April six. Political science class.

I don't have the exams. I beg your forgiveness. I'd

like to get them back right away. However, a more important

thing came up this weekend; income tax. Maybe not more

important to you, but it had to get done or I was going to

get my ass kicked out of the house. My wife kept hassling

me as to how much we would wind up owing. In any case, I

will try to get them back ASAP.

We will start material from today that will begin the

process for the next exam. Okay. Interfaces number four

are due today. Which we will go over in a little while.

Maybe that's why people didn't show. On Thursday, if you

will remember to bring with you the questionnaire that is

the green packet. If anybody needs another green packet I

have extra ones in my office, so you can take care of that.

Procedurally. I do have a new word list for you at this

particular juncture to provide you with. Well that helps.

any other the questions on things that are due?

Assignments? All right. Hopefully. Everything is

understood what's due and when it will be due. Everything's

pushed back a bit.

I have not looked at your exams. I did the Monday

exams. And I don't know, I hope your question was better in

the essay in the sense of your response to it. Translation,

what's my first rule of writing essay questions? Read the

question. Ninety percent answered a different question.

Ninety percent. Now, that meant that the numbers in class

despite their knowledge were really badly -- because they

didn't answer the question. The question I thought was

fairly easy, and asked specifically about it was a quote

from the textbook. Pretty much that democracy has to

protect from abuse of power and so what safeguards are

available in a democracy to prevent the abuse of power? Now

it sounds easy. I thought in the sense, but of course the

mistake that ninety percent made was what? Why they didn't

answer my question. Anybody? They didn't define democracy?

Well, no, that was part of it. That would be a mistake in

reading the question. That would be a mistake in

answering. -- you know what was really funny? The first

thing I have to do is define democracy in that question, and

they never did. Where am I here? So I'm sure that's

nerves. But, you know, we can forget those things. I'm

talking about answering a question I didn't ask. The

question was what are the safeguards for a democracy

basically to avoid abuse of power? See. The answer of the

mistake in a sense answering the wrong question. They were

dealt with safeguards in the United States. Specifically.

They never touched on the question is democracy it doesn't

ask about our Bill of Rights. It doesn't ask about our

Congress, and it doesn't ask about the legislative,

executive, judicial branch; why? Because those are specific

to the United States. Does it mean you would have used the

United States as an example? Yeah, if you stated so later

on in developing it, but that would have entailed the use of

the chart. Obviously conditions of a Democratic government

in the involvement.

I do this to you because maybe your question didn't have

a, you know, mistake like that. I don't know yet. I hope

not, but please, please think about those things for the

final. Which will be your final chance to get a grade.

Because it is very important to answer a question that I can

grade. I can't grade a question on safeguards in the United

States since that was not my question. Okay? Do you

understand that? I hope. Now again it's not a criticism in

this class.

What was your questions? The one about the farmers or

how civil rights and civil liberties both tied to

democracy. Both in with democracy. Like you said, that you

believe in democracy and civil rights have a lot to do with

that. Why would civil rights have to do with that?

Basically how would they be -- that one pretty much was

similar to the one in the textbook that says how does civil

liberties go to the heart of the democratic process? Again,

going to civil liberties and civil rights, if you dealt with

the United States as the basis of the question instead of

using it as an example, which is two different things.

Taking the question as the United States rather than simply

taking, I don't remember the exact words offhand, but if it

was general then the question has to be generic with the

example of the United States. It's a question specifically

applying to the United States, then, you know, you deal with

the U.S. In a more specific way. Okay?

So I mean, you can get a feel. What was the other

question in this class? I tried to do with one on civil

liberties/civil rights. What's the other one? It was

something in the textbook. You took a quote from the

textbook dealing with the nationalization with the Bill of

Rights, i.e., incorporation.

I think it was why democracy have to be so slow or why

they operate so slowly. Okay. And again United States

could have been an example here. Because I try, as you know,

to make up absolutely different questions for each class

within the same context. So each class might wind up with

an easier question and it's always hard for me to judge.

