What this could easily lead to is the ISPs putting certain websites and types of content on one tier and other content on the other. Let’s say content which they or their parent companies own. So while the lower tier of one company allows you to stream video from Hulu, you cannot stream videos from Youtube unless you’re paying for the higher tier of internet.

This will create inequality, something that is shared on the web might be available to some people but not to others, this will be vastly different from the internet we use today where one voice is equal to another and not smothered by the companies controlling major assets in the Internet.

Image via CrunchBase

Recently, Google and Verizon announced that they wish to create such a tier, in order to get Google content (which includes Gmail, Youtube and Google Docs) faster to individuals if they are willing to pay for it. This would start to replicate the Cable subscription model, which has risen in costs since the deregulation that has occurred after the signing of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

You should care because the equality that allows all of us to share our ideas with everyone will fade away and only the ideas that a certain ISPs like will allow to perpetrated to the masses. I want to be able to see Youtube videos, read from the New York Times, check my Facebook, and share things with everyone through this blog. I don’t want that to change even if the Big Media Companies whine that there is not enough bandwidth for it. It’s not true! There is enough bandwidth for it, they just want more money for providing content. This is exemplified by the proposal by Google and Verizon. Let’s take a stand for Net Neutrality and against the corporations trying to take this equality away from us!

Conservative think-tanks have stated that forcing Net Neutrality is unconstitutional as it seems to violate the First amendment, and seeing as how the Supreme Court stated that use of money falls under free speech (Citizens United v. FEC) the equality of the internet could be in jeopardy in the near future.

The FCC has not taken a staunch position for Net Neutrality and with pressures from large media conglomerates it could fall over quite easily and allow Net Neutrality to diminish and endanger our liberty to express ourselves on an equal playing field. Let’s not allow another bill to pass similar to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, what a blunder that is been for the United States.

Unfortunately, all we have now is Fox News, and MSNBC pandering to the left and right respectively. The blogs have followed suit. You either read The Drudge Report, or the Huffington Post, never both. And it’s not if had you read both consistently you would get a the whole picture. Adding parts from the either ends of the spectrum doesn’t make picture whole. Rather it creates a sad picture indeed, a picture in which news reporting ceases to exist but fosters news creating. Creating stories where there isn’t one.

Isn’t that why we had talk of death panels with the health bill? Isn’t that why the Sherri Sherod story took off? Whatever happened to journalistic integrity? Where are the Edward Murrows and Walter Cronkites of this generation?

I don’t wish for all news organizations to become nodes of objectivity. What I wish for is something close to Pirsig’s Quality. I want news to be news, reported and reacted to, not to be incited with emotion and used to blame political opposition at every occasion.

If I have to rely on satirical news shows and obscure blogs for intellectual discourse on the problems our society has to face in the future, I find the future very bleak. However, hopefully… hopefully we (laymen) realize that news organizations when chasing after ratings will always try to create conflict and never properly report the news and that we (in the news business) realize that true discourse and Quality will move this nation forward. Let’s take two steps forward without taking a step back.

The answer is an obvious no. First, the tea-party movement is not as uniform as one may think. Certainly, some groups do communicate with one another and plan gatherings, but there is no single national movement, and most importantly to this debate, no Tea Party political party. So the claim that thousands, if not millions, of Americans are uniting to create a neo-nazi inspired crusade against black America is absurd and insulting.

I will concede however, that some Americans do possess racist beliefs. Whether it is a poster here, or a fiery town hall meeting there, racism is present in our society. We must remember these people are the fringe. So far right, or so far left that they hold no allegiances to political parties. With them, we have little to worry about. They will marginalize themselves and expose everything that is wrong with discrimination.

But there may be more to the racism debate in America. Does anyone remember the 2008 presidentia

l election? Yes. Does anyone remember the voter intimidation exercised by the New Black Panthers? No. Here’s why. If that story  broke two years ago, the liberal movement would have suffered a serious blowback. Organizations like

these, focused on hate and bigotry are the disease rotting away at America. We must do everything we can to push these radicals away from the mainstream and into a region where the public will immediately disregard their actions.

