Saturday, July 25, 2009

Michael Vick, the NFL and domestic abuse, and hot soccer players


I can’t believe I’m revisiting this issue. I’m the last person on earth to give a fuck about football, NFL, or sports of any kind unless you are talking about soccer (globally known as football unless you are in the States). This kind of football is tolerable because it features lean pretty boys who dance around a field.

For example: Cristiano Ronaldo (pictured above), Beckham (of course), Fabio Cannavaro, and lots of others. In any case, I’m here to plead Michael Vick’s case… again.

Facts: Michael Vick was involved in the abuse of animals. Yes. Michael Vick served his time for this offense. Yes.

Facts: The NFL employs a number of players that were involved in domestic abuse and various other criminal acts.

Of 451 incidents since 2000, 128 were drunken-driving charges. Most common NFL charges:
DUIs – 28 percent
Disorderly conduct/assaults/fighting: 21 percent
Domestic violence-related: 15 percent
Drug-related: 13 percent
Gun-related: 8 percent

Here is a link to an article discussing the NFL and domestic abuse. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08072/864335-66.stm

Read it or don’t read it. I don’t care.

I’m not saying animal abuse is okay. I’m saying that Vick served his time. He should be given a chance. Did he abuse humans? No.

There are millions of atrocities done to humans worldwide. Rape, murder, brutality, disfigurement, fear, war, oppression, starvation, manipulation…. And Americans are up in arms over dog fights. That’s fine, but look at the world with a larger viewfinder, there are other NFL players (and world leaders and institutions) that have done worse against humans.

He has served his time. Let the man play. Let's be fair for once.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

Humans will evolve (or regress) into Blackberries or iPhones

I predict that humans will divide themselves into two kinds of handheld portable multi-media groups: Blackberries and iPhones. You may be thinking that this idea is preposterous. Maybe you currently don't even have a smart phone. Maybe you don't even text all that much or even have your cell phone on all the time, but look around you. The multi-faceted digital media (re)volution is at its beginning.

The Federal Communications Commission sold a large swath of airwaves for 17.5 billion dollars to cell phone companies. This is true. Yes. This is true. The change over from analog television to digital television has nothing to do with providing America with better quality television. It has everything to do with money. There wasn't enough space for analog television anymore once the airwaves were turned over to the cell phone empires. Hence, forced digital television for all.

It was once thought that airwaves were free. They belonged to the people. When we were too busy plugged into our various media outlets or working to buy our status branding Manolos or to pay for our huge mortgages on large homes we don't really need, our government sold our airwaves and only offered a redeemable coupon for a digital converter for those few of us who still watch television with bunny ears. Lucky us.

As a citizen of this country, where is my cut? Those were my airwaves, too. I want a piece of that $17.5 billion. Instead, this is what we are getting. The cell phone companies are using that money to advertise (manipulate -whatever you want to call it) us into using our cell phones as our primary media source.

It's working.

Apple just released its third quarter earnings last night: $8.34 billion, a 12 percent increase from last year. Apple sold 5.2 million iPhones, a 626 percent leap from a year ago.

The iPhone, I argue, is the main competitor of the Blackberry, dividing most Americans into Blackberries or iPhones. For those of you who have Trios or other smart phones, I predict that these will never catch on like the Blackberry or the iPhone and will die off due to natural (consumer) selection (or mass market appeal driven by clever marketing and relentless advertising.)

In my research (very limited research and not based on any kind of scientific rigor, but my own self-serving observations solely assembled to write this blog), the Blackberry and iPhone have contrasting personalities, which will divide us as a human race.

The Blackberry person is pragmatic and uses their phone for practical matters: keeping up with their appointments, listening to NPR news updates, and paying for their bills. These tend to be the older counterparts of our cohort (the late twenties to early thirties bunch.)

Now, the iPhoners, are the hipsters of the digital handheld revolution. They want to look cool and be cool. Appointments? What are those? News? They use their iPhones to facebook-on-the-go. These are the kids that grew up with e-mail and the internet, while those of us born in the seventies, remember undergrad in the late 90's when we were honestly skeptical of this "e-mail" when it was introduced to us.

I'm not saying my categorization is based on hard and fast rules. It's not based on anything. I'm pretty much just bullshitting for the hell of it.

Be ready. We will all be plugged in. Newspapers, the kind we actually hold, will be obsolete; we will get this on our phones. Communication as we know it will be a series of ones and zeros transmitted through our phones by e-mailing, texting, and rarely, if ever, actually verbal conversation. We will watch our favorite television shows at ease on our tiny screens. Relationships will live and die through our handhelds. Who we really are will be lost in our on-line plugged-in persona.

All the while, the cell phone empires will grow and grow controlling our means of communication, acquiring information, and ultimately how we socialize with each other.

You will either be a Blackberry or an iPhone. If not, you will fall off the face of this Earth, at least to the rest of us, plugged-in people, for that matter.

Monday, July 20, 2009

Let Vick Play


Give me a break. Let Michael Vick play in the NFL. Let him return to his career after he has served his time. This is an example of the problems with the US prison system. Aren’t we supposed to rehabilitate our ex-convicts and reinstate them into society?

I have nothing against dogs, but it is not like Vick killed, raped, and maimed humans. It’s not like after he served his sentence, Vick is going to return to his previous job as a veterinarian or dog walker. By not allowing Vick back into the NFL, it’s saying that it is just to let him pay for his wrongdoing forever until the day he dies.

Let him make a livelihood the best way he knows how. Yes. We can make him suffer by forcing him to find another way to support himself. But is this necessary?

His crime and his job as a quarterback are greatly unrelated unless the new NFL team he plays for has a dog as the mascot.

Is this how we treat ex-convicts? Even after they have served their time and realized their mistakes, we make it so unbelievably difficult for them to maintain lives as honest law abiding citizens. In this instance, I’m not talking about violent offenders or sex offenders. I’m talking about the ex-convicts that sold drugs, stole money, or ran numerous kinds of illegal operations. We brand them with a stigma after their sentences, making it difficult for them to find honest work, which leads many back into the illegal lifestyle they had before prison.

Vick has been humiliated and stripped of his wealth. Give him a chance.

The belief I have noticed from those that oppose Vick's reinstatement as an NFL player is that he doesn't deserve the money that accompanies the job as a NFL quarterback. So, what you are saying to me is that despite his talent as an athlete, he is not worthy of a NFL salary because of his crime? What if NFL players only made $20,000 a year? What would you say now?

Something to think about. The American public wants to dictate who gets to benefit from the fruits and opportunities of wealth despite, in this case, Vick's athletic talent and his debt that he has paid to society.

Interesting. Modern principles of imperialism and colonialism at its best.