Wikipedia notes: “The social safety net (SSN) consists of non-contributory assistance existing to improve lives of vulnerable families and individuals experiencing poverty and destitution. Examples of SSNs are previously-contributory social pensions, in-kind and food transfers, conditional and unconditional cash transfers, fee waivers, public works, and school feeding programs.”
This net got a reference in the final episode of HBO’s mediocre TV series, The Girls on the Bus. The lead character says to her editor: “We know that Dick Braun [cyber currency billionaire based on Sam Bankman-Fried] is a bad dude and he is backing the mayor who is most definitely a liar…”
Editor: “Why would Braun back a nothing mayor?”
Lead: “Braun knows the power of a pretty filter. Put deregulation, pro-business neo-liberal policy behind the mayor’s glossy facade. Add the fact that he’s a Democrat and most people won’t realize he’s quietly shredding our social safety net.”
Near the end of the show, the lead says: “We had become unwitting agents of the patriarchy. And it would take all of us to stop him.”
“The Boys on the Bus would have knifed each other to get the story. We were supposed to be rivals… Instead, we became a family bonded together to save our democracy.”
Sometimes adopting more feminine values (such as egalitarian cooperation) increases safety and sometimes adding masculine values (such as hierarchy and independence) promotes safety.
The succinct explanation that New York Times war correspondent David Halberstam gave in 1972 for the high-quality work he and his fellow journalists had done in Vietnam was that there had been no women in their lives to mess things up.
“Because only one of them was married,” he wrote of his colleagues, “there was no wifely pull to become part of the Saigon social whirl, to get along with the Noltings or the Harkinses, the kind of insidious pressure which works against journalistic excellence in Washington.”
Women meant compromise and intellectual mediocrity.
If you asked women to name the quality they most admired in women, “intelligence” ranked tops, at 57 percent. If you asked men, the best thing about women was “gentleness,” at 38 percent; only 1 percent of them cited intelligence.
People, not kits. If you really want to be ready for the next big earthquake, forget the earthquake kit and go talk to your neighbors…
The path to recovery after a disaster is created by people. People who choose to stay in a damaged neighborhood. People who choose to offer a place to stay to someone whose home is being repaired. People who choose to support their local businesses and make sure they can stay open and viable. Social scientists have been able to demonstrate that communities with a high level of social capital, where people are connected to one another, recover more quickly and more completely after disasters.
Connecting with people we live near is no longer as obvious as it once was. Because we can electronically stay connected with friends and families even when we move to a new town, we do not have as strong a need for human connection driving us to start new relationships with our neighbors. Those distant friends can help us after a disaster — perhaps giving us the ability to leave the devastated community. The result is one less person available to help that community recover.
If Southern California will continue to be a place we want to live in after the earthquake, we need our fellow Southern Californians to choose to stay when our infrastructure is damaged and our economy is disrupted, and choose to work together to rebuild. Communities recover because community members choose to commit themselves to that recovery. That commitment comes from a sense of connectedness, and that is best created before the disaster.
Having good relations with the people close to you is an important part of your social safety net. Safety is not just something that we look to government to bestow upon us. In part, it is something we earn.
It is easier to bond with people with whom you have much in common. Civil rights laws beginning in 1965 have steadily chipped away at our traditional rights to freedom of association and to private property and have created a less cohesive, less trusting and more litigious nation. Allowing people to hire who they want to hire without threat of litigation, and to rent to whom they want to rent, would increase social cohesion and trust and thereby expand the social safety net.
Woke culture that decrees that certain sacred groups such as blacks, gays, trans and Jews are off-limits to public criticism does not increase social cohesion and trust. Every group benefits from accurate criticism.
The more difficult it is made to state the obvious, such as that different people have different gifts, the more you reduce social trust.
Why have the campus protests of 2024 received a much firmer police response compared to the protests of the 1960s? Because the Jewish community is well organized at protecting its interests.
Business titans privately urged NYC mayor to use police on Columbia protesters, chats show
A WhatsApp chat started by some wealthy Americans after the Oct. 7 Hamas attack reveals their focus on Mayor Eric Adams and their work to shape U.S. opinion of the Gaza war.
A group of billionaires and business titans working to shape U.S. public opinion of the war in Gaza privately pressed New York City’s mayor last month to send police to disperse pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University, according to communications obtained by The Washington Post and people familiar with the group.