So in the long run, I do not expect to see race wars across the United States. After all, we recently elected our first African American president. As Americans we must remember to retain a bit of skepticism with everything we hear in an effort to prevent misinformation, one of the many reasons for discrimination and wrongdoing. As we expose these radicals it will become more evident to the American people that prejudice is not welcome in a democracy and every effort to isolate it will be encouraged.

While the prestige and glamor surrounding Wall Street and New York’s financial district presents to the world at large the image of a city dominated by multinational corporations and other gargantuan businesses, it is small business that is truly the beating heart of the city itself. With media focus drawn to Downtown Manhattan’s Financial District, it’s easy to forget that Midtown Manhattan is above and beyond the largest commercial center in the United States. Midtown, while home to such tourist attractions as Times Square and the high-end shops on Fifth Avenue, also houses more small businesses than any other place in the United States.

Continuing our Lifestyle series, Envision More looks at small businesses in and around the New York City area, chronicling the work done by both raggedy upstarts and long-established family businesses. It is these outfits that compose the backbone of America’s service economy and, consequently, they drive the American economy as a whole.

DayTraderJobs.com Inc. currently is run out of an office in Manhattan. Founded by Ara Mehetarian, a veteran of the financial services industry, the business itself exists solely on the web (daytraderjobs.com) as a platform to serve businesses in finance. Designed and operated to be purposefully niche, DayTraderJobs.com focuses solely on providing services to the core of the financial trading industry.

“Easy to use interface, quick information, and low intervention from the
service provider,” explains Ara Mehetarian, founder of Day Trader Jobs Incorporated, “After years of working as a Quality Assurance Manager for software development in the financial services industry, I learned how the business works, what the people need from a technical perspective. [With DayTraderJobs.com] we created for the recruiter and the prospective jobseeker an interface that allows them to complete their business with ease.”

Mehetarian, after years in the financial sector, was inspired to start the business after he noticed that many large companies had trouble with recruitment.  “[Throughout the course of my work], I became involved in recruiting business developers in the insurance and mortgage industry. Here I became acquainted with the needs of recruiters in the financial sector,” explains Mehetarian.  DayTraderJobs.com, a brain-child fostered after years of dealing with improper and inefficient recruitment techniques, was created to streamline the process of recruitment within the financial sector.

Running small business in New York City has brought its own set of challenges, as well as unique opportunities. “Like with all dot-coms the biggest hurdle is reach, and providing real results,” says Mehetarian. More optimistically, he notes that, “operating from the center of the world, connections are consolidated through sound and transparent business dealings. New York City amplifies the results necessary for expanding our business and helps us to reach those who will greatly benefit from our service.”

Envision More also sat down with Daniel Dabek, one of the few employees Mehetarian has hired to help run the fledgling operation. “I am a full-time proprietary trader and also a full-time business development manager through DayTraderJobs.com Incorporated. I basically incubate ideas and make them a reality,” Dabek explains. He further notes, “for me, as a day trader, DayTraderJobs.com resonated with necessity; a hub where the world can connect to day trading. I just had to become a part of it.” Dabek, a full-time day trader, was intrigued by the idea of such an integrated job-application system and noted that, like Mehetarian, the industry needed a better process for the recruitment of new individuals.

Both men, having long and successful careers behind them working for other individuals, have jumped feet-first into this new endeavor, exhibiting extraordinary optimism for the work they are doing now. Regarding the near future of the company, Mehetarian states that “[Within five years], there is no doubt that DayTraderJobs.com will be a standard in this industry. No hedge fund, proprietary trading company, or financial services firm will find their candidates through any other recruiting service.”

Copyright Dan Downs 2010

However, with ordinances passed by city government in the last decade, no future cigar lounges may be opened within city limits. For the foreseeable future, the New York City is stuck with the lounges it has. Deciding to take part in this timeless tradition, Envision More sent an operative to dive feet-first into New York’s cigar culture, sampling lounges along the way.

Davidoff’s at Columbus Circle:

Located at The Shops at Columbus Circle (housed inside the Time Warner center) in Manhattan, Davidoff’s combines the premier lifestyle-and-cigar-store that has made the brand famous with an incredibly intimate cigar lounge. Essential to any lounge, Davidoff’s carries an expansive collection of cigars, particularly the ones produced by the company itself. The lounge, compared to most others in New York, can be considered to be small, with seating limited to under ten or twelve individuals when filled to capacity. This results in a forced camaraderie of sorts, with conversation between persons at the lounge being particularly rich. The major detracting feature of the establishment –its relatively small size- can be viewed in a positive light to due to the interactions between patrons. A great place to relax and have a smoke after a busy day at the office, Davidoff’s comes highly recommended.

