"I'M SO, SO SORRY"...Sort of

Have you noticed all of the public apologies flying through the air the last couple of weeks? The latest comes from a guy most of us never heard of until he made a truly stupid comment on live television. His name is Todd Akin, and he is a GOP Congressman from Missouri running for the Senate in an attempt to unseat Democrat Claire McCaskill. When asked his views on abortion in cases of rape, Akin (who once said of NBC, “Well, I think NBC has a long record of being very liberal, and at the heart of liberalism really is a hatred for God and a belief that government should replace God”), had this to say: After the predictable firestorm of criticism from the general public, as well as lawmakers both Democratic and Republican (including Mitt Romney, who inexplicably took three days to react to Akin’s ignorance) Akin issued his mea culpa: "In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it's clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year."

 First, there was nothing “off the cuff” about his remarks. He responded in a measured, thought-out way to the interviewer’s question. But more importantly, here in the 21st century, shouldn’t a man who has been a public figure a good portion of his adult life be smarter than to say something so incendiary while he is running for the Senate? And it gets worse: Later he said that he did not mean to say “legitimate rape.” He really meant to say “forcible rape.” That leaves many of us scratching our heads – isn’t rape by its very nature an act of force? Further, notice in the video that Akin refers to “doctors” who told him this interesting phenomenon of the body not allowing itself to get pregnant when raped. Clearly no medical doctor really told him that. Akin simply lied. And there really is not a credible apology for that.

Akin’s apology may be the most high profile at the moment, but a less-publicized apology came about the same time from San Francisco’s All-Star Game MVP Melky Cabrera (right). Cabrera was recently suspended for 50 games after his misguided attempt to hide his use of performance enhancing drugs. Get this: After being accused, Cabrera went so far as to create a fake website that ostensibly sold a fake cream that contained the banned substance he was accused of using. He claimed he did not know the cream (which never existed) contained the substance. Oy. Backed into a corner, Cabrera issued an admission of guilt and an apology to his teammates, yada, yada, yada.

From the outside looking in, we’re left to wonder: Did Cabrera truly believe he would beat this rap? Did he so underestimate the league’s ability to investigate such elevated levels of testosterone in his body? Since he obviously did not act alone in concocting this ridiculous scheme, what about the others who aided and abetted? Do they just walk scot free?

Hey, there really is no such thing as walking away scot free when you’re a professional athlete who screws up in the worst way possible. Just ask NFL’r Chad “Ochocinco” Johnson (below, left), who is accused of head butting Evelyn Lozada, his wife of 41 days after she confronted him about an unexplainable condom receipt in the trunk of his car. Johnson,

always the gentleman (?) tried to convince authorities it was she who did the head butting. However, it was she who ended up in the emergency room with a three-inch laceration to her head. Johnson ended up losing his NFL contract with the Miami Dolphins, as well as his VHI reality show, “Chad and Ev.”

And Ev? Well, she filed for divorce. One might say Johnson is the Michael Vick of 2012. So, of course comes the predictable apology: "I wish Evelyn nothing but the best, I have no negative words to say about her, [and] the only thing I can say is I love her very much.” It went on – you can recite the rest --- “staying positive,” “appreciate all my fans,” yada, yada, yada. He did not, however, apologize to Dolphins Coach Joe Philbin, (who fired him), to whom he said he had never been in trouble before. That was a lie. Johnson has past domestic violence troubles. Johnson’s real distinction is that his marriage lasted even less time than that of Kim and Kris.

 The current cavalcade of public apologies, hollow as they may be, got a real shot in the arm this week with one from a naked Congressman. Come on, you can’t make this stuff up, right? This one comes from GOP’r Kevin Yoder from Kansas (right),

who went on a “fact-finding” mission to Israel with about 20 lawmakers one year ago. It seems that one night after dinner the group decided to go skinny-dipping in the Sea of Galilee – if that sounds familiar, it so happens that Jesus allegedly walked on water there. You have to love Yoder’s apology, in which he said he "followed some members of Congress in a spontaneous and very brief dive into the sea and regrettably I jumped into the water without a swimsuit." Oy. "It is my greatest honor to represent the people of Kansas in Congress,” Yoder added, “and (for) any embarrassment I have caused for my colleagues and constituents, I apologize."

If you’re wondering why Yoder even mentioned any of this, it may have something to do with the fact that the FBI is reportedly investigating the trip, although no details have been released as to why a Federal agency cares if a Congressman skinny dips.

There were other apologies this week, but our public sympathy well is beginning to run a bit dry. Still, it bears mentioning that comedian Wayne Brady apologized for a bad joke he made about Sarah Palin’s son, Trig. During his set at the Comedy Central roast of Roseanne Barr, Brady said to fellow roaster Jeffrey Ross, "...a lot of people hate you, especially Sarah Palin because you remind her of what Trig is going to look like when he’s 40." Trig, you will recall, has Downs Syndrome. Brady later issued an apology to the Palin family, but since he actually had to plan his remarks, and write them down and they were on a teleprompter, one has to assume the apology is somewhat meaningless. He meant to say what he said, knowing full well how insensitive it was. And then, of course, there is insensitivity that goes without any apology. Consider Vice-President Joe Biden, whose recent slavery-reminiscent reference caused a media and public uproar. Watch:
Those waiting for a public apology from the vice-president will be roundly disappointed.

