All Media is Constructed

With all the commotion regarding the Kony 2012 "movement", I though I would take some time as a filmmaker to explain some fundamental concepts to my readers. The average person thinks of documentaries as works of non-fiction that presents a complete non-biased picture. That could not be further from the truth, as even objective forms of all media are constructed.

Documentaries first start with a concept or an arguement and use interviews and visual imagery to tell the story they are looking to tell. As the crew embarks on shooting the documentary, the director takes that concept and writes interviews, goes to related events, and shoots compelling footage to tell that story. Often, the director will ask leading questions to get a soundbite or answer that will help propel the story along to provide evidence for their argument. In addition, the director will often tell the editor to cut around the desired answer, taking it completely out of context and proving his or her point. 

Another thing to ask yourself when watching a documentary is who is left out of the telling of this story. Is the story fair to both sides? Is another perspective even presented? Who is funding this documentary? Is there a financial incentive to present this argument, this particular way? What is the director's overarching agenda? These are just some of the questions one should look at when evaluating the integrity of a film or filmmaker. 

Another way documentaries are constructed is through their editing. An editor is often given hundreds of hours of footage that they must narrow down to a small sliver. They are able to rearrange things and take them out of context. Overlay B-Roll footage and compelling music on top of interviews to create an emotional appeal. They can cut out things that seem contrary to their argument, and cut around dialogue to make their interviewees seem more articulate. 

As emotionally appealing the Kony 2012 campaign may seem when viewed on the surface, there is much more to the story than Invisible Children make it out to be. It is a complex issue that involved many parties and tragedy on both ends. By making the story simply binary, presenting "good" and "bad" (Kony), Invisible Children has over simplified the issue, preventing the general public from knowing the entire story. 

If you are interested in investigating the story further, please read the blog posts below:

Blog Summary

More

IC Responds to Criticism

There are a few articles about it as well. 

Follow the money. Always follow the money. It will tell you a lot about the incentives behind a particular message. 

The Truth About the War on Planned Parenthood

It is astounding to me the debate going on across the nation about Planned Parenthood and women’s health on both sides of the isle. In today’s New York Times Article, Women in Texas Losing Options for Health Care in Abortion Fight, Pam Belluck argues that the fight to end tax-payer abortions is causing a serious toile on Woman’s access to health care across the state.

They begin the article with an emotional pander stating, “Leticia Parra, a mother of five scraping by on income from her husband’s sporadic construction jobs, relied on the Planned Parenthood clinic in San Carlos, an impoverished town in South Texas, for breast cancer screenings, free birth control pills and pap smears for cervical cancer. But the clinic closed in October, along with more than a dozen others in the state, after financing for women’s health was slashed by two-thirds by the Republican-controlled Legislature.”  What they fail to mention is that the state of Texas faced a several billion-dollar deficit this past session and made cuts to programs across the board.

In addition, they fail to mention where the money was redirected to and how other important state functions were helped by the funds transferred their way. One amendment in particular, #46 to the House Budget, took money away from Planned Parenthood and put it towards children with autism (which had received no funding in the House Appropriations Bill). When questioned about this Rep. Christian stated, “We don’t choose between good and bad, we choose between necessary and necessary”, meaning every interest group wants money, lawmakers much choose their battles and give the money to whom they think needs it more.

Planned Parenthood is far from the safe haven for women that the left likes to portray it as. For years they have been caught in scandals ranging from giving advice to pimps on how to receive free care for their underage prostitutes to disposing of fetus remains behind the dumpsters in their facilities. Do you really want your state tax dollars funding operations like that?

Unfortunately, Republicans have made many crucial mistakes when pursuing this issue in their dealings with the media. Instead of phrasing it as allocating scarce resources to more deserving causes, they often phrase it as a war on birth control and abortion. Just look at the gaffs made by Rick Santorum. He speaks as though he desires to outright outlaw birth control. If that is not big government, I don’t know what is.

Republicans need to rephrase the debate to something along the lines of: “If a woman desires to use contraception, she has the right to do so with her own money. However, that being said, it is not fair to subsidize a woman’s sexual practices at the expense of the tax payer.” In essence, frame the argument to portray this type of  funding as welfare for contraceptives.

Sex is a luxury, not a right. If someone cannot afford to be on birth control and does not wish to have a child (or cannot afford a child) then they should not be having sex. Period. Our country is 15 trillion dollars in debt and we are paying for these women to be on birth control (while at the same time subsidizing abortions because they take place in the same places). Insanity.

The media likes sensationalism. Phrasing this fight as a battle for scarce resources isn’t nearly controversial enough to garner readership, because of this, publications like the New York Times like to make it out to be a fight to end woman’s healthcare. That is not the case at all. Women can still have access to all the things a Planned Parenthood has to offer; only they have to pay for it instead of the taxpayer. 

2012: A Storm is Coming

Everyday, the news makes it more and more apparent that the 2012 election cycle is going to shake up national politics in an unprecedented way. This election cycle, we will take back both the White House and Senate in one fatal swoop and begin to reverse the failed policies of the Obama administration.

Its almost hard to believe that the GOP primaries are just over a half year away, its seems just like yesterday that Obama took office and spawned the birth of the Tea Party in early 2009. The recall elections in Wisconsin show just how powerful the Tea Party has become, taking on the mobilization power that the unions possess and still winning.

The Tea Party is such a game changer that for the first time in years RINOs are being defeated by legitimate conservative candidates that are less willing to compromise. Because of the Tea Party, name recognition has become less and less vital, as experienced politicians are being examined for their actions and defeated in primaries.

All around the country, there have been shakeups in just about every race imaginable. Conservatives have had enough and are making it clear through the Tea Party that what has been going on in our country is not acceptable and will no longer be tolerated. 