Business executives including Kind snack company founder Daniel Lubetzky, hedge fund manager Daniel Loeb, billionaire Len Blavatnik and real estate investor Joseph Sitt held a Zoom video call on April 26 with Mayor Eric Adams (D), about a week after the mayor first sent New York police to Columbia’s campus, a log of chat messages shows. During the call, some attendees discussed making political donations to Adams, as well as how the chat group’s members could pressure Columbia’s president and trustees to permit the mayor to send police to the campus to handle protesters, according to chat messages summarizing the conversation.
The more we know about how our country operates, the more trust and cohesion we can build.
Mass demonstrations are becoming more frequent but less effective.
[R]esearchers could find no evidence that protesters changed minds or affected electoral behavior.
Mass struggles have come to rely too much on street protests [and] neglect the “quiet, behind-the-scenes planning and organizing that enable movements to coordinate and sequence tactics in a way that builds participation, leverage and power.”
If you want to learn about the effective use of power, you could do worse than study the effectiveness of the Israel Lobby on U.S. foreign policy.
One billionaire will likely be more effective at changing public policy than a million protesters.
A vital way of increasing social safety is by imprisoning super predators.
Progressives can’t solve the problem because they won’t abandon the practices that cause it.
The violent crime surge was preventable. It was caused by progressive politicians reverting to the same reckless revolving-door policies that during the 1960s and ’70s produced the greatest tsunami of violent crime in American history. We reversed that earlier crime wave with the tough anticrime measures adopted during the Reagan-Bush era. We can stop this one as well.
Studies have repeatedly shown that most predatory crime is committed by a small, hard-core group of habitual offenders. They are a tiny fraction of the population—I estimate roughly 1%—but are responsible for between half and two-thirds of predatory violent crime. Each of these offenders can be expected to commit scores, even hundreds, of crimes a year, frequently while on bail, probation or parole. The only time they aren’t committing crimes is when they’re in prison. For this group, the likelihood of reoffending usually doesn’t recede until they reach their late 30s.
The only way to reduce violent crime appreciably is to keep this cohort off the streets. We know with certainty that for each of these criminals held in prison, there are hundreds of people who aren’t being victimized. This “incapacitation” strategy requires laws, like those in the federal system, that allow judges to detain repeat offenders before trial when they pose a danger to the community, and that impose tough sentences on repeat violent offenders.
History shows this strategy works. Before 1960, violent crime in the U.S. was modest and stable. In the early ’60s, however, liberal reformers pushed to turn state justice systems into revolving doors, with violent offenders quickly released on parole or probation. Predictably, violent crime exploded, going from 160 crimes per 100,000 population in 1960 to 758 per 100,000 in 1991.
Developing a stronger in-group identity will likely make you safer and add to your social capital. However, it will come with downsides to out-groups. The New York Times reported May 18, 2024:
Strangers in Their Own Land: Being Muslim in Modi’s India
Families grapple with anguish and isolation as they try to raise their children in a country that increasingly questions their very identity.
It was the pictures of Palestinians swimming and sunning at a Gaza beach that rubbed Yehuda Shlezinger, an Israeli journalist, the wrong way. Stylish in round red glasses and a faint scruff of beard, Mr. Shlezinger unloaded his revulsion at the “disturbing” pictures while appearing on Israel’s Channel 12.
“These people there deserve death, a hard death, an agonizing death, and instead we see them enjoying on the beach and having fun,” complained Mr. Shlezinger, the religious affairs correspondent for the widely circulated right-wing Israel Hayom newspaper. “We should have seen a lot more revenge there,” Mr. Shlezinger unrepentantly added. “A lot more rivers of Gazans’ blood.”
It would be nice to think that Mr. Shlezinger is a fringe figure or that Israelis would be shocked by his bloody fantasies. But he’s not, and many wouldn’t be.
Israel has hardened, and the signs of it are in plain view. Dehumanizing language and promises of annihilation from military and political leaders. Polls that found wide support for the policies that have wreaked devastation and starvation in Gaza. Selfies of Israeli soldiers preening proudly in bomb-crushed Palestinian neighborhoods. A crackdown on even mild forms of dissent among Israelis.