Here’s the thing about public apologies: First, they are generally offered at the direction of a publicist or other public relations flack. That is why the language generally sounds so similar from disgraced athlete to ignorant politician to desperate comedian. Second, the damage is done, so the apology is really not useful. No one will remember Chad Johnson’s apology, but everyone will remember his 41-day marriage that ended in violence. Most importantly, the apologies are generally insincere and done only in the interest of image rehabilitation. I don’t know about you, but public figures who apologize just to do damage control really irk me. And when the above-mentioned insincerity rolls so easily off of their tongues, I, as a member of the public, feel…well…underestimated.

GOOD CHRISTIAN CHICKEN

In America, almost anything can become a symbol of social division. Exhibit A? Chick-fil-A. How many times have you walked through a mall in America – anywhere in America – and there was Chick-fil-A? The food is mediocre, cholesterol-laden, fried deeply and geared toward a culture that forgot the importance of eating from the earth. Still, a report issued this week by PrivCo, a New York- based research firm that specializes in private companies’ financial data, reveals the company is currently worth $4.5 billion. Further, the report tells us that the company has the biggest sales per unit in the fast food industry in America. So…the company is bigger than Macdonald’s, Wendy’s KFC, Sonic, Taco Bell, Jack in the Box and all the other companies whose focus is fat and salt. Who knew?

If you have been in a coma recently (because that is the only way you do not know this), here’s what happened. In June, COO and President of Chick-fil-A, Dan Cathy, said this in a radio interview: "As it relates to society in general, I think we are inviting God's judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, 'We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.' I pray God's mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude to think that we would have the audacity to try to redefine what marriage is all about."

Then, last month Cathy (left) was interviewed again and when challenged on his opposition to marriage equality, he said this: "Well, guilty as charged. We are very much supportive of the family - the biblical definition of the family unit. We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that. We operate as a family business . . . We intend to stay the course. We know that it might not be popular with everyone, but thank the Lord, we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles."

And then all hell broke loose. Yesterday, I was in Metairie, LA, which for those of you not from New Orleans, is an area outside of New Orleans with a population of about 150,000. According to the 2010 census, the population is approximately 75 percent white. Driving up Veterans Boulevard, which is the main thoroughfare, suddenly the traffic was stopped, bumper-to-bumper. What I failed to remember is that just a few blocks ahead on the right was the local Chick-fil-A. Thousands of people were flooding the company’s restaurants yesterday to stand (or eat, if you will) in solidarity with Dan Cathy’s “biblical definition of the family unit.”

First, I’d like to say to all of the good Christian chicken-lovers who showed up yesterday at Chick-fil-A’s nationwide – wouldn’t you have demonstrated a greater sense of Christian values by donating the money you spent on fried chicken to organizations that work to alleviate hunger internationally? Just saying. Instead, you chose to make a socio-political statement by waiting for up to an hour to pass through a drive-through window for fried chicken on white bread with waffle fries. While doing so, your car was running, so that collectively all of you contributed mightily to Metairie’s carbon footprint. Amen, y’all.

Meanwhile, big city mayors (Chicago, Boston) have come out with public statements rejecting Chick-fil-A and stating the company is not welcome in their cities. At the time I am writing this there is reportedly

a nationwide plan to stage a "National Same-Sex Kiss Day at Chick-fil-A" on Friday. Participants are encouraged to kiss each other, photograph it and post the pictures on the Web. Universities from North Carolina to NYU to Kansas to Notre Dame are reportedly considering dropping Chick-Fil-A from their on-campus food facilities.

Listen, I do not in any way agree with Dan Cathy’s views. I do not. However, I fully support his Constitutional right to express himself. Was it wise for him to mix commerce and religion? I think not.

But it is his choice whether he wants to give public props to Christ on the radio. While my brain does not compute the connection between a deep-fat-fried slab of chicken on a heavily buttered bun and the definition of marriage, Dan Cathy is an American with the right to freely spout off about his pride in being married to his “first wife.” If we try to silence Dan Cathy or put a significant dent in his corporate structure simply because we don’t like his views, what next? What about your views? What if a lot of people do not agree with your views? Should you be silenced? Should you be censored? Should your professional or corporate life be hampered because of your ideology? I think not. Dan Cathy clearly does not comprehend the seismic shift that is occurring in the makeup of the American family. He just doesn’t get it. Still, he has a right to make money. And you have a right not to spend yours on his greasy offerings.

 With that said, if evidence presents itself that Chick-fil-A is practicing discrimination in hiring or promotions, unfair labor practices or actionable bias against certain customers, then we have big trouble and Cathy needs to fess up and suffer the consequences. In fact, U.S. District Court records reveal that Chick-fil-A has been sued 12 times since 1988 for employment discrimination, according to a highly enlightening piece in Forbes Magazine about the company’s corporate culture.

The Chick-fil-A uproar currently underway across the nation is really not about two people with the same genitalia getting married. It is about freedom.