In Texas, Ted Cruz has a good chance to legitimately defeat David Dewhurst, a matchup that four years ago would have seemed like David vs. Goliath. The Tea Party through activist enthusiasm has successfully broken political norms and made politics less about money and name and more about issues and accountability. 

From Kay Bailey Hutchinson to Ted Cruz would be an enormous and positive change for both the Senate and the State of Texas. With the power of the Tea Party only growing stronger and stronger, this is sure to be just one of many positive changes for US politics in the election year to come. 

2012 Election Effects on Texas Politics

Many have asked me what happens to the positions of Governor and Lt. Governor if Perry and Dewhurst win their bids for President and Senator. The answer is complicated, but essentially until the next election cycle the positions would go to 2 moderate Republicans in the Texas Senate.

Because Governor and Lt. Governor are elected during the mid-term elections and not during the same election period as Presidential elections, it would be two years before Texans were given a chance to elect replacements. The job would then go to the Texas Senate to elect two of their own to fill the vacant positions. To do this, the Senate pro tempore (Sen. Mike Jackson)  becomes de-facto Lt. Governor for up to thirty days to lead the Senate in its elections to fill the two positions.

What makes this even more complicated is that Sen. Mike Jackson is considering a run for congress (to take Ron Paul's vacant seat) which would leave Senate pro temore position vacant as well. In this case the next in line would take the position and act as temporary Governor/ Lt. Governor.

So the question remains, who would the Texas Senate elect? Judging by the composition of the Senate, it would be two moderate Republicans that are respected in seniority. The two that immediately come to mind are Sen. Robert Duncan and Sen. Steve Ogden, both powerful moderates popular with the Senate leadership. With these two presiding over the legislature for the 2013 (83rd) legislative session, Texas would surely have an even less conservative session than the last.

While this scenario seems farfetched and obscure, it is definitely possible given the political atmosphere in the air right now. However, like the weather, political climates can change overnight and are very much subject to many interacting factors. It is too early to predict the climate in November 2012, especially because we do not know who the victors of the primaries will be or what large scale events will happen between now and then.

Iron Man a Conservative?

Before Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr. was best known as a talented actor that threw his life away on drugs and alcohol. After years of finding trouble, getting arrested, going to rehab and relapsing, Downey finally was tired of his rockstar lifestyle and decided to seek help and rehabilitate himself back into society.

In an interview years after being released from incarceration, Downey had this to say “I have a really interesting political point of view, and it’s not always something I say too loud at dinner tables here, but you can’t go from a $2,000-a-night suite at La Mirage to a penitentiary and really understand it and come out a liberal. You can’t. I wouldn’t wish that experience on anyone else, but it was very, very, very educational for me and has informed my proclivities and politics every since.” It is incredibly refreshing to see a Hollywood Celebrity reemerge from the grave, really turn his life around, and come out of it viewing the situation in a mature way.

Instead of blaming society and the "the system" for his situation, he in essence took personal responsibility for his actions and sought to make a positive change in his life through hard work and determination. So often, people blame their upbringing and the inequalities inherent to society for their position in life, instead of realizing that the deep rooted problem isn't anyone else but themselves. The government can handout all it wants to people to try and level the playing field for them in society, but at the end of the day it means nothing if the person them self doesn't put in the effort and aspire to greatness.

I am really impressed with Robert Downey Jr., not only is he very talented, but he is willing to work hard to succeed. I applaud him for taking responsibility for his actions and being a real life example of personal responsibility.

Perry Campaign Heats Up

In the last week or so, Perry seems to be popping up everywhere from my cellphone to my personal facebook account. I have received friend requests from two random people employed by the newly found Americans for Rick Perry (The U.S. counterpart for Texans for Rick Perry), Twitter requests from two separate Texans for Rick Perry Accounts, and a mass text yesterday "from" Rick Perry just checking in and saying God Bless. It seems to me that the stars are aligning and the announcement will be coming fairly soon. This late entry could prove to be a blessing or a curse for the Texas Governor. Time will only tell.

More on the Perry Race:

Tribune Post on "Perry Cronies"
Perry this year's Fred Thompson?

The Truth about Romney

The 2008 GOP primary was the first primary I was legally old enough to vote in. For months leading up to February 2008, I researched each of the candidates and began to decide who to support. In the end, I threw my support behind a strong business man, Mitt Romney.

As "Big Tuesday" drew closer, more and more decent candidates dropped out of the race, including Romney. With a the media hyping up a McCain victory, it was impossible for any decent candidate to have a fighting chance. When the big day came, I ended up just casting a symbolic vote for the non-candidate, Mitt Romney, and walked out of the polls disappointed.

While Romney is not my candidate of choice this time around, if he is our worst case scenario, we are in pretty good shape. While he catches a lot of heat for his role in implementing the Massachusetts Health Care reform (I agree he should), the rest of his resume is pretty flawless and full of stories of him raising companies from the grave and implementing fiscal responsibility. (To read more on this just glance at his Wikipedia Biography; Yeah I know it's not a "great source".)

Most consider his Mormon faith a serious character flaw. While this could indeed hurt him in the general election, I feel as though it could be a positive trait to have in a President. One characteristic i've seen in every mormon I know is that they are pretty incorruptible (believe me i've tried).  Having a president that is not phased by the competing interests in Washington, would not be bad for our country.

While it is customary to hate the front runner candidate for president, it is comforting to know that this time around the candidate is at least competent. The last election cycle, the Republican "Hero" was McCain and it was difficult to rally behind such an unimpressive candidate. Whatever the outcome this primary has in store, the most important thing is that we choose a candidate we can all united behind and defeat Barack Obama. That is and should remain priority number one.