Dealing with the safeguards of democracy sounds simple to

me, yet it turned out to be extremely difficult for students

to answer. So bear with me. I try to be fair. I hope I am

in the questions. It's just, you know, in that you can't

always judge and that's why I tried to emphasize the need

for specifically asking me clarifications if you're not sure

what the question asks. I don't want to trick you. It is

not my intent to trick you. That's not what I try to do.

All though I think sometimes people believe I'm attempting

to do that. No, I'm not.

The review material certainly worked very, very well for

the short answers in that class. They did very well there

and so the grades weren't extremely low despite the essays

because it became obvious in that class. They did study the

words and that of course is fifty percent of the list and

therefore even getting a poor grade on the essay means that

they didn't necessarily wind up with zeros or five or ten

points, which I've had in the past. So that's a good sign

and I know that a number of students took advantage of the

fact that we got the review up on the internet right away so

that this class's review helped the classes generally. I

think because they could go over the words more

specifically. That did get up there. I hope none of you

had trouble getting up, but I'm sure a few people do on the

same.

Anything else? The next exam will have the same

format. Part one and part two. Short identification, and

choice of one out of two essays. One trying to get sort of

a quote from the text, one or more for the lectures.

They're fifty points a piece. The questions will be

different of course. And therefore, at least the intent is

to have you be used to the kind of exam that I give you.

Okay? So if the format through you off for the first exam,

at least you'll be more familiar with the second exam,

okay? Any questions about the final at this point?

Now I did say that it is not cumulative. It will start

with today's material, but that does not mean that some of

the material that was previous to today couldn't be usable.

I want essay question. And when I distribute this word list

which I will do in a minute, you will know that at least a

few words will repeat themselves on the list for the final

but not a lot. Any other questions about the exam? Final

exam is? You will -- yeah, go ahead.

Q Do you have a tentative date?

A It's on the sheet. I believe anybody got their, not the

green sheet the blue sheet.

Q May 27th, that's a Thursday?

A Um hum. That's graduation day. You don't graduate if

you don't take me exam. No. However, I give -- I have four

different classes in political science. All of which will

have a final exam. I don't have any objection to anybody

who wants to take it earlier at one of the other times.

Once again, the questions will be different, but none of

them will be attempting to be more difficult. So that if

for some reason you want to take it Monday night, you could

take it Monday night. I will give you the full schedule of

those exams when I work it out later on. Okay?

All right. The exam will be -- what's the 10:30 to

12:30 on May 27th? But there will be other times. There

will be three other times you can take it. Oh, I think that

covers procedure.

The word list has been done at the request of students.

I would not have given it out originally if students hadn't

bugged me about it, so you -- you can blame them, but not

me. I mean my attitude is I'd rather do it so that you

panic by listening and getting it on your own. However,

this time what happens is, you know, the word list becomes

an emphasis and people start looking up the words ahead of

time. Which in this case is somewhat ridiculous. I'll

explain why and then they start giving me dictionary

definitions. But the other request I got from students I

guess since you're a semester which was what? Two years

ago? Is um, that they needed space to write them in. I

know some of you don't use the word list and it wasn't my

intent to have you write the answers in the list, but to

look them up and put you in a notebook, but once again if I

think the students have a legitimate request when they were

what I would choose to throw out then I don't listen. So,

yes, this does have more space. It also takes of course

more paper, and now that there's more money in the community

college system I don't feel as what? Guilty about wasting

quote unquote paper. No, it's true. I really cut down a

lot of the paper awhile back because I was trying to save

money for the school. Not the hell that they would

appreciate it. Important at all. The point was that I felt

that I could do it.

Now obviously, the no screaming issue was your feeling

when you saw the list because it's quite obvious that it is

more extensive to say the least from the previous word

list. There are probably about seventy extra words

comparatively in number to this list. However, although it

won't ease your souls. I might not -- that not all of these

words will be required like on the last list because I do

cut about fifty words from the list. The last study day

when I found out or find out that I haven't covered them in

all my classes so there will be about fifty words cut out of

this list and as I recall we cut only one. And that they

were all covered. Now the reason that they're not covered

all of these, is because we do with institutions and at

times I approach it differently. Depending on the semester,

depending on what's in the news. When I say the institution

of government, specifically I really am referring to the

three branch: The executive, judicial, and legislative.