And every time we try to stifle someone’s Constitutional freedom in this country, we run the risk of losing our own freedoms. And in this country, when you lose even a degree of your freedoms, you rarely get them back. Does anybody remember what it was like when we actually had privacy? I challenge you to tell me how we’re going to ever get our privacy back. The same can be said for our freedom of speech. Let Dan Cathy talk. Let him pontificate and shout his exclusionary dogma from the rooftops of his chicken restaurants. And then shout back if you wish and spend all your fried chicken dollars at KFC or Popeye’s, (mmmm…Popeyes, num num num) but let him talk. The free and open public discourse is the root of everything – even when it is built on a chicken sandwich.

AFTER AURORA: THINGS BETTER LEFT UNSAID

Twelve people died, 58 were injured and media went into overdrive following the horrific shootings in an Aurora, CO movie theatre last week. Most of us would agree that this is not the time to pontificate about society’s ills or gun control or God’s messages or whatever. Most of us. But there are those select few who are so hungry for headlines, or who simply must be heard whether the time is right or not.

 Exhibit A would be one evangelical zealot named Jerry Newcombe, the PR face of a group called Truth in Action Ministries. Newcombe, not content to let the dust settle from the shootings, had this to say: “I can't help but feel that to some extent, we're reaping what we've been sowing as a society. We said to God, ‘Get out of the public arena.’ Lawsuit after lawsuit, often by misguided ‘civil libertarians,’ have chased away any fear of God in the land -- at least in the hearts of millions.” 

Not content to allow for the possibility that the shooter was just a deranged kid whose life had spun out of control, Newcombe evidently feels that some imaginary collective dismissal of God caused the tragedy in Colorado. And, to make matters worse, he went on to say some of the dead were doomed to hell: “If a Christian dies early, if a Christian dies young, it seems tragic, but really it is not tragic because they are going to a wonderful place ... on the other hand, if a person doesn’t know Jesus Christ ... if they knowingly rejected Jesus Christ, then, basically, they are going to a terrible place.”

So sayeth PR mouthpiece Jerry Newcombe. Most disturbing about Newcombe’s comments are that they are self-serving and timed simply to push forward Truth In Action’s agenda. According to their web site, the organization’s mission is “To introduce people to Christ, nurture and encourage Christians, and reform cultures.” Evidently, if they have to dishonor those who died in Aurora, and insult their families, that is all done under the guise of Christianity.

Reaction to the shootings has been largely shock and empathy. However, those select few who garner the big stories are individuals who lack an understanding of the negative power of their ill-timed words. Consider ABC News correspondent Brian Ross. Shortly after the shootings, Ross made a poorly conceived and clearly inaccurate connection between the alleged shooter and the Tea Party. Watch: After 20 years with ABC News, Ross knows better, but in the current “gotta be first” media climate, Ross likely felt unduly pressured to get something on ABC’s airwaves that no one else had yet discovered. This is the same reporter who in 2009 tied the now infamous “underwear bomber” to a plan hatched by former Guantanamo prison detainees. It turned out to be total fiction. Ross also dreamed up an Iraqi connection to the 2001 post-9/11 anthrax attacks. As it turned out, there was no truth to the story. But this time, he seemed determined to find a political angle to the Aurora story that was total fabrication.

Others advancing their own agenda after the Aurora tragedy include Former Arizona State Sen. Russell Pearce,(right) a longtime advocate for gun rights. Here’s what Pearce saw fit to say on his Facebook page: “Had someone been prepared and armed they could have stopped this 'bad' man from most of this tragedy. He was two and three feet away from folks, I understand he had to stop and reload. Where were the men of flight 93????

Someone should have stopped this man. Someone could have stopped this man….Lives were lost because of a bad man, not because he had a weapon, but because no one was prepared to stop it. Had they been prepared to save their lives or lives of others, lives would have been saved. All that was needed is one [courageous]/brave man prepared mentally or otherwise to stop this. [I]t could have been done. When seconds count, police are only minutes away.”

 It is the old “guns don’t kill, people do” argument, and Pearce clearly saw an opening to put forth his personal dogma. Here is the problem with his position: He assumes that everybody else in that theater who could have been armed (had they subscribed to his theory) was completely sane and reasonable. In other words, let’s just let everybody be armed in all public places and hope for the best. Were I able to reach him, I would ask Pearce, with even more weapons being fired in a dark, crowded movie theater, is it not likely more people would have been shot? Pearce’s misguided passion overtook his logic, but it still makes for great news copy, huh?

Finally, the ultimate insult to those directly affected in Aurora comes from none other than pop superstar Madonna. During her current tour, Madonna has hit the headlines for exposing her breast, exposing her butt, showing Nazi symbols on stage as part of her act and standing on top of a black cross holding a gun to her head. One could chalk up these antics to a sort of desperation to hold on to her fan base via shock value, but what she did just hours after the Aurora shootings is simply irresponsible. At a concert in Scotland, the singer reportedly waved fake machine guns and pistols on stage. At the time she did that, the Aurora story was front page news in most major European publications.

 Sometimes discretion really is the better part of valor. Would it not have been more thoughtful of each of the above-mentioned individuals to forgo calling attention to themselves and their own agendas in favor of respecting the families and survivors of Aurora? Brian Ross was simply looking to “scoop” other reporters and news organizations. Jerry Newcombe tried to use the Aurora tragedy to call attention to and possibly enrich his organization. Just under the mission statement on the site is a call for donations. Russell Pearce, no longer a Senator and lacking constant media coverage, obviously saw Aurora as a vehicle to perpetuate his platform for gun rights. And Madonna? Well, Madonna is 53 years old, competing in a genre whose participants are decades younger. Her motives are selfish, to say the least.