The Israeli left — the factions that criticize the occupation of Palestinian lands and favor negotiations and peace instead — is now a withered stump of a once-vigorous movement. In recent years, the attitudes of many Israelis toward the “Palestinian problem” have ranged largely from detached fatigue to the hard-line belief that driving Palestinians off their land and into submission is God’s work.
A stronger in-group identity always goes hand in hand with a sense of victimization and decreased empathy for out-groups.
Posted inAmerica|Comments Off on A Modest Proposal For Expanding The Social Safety Net
Podnotes summary: As a child, I dreamed of being a Christian missionary but ended up immersing myself in American culture after moving to the U.S. in 1977. Without a TV at home, I spent months reading through decades of Reader’s Digest and other magazines at Pacific Union College library before starting sixth grade.
My understanding of America grew from these readings and later television when my father bought one for distraction while defending his views against the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This period sparked my interest in journalism as an access pass to world events—inspired by figures like Dan Rather who became CBS Evening News anchor in 1980.
I interviewed Stormy Daniels multiple times between 2003-2007; she was always intelligent and poised, just like recently on the news. The media shapes our view of the world, often reflecting a liberal perspective that emphasizes individual rights over traditional group identities.
Journalism is not immune to bias; it can be influenced by personal ties or social activism under the guise of reporting truth. Civil rights coverage is an example where media focus tends to ignore certain aspects such as post-legislation violence committed by beneficiaries rather than opponents.
Dan Rather himself struggled with his role as journalist versus activist during civil rights movements—a testament to how journalists are sometimes torn between objectivity and advocacy.
In conclusion, understanding America’s past requires sifting through narratives shaped by various interests and perspectives—not just what we see on screen or read in print but also recognizing underlying motivations behind those stories.
Even without biased media coverage, the Vietnam War was a disaster from the start. America’s involvement wasn’t in its best interest and cost dearly, with troops being sacrificed for no vital national gain. Captain Hank Lu led an inclusive company of the 101st Airborne, embodying “same mud, same blood,” but reality showed racial divisions and ineffective diversity within army units.
The draft brought in low-IQ individuals due to improper IQ test usage by the U.S. Army. This led to dangerous situations and eventually changed recruitment practices. Cohesion was lacking compared to German troops who shared common backgrounds.
Christopher Caldwell discussed affirmative action and political correctness as pillars of post-1964 civil rights movements at Clare Institute, suggesting they were inevitable yet flawed extensions of liberalism that undermined democracy.
Journalism often prioritizes compelling stories over important ones for ratings or aligns with funders’ interests—whether governmental or corporate—affecting narratives like Trump’s alleged Kremlin ties used by The New York Times for profit despite their falsity.
Dan Rather’s portrayal as a patriotic journalist is questioned; his reporting may have been influenced by peer respect rather than truth-seeking alone. Journalism can be self-serving and not always focused on critical issues—it thrives on attention-grabbing content rather than informative substance.
Caldwell’s book “The Age of Entitlement” critiques how civil rights laws bypassed checks and balances, fostering division instead of unity in American society.
Vietnam coverage exposed government lies about war progress causing public distrust—the so-called ‘credibility gap.’ Journalists like Dan Rather became symbols of this era when they reported contrary facts from official statements, shaping public perception despite government pushback blaming media for anti-war sentiments.
A couple of security guards escorted Dan Rather out by his arms. He was punched in the stomach and considered it life-threatening. The incident, which happened inside a building where such aggression was unexpected, shocked onlookers and raised concerns about press safety during the 1968 Democratic National Convention.
Dan Rather later faced similar dangers when reporting on President Richard Nixon’s administration. His confrontations with Nixon were seen as bold journalism by some but angered others who supported Nixon.
The Netflix documentary highlights these moments, suggesting journalists like Rather shaped history through their confrontations with power. However, it also reveals biases within journalism itself – how stories are reported can be influenced by those providing information or pushing agendas.
Journalists often rely on leaks and official documents to avoid libel suits; they’re part of an industry that seeks to maximize its own importance. They may not always prioritize truth over interesting content; hence viewers should critically analyze news narratives considering the sources’ motives.
The film touches upon Watergate, illustrating how government institutions played a bigger role in exposing corruption than journalists did alone. This challenges the myth that reporters are solely responsible for uncovering scandals.