Translation; the material is more structured maybe in

what's being presented to you, or more boring maybe I

suppose depends on how you look at it, or detailed more

specific. There's also another problem however that I need

to warn you about. And that is that a lot of these words

don't appear in my textbook or the other book. Not a lot,

but a number of them where last time I think you could

almost find most of them somewhere in my text. So it

becomes more important for you to listen carefully in class

to when I started repeating words and going over them

again. Perhaps more important to come to class all you

people who aren't here to pick up on words that are not in

the book for the purpose of at least that fifty points on

the exam. Again, it's partial. Which means that there will

be words in the chapters that are not on the list that

you're required and there may be some words they'll place on

the exam like I do on one of the exams I don't know if it

was yours or if it wasn't yours. I had Kossovo on the exam.

Um, because you know we've talked about it. So something

that might be appearing in the classroom in the news that

we've discussed for a number of times in class you are

certainly responsible for. So keep that in mind as well.

Okay? Any questions about the word list?

There were a couple of words that I got out of the

answers from the classes I graded not too many this time.

I'm always happy when I get worth -- I don't have any words

to put up on the internet for my fun site where I laugh at

people because of their answers. Although it's a little

disappointing because I like adding to it. I do have this

time it was interesting because on one exam I had 1787, one

of the words. What -- did I put a date on yours? No? You

didn't get a date? Did you get 666? Yeah. I usually try

to put one number on one of the exams. And on the other

exam I had 1791. And I got answers in both exams that it

was when our declaration of independence was on one it

specifically said on 1787 on July fourth of this day we

declared or independence from Britain. Now, I could

understand that if it were a foreign student who may have

just arrived in the United States, but it is shocking to me

when I use that one rule when I said please do not assume --

do not -- remember the -- remember the structure instructor

is stupid? I cannot assume you know this stuff? How do I

know it was it wasn't a foreign student? By the

handwriting, basically. But many of the most of our foreign

students have different handwriting because they write their

own language in a different script and so that script often

carries over to where I can identify even if they're

structure is fairly good that they have come from a foreign

nation. Not in every case. But in many of the cases.

The other one that was fun was the word oligarchy. Now

I don't know if you had oligarchy on your exam? Every now

and then they reappear on the exams. Obviously I was

looking for government by the few, and you may have put down

by the few and that generally is the wealthy, the

well-born. Something of that nature. However, in this case

the person put down oligarchy is rule by a woman; a queen.

But in reality the men have the final say. Well that's any

government. I just want to be clear. Actually I should

make you know in the New Yorker takes quotes out of the

paper and make comments out of -- maybe I should at some

time making comments on that page just for the hell of it.

So, I know why that person screwed up on that question

because if you remember on an earlier interface, I had

placed that question where you had to identify the

government and it was a woman ruling where the men have the

final say and we did say that it would have been an

oligarchy. As well as a monarchy. A woman inherited her

rule -- and so the person used that as the definition. So

at least they did their interfaces. Which I hope you did.

If you didn't do your interface for today, please

remember that they are due in my box by 9:30 tomorrow or in

my E-mail mailbox with the date and time that indicates that

it was sent before midnight. Or if you are on AOL, before

three a.M. Because AOL uses east coast time. And so I have

to subtract three hours. They cause all kinds of

confusion.

You know, we all have several chapters in my textbook

that way final more enjoyable. By the way, you know as I

said, I did the textbook for the pictures. I got my check

last night. As I was up here in the evening, I guess it

came in the afternoon mail for my years' worth of sales.

So, I got my royalties for my year last night. It came to

$1,397. So I want you to thank you all for having

participated in giving me a little extra money yesterday.