Aurora is yet another American tragedy. Those who cannot contribute something meaningful and substantive to the national conversation need to simply shut up.

WHAT PRICE LAUGHTER?

Last week a comedian you may never have heard of, named Daniel Tosh, made national headlines for all the wrong reasons.  It seems Tosh was doing his standup comedy routine at L.A.’s Laugh Factory, when a female audience member heckled him for declaring that rape jokes are always funny.  Said the audience member, “Actually, rape jokes are never funny.”  That led to Tosh saying, “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now? Like right now? What if a bunch of guys just raped her…”

I can’t remember a standup comedian getting so much press worldwide since last year when comedian Tracy Morgan said this in his standup act, while performing at Nashville’s historic Ryman Auditorium:  "Gays need to quit being pussies and not be whining about something as insignificant as bullying." It gets worse.  He continued: “My son better talk to me like a man and not in a gay voice or I'll pull out a knife and stab that little nigger to death." In the days that followed, there were lots of apologies, both from the theatre and from Morgan, dramatic mea culpas, and all the predictable walking back of thoughts that can’t really be walked back.

Morgan’s (left) rant was just the latest in a string of comedians desperately groping for laughs.  Well, except for “Seinfeld” alum Michael Richards, of course, who lost his complete mind on stage in late 2006, when he committed career suicide.  It seems a black audience member was heckling Richards when the comedian exploded, saying, “"Fifty years ago we'd have you upside down with a fucking fork up your ass." And he didn’t stop.  He was relentless.  "You can talk, you can talk, you're brave now motherfucker. Throw his ass out. He's a nigger! He's a nigger! He's a nigger! A nigger, look, there's a nigger!"

 And that, ladies and gentleman was a wrap.

This week, after Tosh’s unfortunate choice of subject matter and words, media is abuzz with arguments back and forth about whether comics should have boundaries, or if they should be free to say whatever they wish to say. I have three things to say to Daniel Tosh: First, say anything you want to say whenever you want to say it, but remember that words have consequences, and you’re feeling them right now. Second, Daniel…rape isn’t funny. Not funny. At all.  Third, when you responded to the female audience member by suggesting how funny it would be if she was raped, you were not doing comedy.  You were doing power. Everybody knows that rape is an act of power, not sex.  And by insulting the audience member by resorting to the lowest common denominator, you were exerting your power.

Tosh,(below, right) in case you are one of those who hasn’t followed his career, is big on Comedy Central. He has a show called Tosh.0, that has amassed over a million viewers.

The show is Internet-themed, showing viral videos and online clips, mixed with lots of fart jokes and puberty-level bits, and of course his regular segment called “Is It Racist?”.  I know this because a friend of mine watches the show regularly and I have been in front his TV when the show comes on. Sophomoric is the word that comes to mind.  Tosh is reportedly the son of a minister and suffers from social anxiety disorder. Are we, the viewers, being subjected to the host’s daddy issues and need for affiliation? Just saying.

The term you hear so often when incidents like Tosh’s rape joke debacle come up is “political correctness.” How many times have you heard someone complain that “everything has to be so goddamned politically correct these days.” Stop and think about political correctness. What is it, really? It is cultural change in action.  Political correctness is our society’s collective decision that it is no longer appropriate to use words like “nigger,” because it debases an entire population segment.

It is the 21^st century dragging us kicking and screaming toward respect for individuals to whom we have directed our prejudice and disdain for hundreds of years.  People like Tosh must have stayed home sick from school the day when it was communicated that rape is about violence, in a society that does not condone violence. People like Morgan evidently sacrificed the sensitivity chip for anything that would garner a laugh. Even talk of murdering his own son.  Political correctness is nothing more than a society gaining a bit of verbal and behavioral integrity, after years of insults, degradation, humiliation and bullying.

Behind the cushy safety of his Twitter account, Tosh posted this just days after the rape joke incident: "I'd like to sincerely apologize."  That was a good start, until he went on to say that "the point i was making before i was heckled is there are awful things in the world but you can still make jokes about them. #deadbabies."

Somewhere there are rooms full of junior high school boys coming to terms with their internal hormonal tsunami, and rolling on the floor laughing at their hero, Daniel Tosh. In what will seem like milliseconds, those boys will be men, whose indoctrination to male/female relationships will have more to do with Comedy Central than it will with the reality of a culture that is finally struggling to realize the real power of respect.

I had a teacher once who told me the wisest thing I have heard to date: “People are often what you invite them to be.” So, if a person who has a strong public platform and the full attention of his or her listeners – a person, say, like a standup comedian, maybe –if that person uses his platform to invite people to be racists, or homophobes, or cavemen, a good portion of that audience may just go along to get along. But as long as that happens, people like Daniel Tosh have done nothing more than perpetuate ignorance and delay the cultural change that aims to level the playing field.  Listen, I love funny people.  I always have. But is a good laugh worth all that? I think not.