Cigar Inn on 2^nd Ave:

Since Cigar Inn opened its notable Cigar Aficionado lounge in February 2009, smoking in New York City has never been the same.  Located on 2^nd Ave between 53^rd and 54^th Street in Manhattan’s Midtown East, Cigar Inn has one of the most versatile lounges in the city. Wooden furnishings, a nice walk-through room humidor, large leather couches, multiple wall-mounted flat-screen televisions, and a beverage-filled refrigerator, Cigar Inn provides an extraordinarily relaxing environment designed for lounging and conversation with good friends. While alcohol may not be purchased on the premises due to city laws, the lounge’s BYOB policy is most welcome and makes the cigar experience all the more enjoyable. Its late night hours (closing at or after 1:00AM for Monday through Saturday) are always welcome. If you’re looking for a place to watch a sports event or wish to have a relaxing evening with a drink and a good cigar, this is the place to be.

Copyright Dan Downs 2010

America has always lived in a dichotomy. It has been a nation that preaches freedom of religion, yet the nation still holds firm to its Christian roots. America has been a tightrope walker carefully trudging along the razor thin line, sometimes leaning left where the first amendment reads ?Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof? and at other times leaning right towards the proud motto many statesmen and laymen swear by, ?one nation under God.? Thankfully, the tightrope walker hasn?t fallen towards either side, and keeps trudging on. Sure constitutionalists can argue that God has no place in the American Government, and they may be right, but the fact remains that God has been a major part of the American government. Why? Because the people have mandated it so.

Historically there has never been a president of the United States who did not believe in God, and in fact the Christian God (even many of the founding fathers, who are described as Deists, were raised as Episcopalians.) Today more than three quarters of the US population identify themselves as Christian, more than any other western nation. Although that shouldn?t surprise any of you, a more important fact was discovered by the Gallup poll in 2006. The poll revealed that forty-six percent of Americans believe that the Bible should be a source of legislation while nine percent believe that it should be the sole source of legislation. This means that nearly half of America would want God in their government, would want legislation that came from the bible. A large portion of the American public would want a pseudo-theocratic regime!

But religion should not be feared, the brotherhood that arrives from Christianity is extremely lively today in American Culture. The charitable nature of America needless to say lies in the statement that ?my brother is my keeper.? The bond that we share with our neighbors is not just coincidence; it has sprouted from Judeo-Christian values. We easily overlook the goodness of religion that we practice every day. Aphorisms that have sprung up and are preached about every day. The words ?turn the other cheek?and?good Samaritan? are rooted in those values, and we should recognize it to be it so.

However doubters of goodness of religion should not be worried. The Constitution of the United States will not be thrown out; we will still have freedom of religion. We will not start persecuting homosexuals, stoning adulterers nor will we stop the act of proselytizing another religion or no religion at all. However these facts may present us to keep ourselves in check. Who knows may be keeping the Electoral College is a good idea? Maybe we need to protect the American people from themselves, to preserve this great nation.

The only conclusion that one can derive, and be certain of, is that religion is a major influence in the United States, and that we should use this influence carefully. It can be used both to help and harm this wonderful nation-state. In moderation religion can be one of the most beneficial stimuli in an environment. However if we let it roam free then extremism and fundamentalism will rise up instead of the amiable and loving quality that religion holds at its core. Religion is a strong influence in this nation and will remain so for quite some time. Thus we should not oppose religion head on, it will create more fundamentalism, and would incite more conflict. America is a gorgeous valley, and religion is the river flowing through it. We should not build a dam to preserve the beauty of the valley, because the dam will agonize the water, and will eventually burst. Instead we need to redirect the river to not run right through the valley but around it, increasing its magnificence.

The world of print journalism will never be the same again. After 150 years of service to the Denver community, the Rocky Mountain News announced Thursday that their final issue would be Friday (February 27, 2009). Owned by the E. W. Scripps Company, the newspaper had been in financial trouble for months due to an industry-wide decline in newspaper revenues and the current financial turmoil that has shaken global markets.

