Shuarian’s Weblog

Ah, I knew the new media tag (used for meta discussion about media in general, in contrast to more specific tags like movies) would come in handy. Today’s reason to write yet again about the Swiss media scene is caused by a favourite pet peeve of mine, the news programme Tagesschau, which gets aired by SF.

In the news show of January 20, 2007, one of the topics was Sen. Hillary Clinton’s announcement to seek the nomination of the Democratic Party for the US Presidential Election in 2008.

You can watch the news segment online (in German).

So, how many mistakes and inaccuracies can one do in a segment which lasts for only 1.17 minutes? Apparently, six:

1) Quote: “Sie hat ein Wahlkampf Budget von 14 Millionen Dollar” (she has a campaign budget of 14 Mio. USD)

That’s only partially correct. Her campaing money *currently* amounts to 14 Million USD (source: LA Times and others). However, that’s hardly her whole *budget*. Elections, especially in the United States, are costly. With Hillary Clinton now officially in the race, you can expect her campaign treasure (and that of other contenders) to grow significantly. It appears that Sen. Hillary Clinton might also opt out of the federal election funding. That’s seen as step to rise more money than otherwise possible, in a race which is supposed to become the most expensive election in history so far:

The chairman of the Federal Election Commission yesterday predicted that 2008 will produce the first $1 billion presidential race and that the $500 million that each party’s candidate will need to compete will severely limit the field of contenders

Source: The Washington Times: Road to White House may cost $1 billion

[Update January 22, 2007] And indeed, Howard Wolfson, spokesman of Hillary Clinton, confirms her intention to opt out of public fundings:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York) is the first top-tier candidate to tip her hand that she intends to leave the public money on the table. Senior Clinton advisor Howard Wolfson said by e-mail Sunday that she would not take matching funds in the primary campaign or, if she wins the Democratic nomination, in the general election. [Emphasis added]

Source: Los Angeles Times: Just $83.8 million? No thanks

2) Quote: “Hillary Clinton wäre die allererste Frau, die sich um die Präsidentschaft der USA bewirbt” (Hillary Clinton would be the first women to seek the US Presidency)

She wouldn’t be the first female candidate for the US Presidency. That was done before. She also isn’t the first woman to seek the nomination of the Democratic Party, that honour goes to Shirely Chisholm in 1972. As early (or as late) as 1964, Margaret Chase Smith was trying to win the nomination of the Republican Party.

If elected in the primaries, however, she would become the first female candidate to run for the US Presidency for one of the two major parties.

3) Quote: “Hillary ist die Ex-Frau von Ex-Präsident Clinton” (Hillary is the former wife of former president Clinton)

Ouch, being divorced will be a severe handicap for her in the race. Only, she is still married to former President Bill Clinton.

It’s interesting to note that the media already uses some of her carefully outlined terms. It was a smart move by her to refer to herself mostly as ‘Hillary’, and not Hillary Clinton or - even worse - just Clinton. Thus it’s also Hillary for President and Vote Hillary (see http://www.votehillary.org/).

4) Quote: “Sie gehört zu jenen Demokraten, die vehement einen US Truppenabzug fordern, und die Bush Regierung kritisieren” (She’s among those Democrats who vehemently demand a withdrawal of US troops and criticise the Bush administration)

There’s no doubt that she does criticise President Bush, although it would be wrong to call her a sharp critic so far. As for her stance on the war, the above attribution is disputable. She voted yes on authorizing use of military force against Iraq in 2002. She’s saying she regrets Bush’s handling of the war, but she does not regret her vote in 2002, and won’t recant it (Source: On The Issues: Hillary Clinton). Her stance on withdrawal can hardly be called vehemently, as she’s on record calling an immediate withdrawal of US troops a big mistake.

Note: I actually agree that an immediate withdrawal (as opposed to a phased withdrawal, for example) probably isn’t the right solution in the United States’ seemingly lose-lose situation in Iraq. However, given that other Democrats are demanding just that, her stance can hardly be called vehement, especially since she also was late and ambiguous in her call for withdrawal (no matter what kind).