THE SUMMER OF FALLEN HEROES

We Americans have learned some hard lessons lately about hero worship, creating cultural icons and expecting too much from our fellow humans. Exhibit A, of course, is Joe Paterno, the recently deceased former football coach at the embattled Penn State University. Paterno emerged, over decades, as the symbol of Penn State’s success, which was defined by its football program. Now we know that like many others at the university, Paterno was complicit in covering up child molestations perpetrated by one of his staff members, Jerry Sandusky. Paterno’s dead, Sandusky’s in prison, and the citizens of “Happy Valley,” PA, are left to clean up their mess. Oh, and those young boys who Sandusky molested? Well, they’re still young, but some of them are in young adulthood, and they are left to cope with what happened to them.

 In a scathing report issued by former FBI Director Louis Freeh, Paterno is singled out as one among several powerful figures at Penn State who not only knew of the molestations as far back as 1998, but made a decision to do nothing about it. Paterno, with 409 career victories - the most in NCAA history among major college coaches, chose to ignore the illegality and inhumanity of Sandusky’s behavior, and simply protect the institution. Here is ESPN’s initial report regarding Freeh’s findings: Therein is the problem with heroes. Once we elevate someone to idol status, it is up to them to fight their own ego and stay on the straight and narrow, and it’s up to us to monitor their integrity. Had anyone bothered to monitor Joe Paterno’s real life, rather than the one his fans created for him, it would have been clear that he was a flawed human being, just like the rest of us. Instead, he was assigned some type of mythic status that resulted in his carrying the secrets of his complicity to the grave.

When hero worship runs amok, even low lifers like former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards are able to become symbols of the American dream. Back in 2006, when Edwards came to New Orleans to announce his candidacy, I already had my doubts about him. He went to a site in the Ninth Ward, where the recent Hurricane Katrina had done the most damage, to announce his candidacy. It was a well-orchestrated, strategic move designed to show Edwards getting down with the people. Ostensibly, Edwards was there to help rebuild a badly damaged home. Witnesses who were there say he never so much as picked up a hammer. It was a photo op only.

He announced the candidacy, got in a black SUV with heavily tinted windows and off he went. It was then I knew Edwards was not to be placed on a pedestal. Back then, a close friend of mine told me she was very impressed with Edwards and planned to support his candidacy.

I told her I did not trust him, and if I were her I would wait it out and see if he reveals more of his true self. The rest, as they say, is history. The important point here is that Edwards amassed a lot of support for his candidacy. His all-American good looks and megawatt smile were, for some voters, mesmerizing. Had there been no Hillary Clinton in the race, chances are Edwards would have amassed huge support. He was already gaining endorsements from organized labor, and his campaign appearances were rock-star like. Later, by the time the emperor (Edwards) had no clothes, campaign observers were able to shed their blind admiration for the candidate and see that he was indeed not a hero. In the National Review, writer John Geraghty said it best in a piece he wrote about the Edwards campaign: “The Edwardses warns us of the risk we take when we “fall in love” with a politician — and I don’t mean in a romantic sense, but when we conclude “I can trust that person, I know that person” based on some interviews and speeches.”

But it is not always about trust. Sometimes it is simply about a hunger for leadership, a public need for a return to civil discourse and the potential for positive change. Enter Barack Obama, whose campaign for his first term brought back memories of John F. Kennedy’s 1960 election.

For my part, I believe he ran a pretty straightforward campaign, and while he said things people wanted to hear, I think he believed in what he said. The list of individuals and organizations that endorsed his candidacy is long and now legendary. And talk about a rock star – Edwards was a mere Neil Diamond next to Obama’s Springsteen. It had been a long time since a candidate had been so lionized by the voting public. After his momentous election day, he really had nowhere to go but down. And down he went. Depending upon where and what you read, Obama is currently way down in support among women, young people, Jews, even fellow Democrats. What no one seems to want to admit is that we, the voters, really set him up to fail. Nobody could have fulfilled all of the promise that we entrusted with him.

 It is the incessant need for heroes in our culture that seems to do us the most harm. And it keeps happening. Was Lance Armstrong the super-human athlete we needed him to be, or was he simply an example of better cycling through chemistry? We were the ones who decided that baseball-betting, tax-evading, umpire attacking Pete Rose

was a baseball hero. The list is never-ending: Mel Gibson, Tom Cruise, John Travolta, Anthony Weiner, Rod Blagojevich, Gary Hart, Tiger Woods, Eliot Spitzer, and of course, our two all-time favorite disgraced heroes: O.J. Simpson and Richard Nixon. All of the above lost public support, and some of them lost their careers, all because they screwed up in spectacular fashion. Well, not “all because.” Perhaps it was partly our fault that caused these and other public figures to fall. They all exercised questionable judgment, but we decided each was way out of our league, because we needed to look up to somebody.

The moral of this story is simple: Because someone can speak or sing or throw a ball or run fast or dazzle a crowd or win football games does not make him or her bigger or better than you. And once they fail to live up to your expectations, perhaps it is best to simply acknowledge they were not perfect. Following last week’s release of the Freeh report on Penn State, Joe Paterno’s family released a lengthy statement denying its claims. Towards the end, it said, “It can certainly be asserted that Joe Paterno could have done more. He acknowledged this himself last fall. But to claim that he knowingly, intentionally protected a pedophile is false.” Although the evidence shows otherwise, there may be some truth to the statement. In fact, Joe Paterno may simply have been protecting himself, and the institution that formed the basis of his lifelong identity. In the end, he was nobody’s hero—he was just a guy who knew how to coach football.