In conclusion, while journalists aim to inform the public, they operate within constraints and personal interests just like any other profession. The documentary suggests we should view news with awareness of these factors for a more accurate understanding of events.
Political activists may masquerade as journalists, their views shaped early by biology and upbringing. They seek power through journalism, driven to uncover newsworthy material even at personal risk.
Journalists are often liberals, craving fresh information and sometimes engaging in risky endeavors for a story. This hunger for news can lead them into dangerous situations without backup.
The Nixon presidency wasn’t toppled by the media but by Nixon’s mismanagement. Similarly, Donald Trump faced containment from established powers. Watergate was initially seen as minor political espionage but evolved into a symbol of corruption that threatened American values.
Jeffrey Alexander’s essay explains how society transformed Watergate from an insignificant event to a moral crisis over two years. The scandal became emblematic of systemic immorality within the government.
Initially dismissed by Americans and media alike, Watergate gained significance through elite-driven narratives framing it as an attack on national morals rather than mere politics. This shift turned it into a battle between good and evil in public perception.
CBS News faced pressure during this time; Dan Rather moved from covering the White House to joining “60 Minutes,” reflecting television’s blend of news with show business due to ratings pressures.
In reporting, credibility is paramount—whether covering protests or foreign conflicts like Afghanistan. Journalists must navigate risks to bring stories home while maintaining audience trust—a challenge exemplified in Rather’s career transition after Walter Cronkite’s retirement from CBS Evening News.
News has become intertwined with entertainment; however, integrity remains crucial for anchors who convey information to the public—a responsibility taken seriously despite inherent biases or limitations everyone faces when interpreting reality.
I recently watched the first two episodes of HBO’s “Small Town News,” a documentary about a local news team in Pahrump, Nevada. The series is set in a real workplace and follows the staff as they produce content for their station, KVPM. Reviews praise the show’s endearing characters who are easy to root for.
Despite its charm, I found myself feeling down after watching it. The thought of living in Pahrump—a small town with 36,000 residents near Las Vegas—struck me as bleak. It made me reflect on my own situation and whether I’d be willing to move somewhere like that just to be on TV or work at a small station.
The show also sparked thoughts about online content creators’ desperation for attention and validation through likes and subscriptions. It feels uncomfortable when someone seems overly eager for your approval.
However, there are those who genuinely have something valuable to share—like Professor Casey’s insightful videos on poultry—which doesn’t come across as desperate or depressing.
“Small Town News” features people who are comfortable with themselves and their roles within the community. They’re happy contributing however they can without seeking fame or recognition.
On another note, reading Peter Novick’s book “That Noble Dream” reminded me how historians sought objectivity post-World War II but often avoided controversial topics except when promoting racial equality or U.S. foreign policy power responsibilities—considered objective truths then.
In contrast, today’s media landscape includes debates over free speech versus hate speech regulations; this echoes past discussions around journalistic objectivity versus subjectivity.
Reflecting on my journey into journalism since 1979 has shown that striving for objectivity often meant simply echoing authority figures—an approach challenged by new journalism practices which emphasize personal perspective over bureaucratic reports.
Lastly, Dan Rather’s portrayal in a recent Netflix documentary highlighted his intense style compared to other anchors like Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings during an era when network news dominated public discourse.
The desire to save and be saved often stems from the same unhealthy place. I learned this at a program for sex and love addiction, which explained that both impulses can come from problematic origins.
In 2016, F’s life was spiraling when she overdosed in Pasadena. Poe, who paid for the room, claimed he was just a family friend to the police.
Dan Rather’s Netflix documentary highlighted how early on media stories were crafted with ease. Paul P of The New York Times linked it to an official document by Pasadena Police Department. A TV network could cover global events if they invested enough money.
Live news became so influential that during coverage in Beijing, China decided to cut off satellite access – a significant moment for us journalists but also a black eye for Chinese authorities.
Journalism has evolved; once universally supporting free expression, intellectuals now debate what should be publicly discussed. Ronald Coase questioned why intellectuals support free idea markets yet oppose goods and services markets. This shift possibly began in the ’90s with political correctness rising alongside internet critiques by perceived inferiors.