The Rocky Mountain News had a storied history. Its first printing was in April of 1859, when William N. Byers, an Ohioan by birth, moved to Denver in order to sell newspapers to citizens of a booming gold-rush city. Since then, the paper has been through countless adventures. Evidence of the paper?s rich history can be found in author Robert L. Perkins? The First Hundred Years-an Informal History of Denver and the Rocky Mountain News, a book that chronicles the adventures of the Denver news giant from its birth in 1859 to its one-hundred year anniversary in 1959.

It is fitting to note that, while the closing of this institution is indeed a great tragedy, both for the industry and for the loyal readers of the paper, the Rocky Mountain News has left the stage in peak condition. The tenure of the paper?s last editor, John Temple, has seen the tabloid finally solidifying its position as a no-nonsense, high-quality news source that shatters the traditional stereotype that many Americans have come to associate with tabloid newspapers. Since 2000, the Rocky Mountain News has won four Pulitzer Prizes. Three were for excellence in photography while the last one was for reporter Jim Sheeler?s ?Final Salute? article, a piece about Casualty Assistance Calls Officers in the United States Marine Corps that was recognized as an outstanding achievement of journalistic prose, form, and content. While the death of this paper is a tragic one, Rocky employees can rest assured that the content produced by the paper was not at fault for the collapse of their beloved institution. Rather, revenues from Classified ads all but disappeared with the advent of Internet posting of services and sales, especially from sites like Craigslist.

This bottoming-out of revenue streams provided by newspaper ads has had detrimental affects throughout the American newspaper industry. This past Wednesday (February 25^th, 2009) saw the announcement from the San Francisco Chronicle that the newspaper was in experiencing incredible financial hardships, with the paper losing thousands of dollars each week. Hearst Corporation, owner of the Chronicle, knows that it cannot accept these losses forever. Currently, the paper looks to be listed for sale or closing within the coming months. The Journal Register Company, a multi-state corporation that owns over three-hundred local newspapers, recently filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection due to the almost complete destruction of revenues.

Some newspapers seem to be surviving, if not thriving, in this world of lessened newspaper revenues nationwide. The Wall Street Journal, for example, seems to be weathering the hard times nicely to due to highly successful web-based subscription service has resulted in many people paying substantial annual fees in order to read the Journal online each day.

The Rocky Mountain Press may be the first newspaper to go this year but it will certainly not be the last. With the passing of this once-formidable institution, an industry stands on the brink and waits to see if any more papers will share the same fate as the Rocky. For the job-seeking, ex-employees of what was Denver?s top tabloid and for the dedicated readers who enjoyed their paper?s daily serving of news, the market shift that has gutted the profit-making organs of newspapers across the nation has already taken its toll and robbed the world of quality writing and photography that Denver knew and loved. This new paradigm shift, while justified according of the market?s natural tendencies, has left a world where everyone already misses their Rocky.

Copyright Daniel Downs 2009

I took advantage of IHOP’s generosity and did visit my local franchise. The service was prompt, the pancakes warm and fluffy, the butter deliciously whipped, and the atmosphere cozy. Within minutes, I devoured my free stack of pancakes. After my meal, I made a sizable donation to the charity drive.

While I’m sure the event wasn’t too profitable for IHOP as a company, it is heartwarming to see businesses go out of their way for a good cause. That waiters and waitresses working today did so on the company dime but often without tips (as they were donated to the charity drive), a true act of selflessness on the part of those who survive on the money we patrons leave on the table.

Men and women of IHOP, I salute you. And thanks for the warm, fluffy pancakes.

Copyright Daniel Downs 2009

What does this say about the state of the news media?

In the United States, the news media is charged with the responsibility of acting as the supervisors of the political establishment. Accountability is an important check on political power; politicians know that informed voters can throw them out of office. And good journalism is the means by which such necessary information is disseminated. That would-be tyrants, conspirators, and abusers of power work behind closed doors is a powerful testament to this fact.

Most Americans become aware of political issues via the media. Because of this, reporters seem especially well-placed to guard against political gambits that depart from citizens’s wishes. If the media’s role as the palladium of good government is as crucial to contemporary society as many in the news business believe, then politicians who want to head off-center should be checking their rearview mirrors often.