GREENBERG RANTS IS ON VACATION!

TRENDING: THIS WEEK’S BIG 5

A SALUTE TO PRIDE: For those still unconvinced that America’s social mores are changing, be aware that the U.S. Department of Defense announced it will hold an event to honor gay men and women who are serving in the military.  Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says the Pentagon is ready to salute gay troops as part of Gay Pride Month, according to a report in the Associated Press.

Although the move is encouraging, especially to those who fought so hard to repeal “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” (which was struck down nine months ago), there are still challenges ahead. So far, the military does not afford health benefits to spouses or partners of gay service members. "The department is carefully and deliberately reviewing the benefits from a policy, fiscal, legal, and feasibility perspective," Eileen Lainez, a Pentagon spokeswoman said Thursday. One step at a time.

RECONSIDERING DEPORTATION:  The White House made the stunning announcement that many young illegal immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as small children will be allowed to stay here. After the failure of Congress to pass the dream act, proposed legislation that would have allowed young immigrants to pursue citizenship, many were due for deportation. The Washington Post reports the criteria: They also must be 30 or younger and must have never been convicted of a felony, a significant misdemeanor, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

EDWARDS WALKS:  Just after turning 59 years old and just before his baby momma Rielle Hunter releases her tell-all memoir, John Edwards became a free man last week. The Department of Justice announced it will not retry Edwards on shady dealings with 2008 presidential campaign funds. The Edwards debacle ended in a mistrial last month, and this latest announcement is the last piece in a story that has been front page news for four years. While the conventional wisdom is simply that he got away with it, the judicial system has spoken. Up next? Edwards says he would like to go back in to practicing law with a focus on the underprivileged.  We wonder, however, if perhaps he will have to deal with that “life-threatening”illness" that caused his trial to be delayed earlier this year.

PONZI PUNISHMENT:  His name never quite became as widely known as Bernie Madoff, but Allen Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scheme ran a close second to Madoff’s $18 billion caper. Stanford’s story will make for a great movie someday, complete with his high-flying lifestyle, financed to the tune of $2 billion with the investment money of his clients. Those clients were under the impression that their money was safely and wisely invested in profit-making financial instruments. The inevitable movie will likely also show how Stanford became a national hero on the island of Antigua, where much of his financial operation was headquartered, how he was almost killed in a prison fight, and how to the end he declared he was “not a Ponzi schemer, but just a successful businessman." His protestations nothwithstanding, the New York Times reports this week Stanford, 62, was sentenced in Federal District Court to 110 years in prison. By the way…our choice to play Stanford in the movie? John Lithgow.

OLD MEDIA….MEET NEW MEDIA:  The New York Times announced it will partner with Buzzfeed for Democratic and Republican convention coverage.  Why does this matter? Because it clearly shows that old line journalism acknowledges there is a significant place for new media when it comes to the biggest stories.  Buzzfeed, an online entity known primarily for pop culture coverage, is nonetheless far more advanced in streaming media than the New York Times. Buzzfeed also “gets” social media, which is an area the Times is still learning. They can learn from each other, and hats off to the Times for reaching out to such a new player in the media industries. It shows the Times is willing to step up to the ever-increasing demands of an Internet-savvy consumer base.

AXED!

The call came in the late afternoon. It was an executive with the Times-Picayune. I knew who he was and he knew who I was, but when I worked there for nine years I do not think he ever made eye contact with me or said hello. But hey, that’s corporateland, right? I was a lowly staff writer and he was…well an exec. But yesterday his voice on the phone was almost friendly. See, I left the Times-Picayune in 2002, but since the 1990s I have written a weekly column for the paper on job searching and career changing. When I left my job, I continued to produce the weekly column.

"Paul, this is (name of exec). I'm sure you have heard about all the chnages that are taking place at the newspaper. I'm calling to let you know that your services won't be needed any longer after September 30."
 
The exec was clearly reading from a prepared script that was being used to inform all “occasional” employees of impending editorial doom. He went on to read to me that a member of management would contact me in the coming weeks to let me know if there might be an opportunity for me to apply for a position with the newly formed media company that will include the Times-Picayune under its corporate umbrella.

 Since I left the paper 10 years ago, I have worked full time for a university. So I won’t be applying for a new position with the company, (but I must admit I will miss the monthly check for my column). And I must also admit that I really enjoyed doing this column. It was this column that later led to my working as a contributing writer for Monster.com, the premiere online site for job searching. It was also this column that landed me several speaking engagements at local schools and other organizations. The exposure was good, and the subject matter was something that really interests me. To be frank, I’m disappointed that I was so unceremoniously AXED – and on the phone! My loss pales in comparison to the 200 employees who lost their full livelihood this week. If you are not in New Orleans, here is a recap of what happened this week from WWL-TV:
 I worked at the paper full time for nine years, and I left just as digital media was in its infancy. While I was there I observed a company that was over-staffed and unusually generous in its compensation packages. I saw an upper management team comprised mostly of older white males who were largely uncommunicative with the labor force. I knew people who had worked there for upwards of 40 years, who had probably outlived their self-motivational shelf lives, but who were hanging on until retirement. It was an old-world type of business, one in which the business model really hadn’t changed in at least a half century or more. Even then I wondered how long it could carry on that way. In annual meetings the publisher would tell us how rapidly costs were rising, that even the cost of newsprint had doubled in just 10 years. In response to the astronomical costs of production, the paper was reduced in physical size multiple times during my tenure. Major advertisers dropped out one by one by one. Meanwhile, the 24-hour news cycle had reached a saturation point with the general public, and newspapers were obsolescent.