There is a photo in there only one photo that I didn't take

and that's of Sister Boom Boom. And of course every time

they have the Easter parade in San Francisco with the

Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence and it causes quite a stir

as you -- if you follow the news like I've asked to you to

do, the fact is that I -- I think of that photograph it's

such a good photograph of the picture of Ronald Reagan that

I am, you know, I really begged the guy to give it to, you

know, let me use it. He finally, you know, he really didn't

have any conflict with it. We actually had a bet. He was

an interesting kind of a student, mother I knew well, and a

sister. And he was one of those students who was brilliant

but never completed a course. And he took the self pace

western civ course from me and I bet him that he wouldn't

complete it and the bet was I didn't I get to use this photo

free. He didn't complete it. Some people aren't completers.

Some are not. For whatever reason all those he's finally

graduate college after twenty years. He's going into

teaching which is scary when people who have that kind of an

a person enter teaching, but at least he's bright, you

know. It's more frightening to me somebody who finishes

school in four years has a C average and decide to be a

teacher because then the knowledge that they present in the

classroom is at a C level and so students get an A for

knowing C work because that's all they can present. I'm

definitely an elitist when it comes to teaching good care

how good a teacher they are has a need for subject matter

and so, okay. My sermon for today.

The Catholic church is quite upset with that march, the

demonstration on Sunday because of making fun of the nuns

and of course pope and everything else and tens of thousands

of people who were there. The media of course loves that

kind of conflict. It plays with it all the time. Of course

when we talk about the media, what does that word mean?

What do we mean by media?

Q TV, magazine?

A How would you define it? I don't know if I do in my

book or not, but it's anything that decimates information

about usually politics or the news. So anything that will

decimate, give you information. I should add that's

inanimate. Because a person really isn't media, although I

know some inanimate people. One of the questions that used

to be on in other interface in this section in this chapter

that I took out only because I had to take out some

interfaces when I added my new chapter was what in your

house is media, that is to say decimates political

information? So in your house what gives you political

information? Newspaper. Yeah, if you have newspapers. TV

is one. Certainly, watching the news, well what about

regular TV shows? Forgetting the news do they give you

political information? Many of them do. Well not just the

jokes, but even the sit coms often deal with or developed

around the news stories that have occurred. Shows like Hill

Street Blues. And even shows that are as strange as Star

Trek go back and bring the news that are going on from

certain periods of time as they go back from history and so

there is a currency to many of the programs who also deal

with hot political issue from time to time.

For example, many organizations especially nonprofit

ones have lobbyists not just in Sacramento or Washington.

Q What's a lobbyist?

A Somebody who's paid to influence government.

Q Yeah somebody who's paid to influence or oversee

government and it's in a sense influence it. By the way,

lobbyists make very good money. Generally, the beginning

salary for most lobbyists in small organizations is a

hundred thousand a year; major organizations lobbyist make

over a million a year in salary. Okay. That's not their

expense account. Their expense account are far more than

that.

Q They're paid to influence government?

A Yes. By whom? Their group. Well this people? Well

not usually individuals. It's seldom that individuals have a

lobbyist. Usually their business or organization. In other

words, Bill Gates doesn't higher usually a personal

lobbyist. He might have hired a press secretary. That is a

little different. But Micro Soft hires lobbyists especially

now with the suit. The government is pursuing based on

arguing that they have been a monopoly controlling and

influencing trying to force their browser with the internet

explorer on everything to destroy any other browser, such as

Net Scape. Lobbyists have interesting personalities

generally. They're usually not very dynamic lecturers,

speakers. They're not the charismatic kind of person that

you think of who stands in front of an audience or walks in

front of a room. They are usually low keyed because they

tend to be ones who work one of one. They are able to

influence people to get into an office. Sit down, and talk

with the person. I'm the kind of person that needs a large

audience. I do well in a big crowd. The more, the better.

It's like, you know, I do my stand-up routine, and I enjoy

it. I am very, very bad when it comes to one of one

relations. I don't do well sitting, talking to somebody

individually to persuade them. I don't enjoy it as much. I

couldn't be a lobbyist. So personalities make a fact.

Where do lobbyists get their positions? What kind of

back grounds do they have? I mean that was a little off the

subject, but it goes ahead to a different subject, but as

long as I was start on it. Where do lobbyists --?

