Facts are Fascinating - Give Them a Try

Without a doubt, many "things" (ideas, clothing, traditions, etc.) have a shelf life; they go out of style eventually, and we look back and invariably say, "I can't believe I wore/believed/said that."  I'm certainly not immune to this: while I'll continue to listen to my 80s new wave/alternative rock and consider those sounds "classics", I look at photos of myself from that same era and have trouble remembering how it was humanly possible to breathe with my pants hiked up and belted so high.  With that said, though, there are certain things that never go out of style, whose shelf life is eternal: two of those things are the movie Uncle Buck and truth.  

My major in college was advertising, and advertising was part of the Communications college of my university.  Every undergrad student who was pursuing a degree in a Communications-related field (advertising, public relations, broadcasting, journalism, etc.) was required to take a semester-long course called "Media Ethics".  I'll beat you to it and say it now: these days, that seems like a clear oxymoron -  and that's sort of the point underlying why I'm starting this little venture.  While most of the class discussions and projects we had in that particular class have completely vanished from my memory, there's one thing that stuck out and remains vivid in my brain: the instructor was adamant that the truth was paramount, and the journalism students walked around like they were the high priests and priestesses of the Holy Temple of Truth - the rest of us were mere mortals who needed their guidance.   

At the time, I just laughed and thought, well, they SORT OF have a point:  here I am learning how to write engaging copy and think up clever ways to sell everything from baby food to radial tires, and they're in training to get to the bottom of a story and uncover sources to expose the underbelly of an issue.  This was 30+ years ago when CNN was still in its infancy so the 24-hour news cycle was still evolving.  (I'd prefer to quote Norm MacDonald directly here, but I can't find it, so I'm going to slaughter it and make it about an eighth as funny as Norm would have delivered it.)  In the 60s and 70s, why was the news only a thirty-minute program?  Because there's only thirty minutes of news to be broadcast each day.  The rest of it is just talking.  (Rest in peace, Norm - your wisdom and insights are still spot on in 2021!)

I'm not breaking new ground here by saying today's "news" outlets are more concerned about ratings, shares, clicks, eyeballs, etc., and the truth is only used when it fits their narrative.  My goal with this new venture isn't to call the media on the carpet and get them to return to their journalistic roots and recall their media ethics class (I'm going to go ahead and assume my college wasn't the only one that required a similar class of its undergrads).  They've learned how to be ring masters/mistresses in a circus, DJs at the club for cool kids, and entertainers doing seven shows a week on the Strip.  It pays their bills, and I'm not going to fault them for that.  

My goal, really, is very simple: take a current event or topic and present the facts.  Present the FACTS and allow - nay, ENABLE - every single person reading this to be informed and make an informed opinion regarding how she/he feels about it.  Crazy, I know.  

I'm going to use an example from long enough ago so I don't "trigger" anyone.  (I just rolled my eyes while typing that, but that's where we are now, right?)  Watergate.  If that happened today, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, The Weather Channel, etc. would have their "experts" lined up one after another to delve into the reason the burglars wore black rather than a calming shade of charcoal, how the manufacturer of the recording equipment in the White House is responsible for Nixon's behavior, the implications this will have on a tropical storm brewing over Guam, the various treatments one should use for their vocal chords if they aspire to be the next Deep Throat, and so on.  Everything BUT the facts.

The facts alone were glaring enough.  Just to name a few: one of the burglars arrested at the scene was James McCord, an ex-CIA agent who worked directly for the RNC; there was a voice-activated recording system in the Oval Office that proved Nixon's knowledge of and involvement in the burglary; and the cash found on the burglars could be traced back to Nixon's re-election fund.  Truth is ALWAYS more interesting, ultimately. 

Honestly, I used the Watergate example on purpose.  I'm a Nixon fan, I'll admit.  I'm a registered Republican, and I've never voted for a non-Republican candidate for president since I was old enough to vote.  I used Watergate as an example because the truth was Nixon screwed up, and he deserved to lose his position as the most powerful person in the free world.  Regardless of my political leanings or thoughts about the opposition, the truth needed to come out, and out it came.  

So, before I lay out my "agenda", let me be clear on what it's NOT.

• I'm NOT trying to get any news media outlet to change the way they do business - if they have an audience who enjoys their product, God bless them!
• I'm NOT trying to separate myself from or position myself better than any group.  As I disclosed above, I have political leanings and views, and I'm not going to abandon them; this just isn't a forum for making political statements.

My agenda is this:

• Take a current event or topic and present the FACTS surrounding it - not opinions or spins
• Enlist the aid of journalists and others who have access to information and have the ability to get this . . . venture picked up and noticed by as many other mass-communication avenues as possible so the more people who can see the facts, the better
• Full disclosure: at some point, I would love to have this built up to a point where I could sell ad space to make some money off of this - that's the American way, right?

Let me give you an example as I'm seeing this play out.  I'll use the Alec Baldwin incident as my framework.  (Full disclosure: I've enjoyed watching his movies, but I'm fairly certain his political beliefs and mine aren't even a nodding acquaintance with one another.  With that said, though, absent PROOF that he picked up that gun with the express intent to injure and kill people, I wouldn't wish the guilt and heartache he's currently experiencing on ANYONE, regardless of political or personal beliefs.)  The different media outlets are busy speculating about everything under the sun surrounding this unfortunate incident.  The AB lovers are trying to bend the narrative in a way to point the finger at the armorer; the haters are coming up with all sorts of memes and jokes about standing BEHIND him from now on.  Neither of those two diametrically opposed approaches does any good for understanding what happened.  Rather than encouraging discourse, it's sowing discord.  We don't need MORE of that in this world.

• Invite a crime-scene investigator to explain how this type of incident should be investigated by the book; we don't want to know what she/he thinks the investigative team did right or wrong at this point - let the facts play out first. 
• Invite a professional armorer to explain how firearms (fake and real) should be handled on a movie set; we don't want to know what she/he thinks the armorer did right or wrong, but it would be helpful for that professional to explain what common mistakes are made and the consequences they create. 
• Present the FULL transcript (or video) of the sheriff's statement(s) concerning the investigation.  Sound bytes are great to fit into a time slot, but the possibility of them being taken out of context or being misinterpreted because of a LACK of context is just too high. 
• Invite an expert who is well versed in New Mexico law who can lay out the possible consequences different persons could face if they were found guilty of specific charges; she/he could outline what would be needed to make a case to have that person be charged.

Only the FACTS.  Ultimately, this will come down to what the sheriff's office finds and what they pass on to the District Attorney, obviously - whatever is presented here or on MSNBC will have little or absolutely no effect on that outcome, but in the meantime, what we would present here would help and encourage people to TALK about the topic and exchange thoughts rather than post on social media an expletive-filled diatribe, which only serves to divide.  

With that said, I now send out the clarion call for your help:

• Topics and events to be addressed
• Connections to experts in various fields
• Connections to journalists and others who could help with their resources to flesh out the topics and get this out to the general public
• Suggestions on how to set up the website (I'm starting this as a blog because that's the extent of my knowledge regarding the internet) to make it searchable and categorize the topics so information and FACTS are easily found
  
  

I want to create discourse, not sow discord.