Yet, as we witness time and again, many news organizations have failed to fulfill this role. Political elites continue to refine their techniques with dealing with voters and managing the media. In the political battles waged through news outlets, news organizations frequently transform from watchdogs into lapdogs.

So is the problem that plagues the news media today partisan bias? Most journalists would describe their political views as centrist, although I would imagine they tend to vote Democratic. And while journalists tend to the left, publishers and editorial pages tend to the right. Maybe there isn’t so much of a “liberal media bias” after all.

Perhaps the issue is not partisan bias, but other biases that the news media is involved with. One such bias is that the news media is more focused on entertaining than informing (Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan, in my opinion, should never be considered “breaking news”, much less “news” at all). It was at a lecture at Princeton that I learned that “what bleeds, reads.” The news media has put a premium on drama and brevity. Consider this: the print edition of the New York Times contains, on average, 100,000 words. Nightly news on stations such as NBC averages 3600 words. I suppose that’s why television is a medium; it isn’t well-done.

TV news stories must catch the viewer’s eye, and must to do immediately. To do otherwise is to face the vengeance of the remote control. Because of this, stories have become shorter and more dramatic. More and more news stories cover crime, celebrities, and disasters. To compensate, less airtime is devoted to the more complex political issues that are of interest to the citizen who wishes to be informed.

What of the print media? It performs slightly better. But fewer Americans get their information from the daily paper as more get their information from Web and TV sources. Newspaper companies have been cutting back operations for some time now, and as consolidation becomes more commonplace, news conglomerates shift their focus on turning a profit. This renders newspapers as yet another ordinary commodity. Few papers give their readers enough news to make them informed citizens of domestic and international affairs. Clearly, the majority of Americans don’t get their news from the New York Times, much less the Financial Times.

For all these reasons, the American media has decomposed into a delivery system for “news”, commentary, talking points, jargon, and spin. Biases such as the media’s attraction towards hyperbole, among other biases, impede its effectiveness far more than any left-or-right-leaning political bias. Only once we identify and understand these biases can we begin to take steps to reform this defunct machine.

While the Obama campaign is by no means advocating such trickery, the mass communication infrastructure created by the Democratic candidate’s team has an incredible potential, one that has forever changed the nature of national politics. Imagine this: It’s Tuesday, November 4^th. You are a lanky college Freshman waking up after noon following a night of rigorous studying. Leaving the bed, you feel the familiar vibration of the brand-new iPhone that rests in your pocket. You look at the screen and see that there are two new text messages, both from the Obama campaign. The first, sent at 8:00 AM sharp, is a reminder that today is Election Day and that the Obama campaign needs your vote. The second is a follow-up reminder, this one containing a special video message from Barack Obama himself. It’s 12:34 PM and you’re still in bed, but the Obama campaign has turned your mind to national politics and has reminded you to vote. You quickly hop out of bed and turn on your laptop, eager to check your Facebook and MySpace profiles. Besides a few regular updates to your Wall that are just extensions of mundane, circular conversations that have been skipping back and forth between your Wall and the Wall of your distant friend for over a year now, you see that the Obama campaign has sent you reminders. All who are friends with Barack on MySpace get a personalized message; one that is replete with the fancy HTML coding that caused millions to jump ship to Facebook. It’s now 12:40 PM on a cloudy Tuesday. You have received a total of four communiques from the Obama campaign, with two being text-messages, one a Facebook reminder, and the other a colorful MySpace greeting. Although your day schedule was previously clear, you make plans to visit the nearest polling station. You know who you’ll be voting for.

With the advent of high-speed internet connections and instant, worldwide messaging devices, the Obama campaign could have the ability to effectively mobilize a younger and more tech-savvy demographic, one that is usually associated with staying home every November 4^th. The ubiquitousness of such communication devices gives the Obama campaign the capacity to remind potential voters constantly, to rally those students who may support him but didn’t plan on voting.

The McCain campaign had better watch out! While a certain phrase regarding the political process in Chicago is certainly outdated, the spirit it carries, that of mobilizing huge bodies of voters, is alive and well today. In a world of modern marvels and high-connectivity, the Obama campaign can and most certainly will be telling those able to “Just Vote!” on the first Tuesday of November.

Copyright 2008 Daniel Downs