5) Quote: “Ihr schärfster Konkurrent dürfte der demokratische Senator Barack Obama sein” (Her strongest opponent seems to be Sen. Barack Obama)

That’s only half true. Polls from the first primary states (which are decisive for the campaigns), indicate that former Sen. John Edwards should be mentioned alongside Sen. Barack Obama. Sources: Zogby polls of likely voters for Iowa and New Hampshire - just take a look at them and you’ll understand my reasoning.

6) Quote: “(Barack Obama ist) der erste schwarze Kandidat” ([Barack Obama is] the first black candidate)

Remember the part where I mentioned Sen. Hillary Clinton is not the first female aspirant? Well, despite the above quote, neither is Sen. Barack Obama the first black candidate. The already mentioned Shirley Chisholm was Afro-American, too. Maybe you also have heard of Jesse Jackson? He was seeking the nomination in 1984, and again in 1988. Maybe that’s too long ago? Does Rev. Al Sharpton ring a bell? He was seeking the nomination of the Democratic Party in 2004. Like Sen. Hillary Clinton, however, if elected during the primary elections, Sen. Barack Obama would be the first black candidate of the general elections. At least for the two major parties, I wasn’t able to digg up any useful information regarding possible runs by black third party candidates.

***

Of course, the bids by Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama are noteworthy insofar as they both appear to have a realistic chance of winning the general election in 2008 - something the former candidates didn’t (to my knowledge). However, that doesn’t mean they should be portrayed as being two brave souls on the forefront of gender and race equality. That’s a media spin, and nothing more.

For the new year, I’d love to spend more time taking pictures, hopefully gaining more experiences over time. I don’t have that much time, but as the headline already suggests, I’ll try to make a few decent photos every month. It certainly would be helpful to eventually finish my website with its photo section, but alas, I have to limit myself to possible and viable solutions, not future plans. So, for this month, here are some pictures I took last Saturday:

 

Just in time before the decoration of our Christmas tree got removed, I made this picture of a branch with an unlit candle, flooded by sunlight. As Christmas is already over, warmth now comes from other sources than the candle, yet the need for it remains, served by the sun in this photo.

I converted the picture to black and white, to better show the timeless and traditional nature of this ‘holy holiday’. Other than that, I slightly increased the brightness in some areas, so as to emphasise the light a bit more. The yellowish frame was added because Christmas time is not only contemplative and cosy, but always also a bit cheesy and kitschy.

A rather simple snapshot of our cat. What I like about the picture is how it shows the cat’s energy and readiness for movement, as well as its constrained endurance to hold back and wait for a moment longer. I think the title, Restrained Movement, is quite an accurate description.

I didn’t manipulate this picture all that much; I mostly just used the relevant selection of the original, made the colours a bit colder and increased the green ratio slightly (the resulting overall green shade is quite noticeable if you look closely enough). The black frame was added to highlight the snapshot manner of this shot.

Two heavily photo op’ed pictures, which were made more interesting by playing with some of IrfanView’s nifty filters. I’ve done these photos mostly because I wanted to experiment with photos from a close-up view, and liked the idea of having some silly, almost fairy-talish, garden dwarfs as subject.

Lottery is a pretty hopeless fight against probability. Yet the dream of becoming instantly rich seems to be rather appealing, given the many players lottery enjoys.

Some weeks earlier, as the jackpot was unusual high, my dad decided to play the EuroMillions lottery, using numbers from ever family member. A few days later, he expressed his anger at me for choosing the wrong numbers. Of course, I was rather puzzled, so he further explained what had happened:

The actual numbers were:   09 20 38 43 11
The numbers I had chosen: 08 19 37 42 31

(Almost) Four out of five, not that bad! To put things into perspective, even in the unlikely event of me magically changing all numbers by the factor one, the actual payout would have been small. The EuroMillions consist of two draws, numbers and starts, and since I didn’t chose the right stars (and was off by a factor greater than one, hehe), the prize would have been CHF 215 (approx. 176 USD).

Anyway, should the proverb unlucky at cards, lucky in love be true, some ungained CHF 215 wouldn’t be such a bad deal =:->