Previously pro-freedom press resented new mediums like radio and TV news as competition arose. Once atop cultural high ground, some intellectuals felt threatened by free speech rather than protected by it – principles become secondary when power is gained.
Experts rely on peer recognition; their status rises through achievements acknowledged within their community circles—journalists lean on these experts to interpret reality.
A bizarre assault on Dan Rather left many skeptical about his story until evidence proved otherwise—a song even immortalized the incident later despite its serious nature initially being mocked or doubted.
When live interviews replace edited ones, control shifts away from journalists like Rather who struggled without editing leverage against George Bush during an Iran-Contra interview—highlighting journalism’s complex relationship with power dynamics.
Publicity has dual effects—it illuminates but also burns those under its intense focus constantly scrutinized or targeted for downfall—suggesting acting transparently reduces risks associated with fame or spotlight pressure since any missteps are never forgotten especially in politics where strategies play out long-term.
The left and right aren’t so different; we all manipulate events for our benefit. The American public doesn’t want to be told how to think, which led to the “We report, you decide” approach at Fox News. Still, networks like ABC and NBC are considered straight shooters by some, while CBS’s Dan Rather is seen as biased due to his dislike for George Bush.
In news media, having a villain helps drive a narrative. Roger Ailes of Fox News aimed to serve an audience he felt was overlooked. He created a channel that reflected his worldview with strong personalities driving ratings.
News often reflects bureaucratic statements rather than reality. For instance, recession indicators were evident when strippers in Manhattan noticed reduced tips long before official reports confirmed it. Bureaucratic sources are favored because they’re less likely to lead to lawsuits than individual insights—yet real-life experiences sometimes provide more accurate information.
Understanding news requires context: who wrote it, their ideology, agenda, incentives faced by them and their social circle’s expectations.
Fox News has been criticized by competitors but this is typical human behavior – people protect their status when threatened.
Journalism debates between traditional methods relying on official sources versus new journalism focusing on personal experience continue. Official declarations become ‘facts’, yet street corner comments can sometimes offer greater clarity or truth.
Finally, understanding power dynamics in society can be more enlightening than consuming sensationalist news that plays into biases without adding meaningful insight into complex issues.
Eating steak makes you full, much like consuming in-depth articles or books requires thought. News, however, is like junk food for the mind – easily digestible but not substantial. We’re starting to see how toxic it can be, similar to recognizing unhealthy foods years ago.
News focuses on sensational stories instead of underlying issues. It misleads us about real risks and priorities – terrorism seems more threatening than chronic stress; financial irresponsibility goes unnoticed while high-profile events grab attention.
Cutting news consumption entirely might be the only way to avoid its hazards. Daily news routines fill our heads with irrelevant information that seldom aids in making better life decisions.
News triggers stress responses and hinders deep thinking abilities. It’s a distraction system that affects memory and cognition negatively.
Moreover, excessive news watching fosters passivity by presenting problems we cannot influence, leading to pessimism and potentially contributing to depression and lack of creativity.
Journalistic ethics are complex due to their varied obligations – readers, sources, subjects of reporting, employers, advertisers all pull journalists in different directions. This complexity often leads to debates over what constitutes ethical journalism practice.
In summary: Overconsumption of news can be detrimental; it’s designed for quick consumption rather than deep understanding or relevance. Journalists face an intricate web of ethical considerations affecting their reporting quality and focus.
Culture, including music, TV, and books, shapes our worldview. Journalism is a powerful cultural force that helps us understand politics, empathize with others’ experiences, and grasp important public issues.
Dan Rather’s career at CBS News ended controversially due to a discredited report on President Bush’s National Guard service. He chose not to blame his team publicly to maintain the image of being more than just a newsreader. Despite this setback and the end of his high-profile job at CBS News—a role deeply tied to social status—Rather continued working in journalism even though his subsequent projects did not reach the same level of influence.
His post-CBS work didn’t capture national attention like before; stepping away from such prominence often means one can’t fully regain their former stature. Nevertheless, Rather persisted out of personal drive rather than retirement or defeat.
In summary, culture influences perception; journalism plays a key role in shaping it. Dan Rather faced career challenges but remained committed to journalistic work despite reduced impact after leaving CBS News.
Posted inJournalism|Comments Off on Decoding Dan Rather (5-12-24)
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