A Probably they have a law background.

A good percentage of them have law backgrounds or

political backgrounds, yeah. Um, many of them actually are

trained in law, because why would lobbyists be trained in

law? Politics deals with law. Well it's more than that.

Lobbyist are often involved in creating the legislation.

They actually write it and give it. Legislation for their

company. They actually introduce it at times. To a

legislature to introduce. So a law background is useful

besides the knowledge of having political background.




Lobbyist are also often involved politically because

they have connections. But there's another whole range of

lobbyist. Retired civil servants in military. Because a

number of companies realize that people from the military

have men and people know them and they know who to contact.

So often people leave government. There are new regulations

that have been instituted in the last few years. For

example, nobody who worked for the president can open a

lobbyist people or lobby government until two years after

they've left their White House job. And there have been

some charges filed -- who left because of that. From the

Reagan administration to the Clinton administration because

they did not adhere to the two years. They tried to work

around it. One of biggest lobbying firms in the world is

run by Henry Kissinger who was our former Secretary of State

because of his contacts internationally. Interestingly.

I don't know why my mind flips as you know from space to

space but you've heard that the two individuals who were

being accused of having blown up the -- the flight 103 was

it Pan Am 103? Have been turned over to Holland to the

Dutch where they will be tried with Scottish judges.

Because it occurred over Scotland. Did you read who was

responsible for finally convincing after ten years? Kadofy

to turn them over. These people get involved even afterwards

but in this case it wasn't a hired situation. It was more

of a friendship. It was Mandella. From south Africa.

Because of the support that Kadofy gave to his liberation

movement while he was in prison, Mandella, never never

follow the west demand for him to condemn Kadofy and was

able to go in and function internationally as a diplomat

finally working out the -- to trust the west. Kadofy

refused to trust the west trials of course the real issues

were these two individuals agents of the Libyan government

when they blew up the plane. Of course ten years ago Libya

was our enemy, nobody even knows about Libya, Kadofy,

anymore because we have new enemies today.

So, lobbying of course becomes an important factor, um,

in certainly the creation of legislation and more so even in

TV and radio programs. It's hard to believe. I'm not talking

about paid advertising. Most of us know and I'm sure it was

where she would hold up a case during the TV you know, most

of the products if not all of them that are shown in the

movies when you see the names they're paid for. They pay

for those ads. To help fund the film. So if you see a

package of Wheaties sitting there, that Wheaties is sitting

there because they pay. Of course the biggest mistake ever

made was M & M. What am I talking about? E.T. For those

that may not be aware of it, M & Ms were used to fund the

dropping of M & Ms as a trail most of you have seen E.T. at

some point. Even now. Who has not seen E.T.? You've all

seen it? Serious? Well there's a scene in there where to

find his way, he drops the M & Ms. Well they weren't

M & Ms, and they were expecting M & M to pay for it. So

Rieces Pieces picked up the bit and Rieces Pieces went sky

high and even outsold M & Ms because of that film. The

scary part maybe scary, is that now with digitalization,

however you say it, apparently as these films are being

reproduced for DVD or reproduced for reshowing in the

theaters, they have an ability to change the ad. And they

are now going out and talking to M & Ms to repickup if

Rieces Pieces doesn't meet their price. So that it may in

the future be M & Ms. Reality and what it used to be. The

past isn't what it used to be. It's hard today.

The digitalization has become so it's hard to know

reality. I'm dealing with the subject. I'm jumping. Did

Fred Astaire really dance with a vacuum cleaner? Looks so

real, doesn't it? I mean, or was Forrest Gump real? I mean

there are many people today who believe that there really

was a Forrest Gump. Well he looks real. They cut him in

and it's beautiful shaking hands with the president. The

biggest stink recently about being cut into the film was by

Clinton in Contact. Because they put him right into the

film and used these news casts to make the film more what?

Believable? He was really upset because of all the -- of

the president's now with digitalization he has been cut into

numerous films and since he is copyright free because he is

a public figure, there's very little they can do in the

White House about it unless of course they should defame him

in some fashion, I suppose.