Still, a more forward-thinking organization than the Times-Picayune would have actively studied the future of media and slowly, gradually altered its business model to accommodate the evolving tastes of the public. They did not do that. Instead, they waited until 2012 to abruptly and recklessly change the business model in a way that callously eliminated some of the best of the best staffers and angered the reading public in an unprecedented fashion. When I found out who some of the individuals are that are being eliminated, I was dumbfounded. And I wasn’t alone. The collective voice of New Orleanians is fairly screaming in discontent today. Note to the newly-established “Nola Media Group”: In making the radical alterations to your enterprise, you neglected one very important group – the consumers of your product. Big mistake.

 In the years to come, I believe media organizations will point to the Times-Picayune as the model of what not to do in transitioning to the digital age in media. The elimination of hundreds of employees in one day is not only bad business, but seriously inhumane. In the end, it is the humanity, or lack thereof, that will stay in the memories of the readers. It is the insensitive manner in which the owners treated the bright minds that produced the product for so many years that will shape the public image of the new company. It bears mentioning that those who were eliminated are required to work until September 30 in order to collect their full severance. How would you feel going to work every day for the next three months knowing that you are considered fully dispensable and unnecessary to the organization?

 Shame on you, Times-Picayune, or Nola Media Group or whatever you like to be called these days. Shame. You did a very bad thing here and believe me, New Orleans will long remember it.

STOP THE PRESSES!

The irony was lost on no one in New Orleans: the very day that Newhouse Publishing announced the Times-Picayune would only print three days a week starting in the Fall, the paper ran a headline that included the word “Titanic.” New Orleanians are so enamored of their 179-year-old daily newspaper that the announcement felt sharply fatalistic. It is a similar sense of mourning that Coloradans felt in 2009 when the Rocky Mountain News folded. The same feeling of loss hovered over Seattle in 2009 when the Post-Intelligencer stopped printing. It is, without question, the relentless march of technology that has caused a hard cultural shift in the way Americans get their news.

 Since I worked for the Times-Picayune for nine years (until 2002), and I now teach journalism (including digital journalism) at a university, I have a pluralistic perspective on what happened in New Orleans yesterday. Technology started to take hold at the paper in the late 1990s. Prior to that we were actually using computers with the old black screens and green type and DOS operating system. We had no Internet access at that time, and really no clear idea of how technology and the newspaper business would intersect in just a few short years. But that was then.

 “Then” included a centuries-old industry that has always been dominated by older white males.

Although many of them were and are great journalists, few of them had the necessary vision about the technological future that was unfolding before their eyes. No one, for example, ever even considered the fact that a newspaper could stop printing a daily edition in favor of delivering content strictly online.

 In the late 1990s when the TP established a web site, www.timespicayune.com, we wondered what it would be used for. If you check it out even today, it’s not used for much of anything. You can go there and buy yourself a book about the history of the newspaper, or you can subscribe (not likely), or you can even arrange to advertise (even less likely). What you cannot do at the web site is find out what is going on in the world. There is no news at timespicayune.com.

 Meanwhile, along comes www.nola.com, billed as the companion website to the newspaper. I’m not sure if the higher ups at Newhouse (the parent company) know this, but a number of journalism teachers use Nola.com as an example of what not to do in digital journalism.

The site is tough to navigate, hard on the eyes (a recent redesign is themed in bright yellow, a color designers almost never use for websites) and not terribly compelling from a news standpoint. There is very little movement on the site, an element that distinguishes online publications from their static print cousins. Unfortunately, the company never quite knew how to deliver smart, informative content via the web. And now comes news that the web will be the predominant vehicle via which the company sends out its content.

Further, word comes that Jim Amoss, the highly talented and respected editor of the TP will run the new show. With all due respect to Amoss, the “new show” needs a new media leader, rather than a print journalist. Since the company has had such a poor digital showing to date, what is needed is a highly skilled digital editor, not a traditional newspaper editor. Further, working under his or her supervision, the new show needs innovative, imaginative digital designers to make the product appealing on first glance and beyond. Then it needs to pour good money into hiring a determined, highly trained investigative reporting team that can produce in-depth stories of newspaper quality.

By now, we know what works in online news. First, the site must be visually stunning. Second, it must include a smart mix of original content and aggregate news from other respected sites. Third, it must show a lot of news and visuals in the first screen,

because we now have studies that show people don’t like to scroll, so we have to give them good reasons to do so. Finally, it must be updated continually at all hours. If you really want to know what works, check out Tina Brown’s “The Daily Beast.”

This week Facebook is frantic with people lamenting the loss of the Times-Picayune daily print edition. New Orleanians have a dedicated, emotional tie to their newspaper of record. Many of them are calling for citizens to pounce on the company with letters, calls and issues of complaint. Sadly, such outcries will not change anything.

What many of them are not facing is the reality of the newspaper industry, which is the fastest declining industry in the United States, according to a March, 2012 report from the Council of Economic Advisors. The same report reveals that online publishing is among the fastest-growing industries in the nation. As usual, the numbers tell the story: Prior to Hurricane Katrina, the Times-Picayune had a circulation of 261,000. That number has dwindled to about 130,000.

