted people to be happy and to work as a team.”
Can this student run for office some day? Please?
 
-“They would disagree on things because they would have different opinions and they would argue a lot.”
Run-on sentence aside, she was predicting the future with amazing accuracy.
 
-“It creates tensions and the good that could be done is lost in the arguments of each party’s plans.”
Another candidate for office someday – governor, perhaps.
“Washington knew that if the country split into political parties, then the country would be more split up and there would be too many disagreements.”
Politicians, stand warned. This student and others like him will be voting before you know it.
 
It’s time, it’s well past time, to start cooperating. Bipartisan collaboration would be a good start, but in all honesty, nonpartisan cooperation would be even better.
I’m sure George would agree.
Now back to the grade book to grade the maps of Ancient Egypt. My students know the real history of the pyramids. Maybe a certain candidate at tonight’s debate needs a little Common Core in his life.
But anyway, readers, feel free to step in. Today’s students are tomorrow’s leaders. How do you feel about that?

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

Civics Test for High School Graduates

It was a test – only a test, but a test that could have mattered. I’ve taught science for many years, perhaps to the detriment of my knowledge of social studies including geography, history, and you guessed it, civics. When we started a day of staff development and meeting with the New Required for Graduation Civics Test, I worried. What if I didn’t do well? What if my teacher self couldn’t handle a test we’ll administer to all high school freshmen starting this year?

I passed. Heck, I more than passed. Out of 100 multiple choice questions, I got 99 right. Maybe I haven’t taught a lot of United States history and government units, but I’m politically active and reasonably well informed. I read (and write for) The Broad Side. I contribute to, among others, Emily’s List.

I passed the test and discussed a few discrepancies with the teacher sitting next to me. We looked at the question asking us to identify the Speaker of the House, and asked “Isn’t the new guy (Wisconsin’s own Paul Ryan) getting sworn in today?” The question asking the students to identify their Representative in Congress will need to be open ended; our virtual school students live all over the state of Wisconsin. We also identified a few poorly worded questions that, while far from being par for the course, really needed updating.

What did I get wrong? I thought I could avoid answering that. Deep sigh. Oh, all right. I did not identify James Madison as an author of The Federalist Papers, a collection of essays that supported the ratification of the Constitution.

Readers (and voters), could you pass a 100 question civics test? What do you think?

Share and Enjoy !

Shares

Who is Paul Ryan? An encore, updated.

You heard the news, folks. Wisconsin’s Paul Ryan is now Mitt Romney’s running mate.  Speaker of the House. But who is this guy? What’s his vision? What is Paul Ryan really like?

Paul Ryan represents a district in southern Wisconsin in Congress. He is 42 45 years old, the fourth youngest candidate on a major party ticket when he was Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012..

Paul Ryan is an economist by trade. He graduated from college with a double major in economics and political science. On the surface, this could be a plus on his balance sheet. He is articulate and intelligent, and he can expound upon economic theories at length.

But let’s look deeply into this economist’s vision for the country. His budget plan, nicknamed the “Path to Prosperity,” didn’t really propose to increase prosperity for the average middle class American. His plan as introduced last fall (2011) included major changes in the programs known as entitlements, most notably replacing Medicare with a voucher program. His overall plan also relied on severe spending cuts. These cuts, and the austerity policies that would result, promised to be extreme and far-reaching.

The Ryan Budget bill did not become law. It passed the House, but the Senate voted it down.

What’s next, moving forward? Well, blog readers, that’s where the problem sits. Paul Ryan’s plans would move our country in reverse, back to the archaic values of the 1950s. His plans are extreme, severe, and austere in all the wrong places.

Ryan describes himself as being “…as pro-life as a person can be.” Unfortunately, that doesn’t include pro-women who need birth control, empathetic toward women who become pregnant by rape or incest, or supportive of women who have a legitimate need to terminate a pregnancy. He doesn’t value their lives at all.

Rep. Ryan’s budget proposals favor privatizing public education and using public funding in order to do it. His austerity measures and cuts will harm public schools – schools that are suffering  financially already.  A full generation of students are at risk. These students, unfortunately, are too young to vote.

Rep. Ryan likes the idea of for-profit colleges. He ignores the years of evidence that show for-profit colleges’ students’ poor payback record for federal student loans. Defaults on loans like this – well, where does the money come from to make up the missing dough? Ryan hasn’t answered that question. He has a history of voting against increasing amounts or availability of Pell Grants, grants that target low-income students pay for college. In general, his policies show that he views education as a privilege for the wealthy rather than an opportunity and a right for all.

Three years after the Romney/Ryan loss, I still question Ryan’s priorities. I’m glad to see him insist on family time, but I’m disappointed that his voting record doesn’t support middle income and low income families. Readers and Voters, what do you see in this new Speaker of the House? 

Share and Enjoy !

Shares