If truth be told, many of those who are protesting the loudest do not read the newspaper. The readership issue is generational. Older citizens are far more likely to subscribe and read the paper. Younger people are devoted to their smartphones and Ipads,

where they can get their news on the go. Still, culturally there is a romantic attachment Americans have with their daily. It is the stuff that movies and books and Broadway plays have been made of. Memorable issues are neatly tucked away in attics coast to coast. On my own office wall is the framed February 8, 2010 edition of the TP, featuring a Super Bowl triumphant Drew Brees in a victory pose.

There is, without question, a sweet sentimentality about old timey newsprint. But sentimentality does not feed the bottom line, encourage advertisers to promote their wares in print or have the moxie to fight the onslaught of consumer technology. And the Times-Picayune decision makers simply did not have the necessary foresight to save their product, while neatly integrating digital content into their readers lives. They just didn’t. What is most disturbing to me is simply that their lack of vision will now result in hundreds of good people losing their jobs. Not just reporters and writers, but delivery truck drivers, wholesalers, technicians, accounting personnel, sales reps, human resources workers, photographers, graphic designers, administrative assistants, marketers, and so many more. In the end, newspapers are all about people, and now many, many people will face the biggest challenge of their lives.

TRENDING: THIS WEEK'S BIG 5

SECRET SERVICE SCANDAL WIDENS: The scandal involving U.S. Secret Service personnel and prostitutes in Colombia widened this week to include possible involvement of DEA agents, as well. The Washington Post has provided the most comprehensive coverage of the story to date, including this week’s revelation that some Secret Service employees are fighting their dismissals with claims that they are being made scapegoats in the investigation. This week, Congressional Hearings began about the Colombia incident, with Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) claiming the scandal may be just the tip of the iceberg: “This was not a one-time event,” said Collins, “The circumstances unfortunately suggest an issue of culture.”

FACEBOOK’S INITIAL PUBLIC DEBACLE: It was supposed to be one of the largest Internet company Initial Public Offerings in history, but it turned into a case of big talk and no walk. Facebook opened its company up to investors and promptly flopped. Forbes Magazine has done a stellar job in interpreting this mess for the masses, especially offering solid reasons the IPO was a bust. It should have been a top-shelf week for CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who saw his fiancée graduate from med school and then got married the day after the IPO debut; instead, Zuckerberg, more of an idea guy than a corporate animal, is learning the hard way that playing in the big leagues is unpredictable and pretty ugly.

UNCLE WALTER UNMASKED: Three years after his death and three decades after he signed off for the last time at CBS Evening News, Walter Cronkite is the subject of a sometimes unflattering new biography by historian Douglas Brinkley. Brinkley, whose is renowned for his deep research and thorough approach to his subjects, uncovered a few fatal flaws about “the most trusted man in America.” Cronkite, it seems, was not immune to accepting favors and gifts from companies or organizations about which he reported.

It is widely known that Cronkite was against the Vietnam war, but not until Brinkley’s book did we find out that he actually pushed Robert F. Kennedy into a presidential run in 1968. “You must announce your intention to run against Johnson,” Cronkite reportedly told RFK, “to show people there will be a way out of this terrible war.” One could say the newsman was attempting to create the news, which as all decent journalists know, is about as against the rules as against the rules can be. The book also details Cronkite’s disdain for his successor, Dan Rather. Read more about Brinkley’s revelations at Newsweek and The Daily Beast.

STEALING SHERIFF JOE’S THUNDER: If there is one word to describe Arizona, it is “persistent.” This week, the notorious Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the living thorn in President Obama’s side, decided to send a deputy to Hawaii to prove once and for all that Obama was not born in the U.S. There was just one problem with Sheriff Joe’s timing: Also this week, Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett received final verification from Hawaii Attorney General David Louie that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii.

Bennett was threatening to keep Obama off the November presidential election ballot if he could not be fully assured that Obama was born in the U.S. Meanwhile, Sheriff Joe might want to focus his energies on his own tenure in Arizona: The U.S. government has filed suit against Arpaio for racially profiling Latinos. Note to “America’s toughest sheriff”: Uncle Sam is one mean mother.

AND YET, NO APOLOGY: The judge in the Dharun Ravi (below, left) case wondered out loud before imposing a 30-day sentence on the 19-year-old who clandestinely taped his Rutgers University roommate having sex with a man: “I haven’t heard you apologize.” Yet Ravi’s lack of stated remorse did not seem to influence Judge Glenn Berman to exact extreme punishment. 30 days in jail, $10,000 fine and community service work. The roommate, Tyler Clementi, after discovering that Ravi had distributed the video online, jumped to his death from a bridge.

The light sentence touched off a firestorm of disagreement among observers, but Judge Berman said simply, "I do not believe [the legislature] envisioned this type of behavior" when it passed the anti-bias statute at the heart of the case.” In other words, in his estimation, the act did not rise to the standards of a hate crime. As Forbes Magazine staff writer Kashmir Hill points out, this was not a murder case, but what about the obvious invasion of privacy? Now that we have such easily accessible consumer technology, maybe it is time to revisit our privacy laws and bring them into the 21st century.