Again, the changes in technology are changing what

reality is because sometimes it's difficult to know and what

I was alluded to what the TV to let you know that I am still

on the subject of TVs in the house and the media, is that we

now have a word for programs that provide us information

through entertainment. It's called infotainment. Is it in

my book? Which sometimes creates our reality. The movie

JFK introduced people who never existed. They made people up

in the story, but these people became real. They become real

as the story becomes real because that's the way many young

people learn about history. Who is the real Amy Fisher?

Will the real Amy Fisher please stand up? She shot

somebody's wife. Yeah, she's Mary Joe Budafuco. Did you

hear? Yeah, that's why -- she is getting out of prison

after seven years. She's now 24. She was having an affair

with this guy at 16 and she wanted to free him so he could

marry her, and so she shot his wife at the head. But she

survived. And she went to prison. The wife wrote a letter

to the D.A.'s office saying that, you know, she was a little

cracked and broke under the pressure and she didn't blame

her anymore and she forgave her and asked the D.A. to

release her. And so they're moving to let her out of

prison for this attempted murder.

But at the point that the story broke, all three

television networks did Amy Fisher movies. And they did the

Nancy Carrigan/Tanya Harding reunion. They get like a

hundred grand each. Amy Fisher -- and that's what they

think. Because the Budafuco's are having money problems

that's what it said on the TV the other night. They were

going to have them meet like Tanya Harding and Nancy

Carrigan. They should have Springer oversee it. There's a

new form of prostitution, folks; the media. Why? Because a

hundred thousand is nothing. I mean, God, the biggest

prostitute's name is Monica Lewinsky. Well she's getting a

lot of the money. There's not one prostitute, even Heidy

Fleiss, who's pleased a lot of people. The fact is that if

your name appears in the media under those circumstances for

strange reasons, those stories sell because -- not because

the media just wants the publicity, but the media makes its

money through the advertiser. And so the infotainment

becomes important because people will watch it. What are we

talking about? Anywhere at the lowest range from three

hundred thousand dollars to the highest range of one million

point six for the super bowl for any thirty second spot.

One point six million dollars for a thirty second spot.

That's a lot of money. Didn't they say that the brand of

lipstick Monica Lewinsky wore sold out all over the nation?

People couldn't get it because people loved her lip stick.

well it's good enough for the president. President staff

approved. Well, she didn't wear it at that point. I don't

think. Yeah, it was funny. One of my students said that

Tipper Gore, Al Gore's wife, looked like a blond Monica

Lewinsky. And I looked at her I saw what she was talking

about. So you -- I don't know. All right. I guess you

have to have a certain look to look at politics.

Did you see at the academy awards winner for best actor

invited Monica Lewinsky to join him in England? In England

he was going to take her out. We were in -- I don't know if

I told you this story. We were in Tahoe and we took a trip

to Virginia City on the bus. We were looking for something

to do, and the bus says first time we took a bus trip the

bus stopped off at this house of prostitution ranch whatever

it was called. It wasn't the Mustang Ranch. It's the one

where John Wayne Bobbit works. And they got this whole big

sign. He's the entertainment there. He is the bartender at

this particular ranch. Of course, isn't he the one who all

of a sudden found Christ? No, he wants her back. After she

beat up her mother? He wants to take another stab at it.

Jerry Springer -- she wants. She cut him off well. Bad

lines. I mean you almost say to yourself is it worth

working.

Many people believe the old work ethic which I deal with

in my 8th chapter that hard work -- God rewards you. And

that people who were good are the ones who get the money and

many people in America feel that way. We go to Las Vegas or

Reno and we lose money and we think that God hates us. We

think that we're evil, but when we win, God was on my side.

I feel fulfilled and now of course you know the whole issue

of morality and makes the money is very much depended upon

the media. I mean it's always been to some extent that way

on a minor level, but the stakes are so high especially

during sweeps week. That these perhaps are produced

specifically to grab attention so that they can get their

station to get the better advertising. And that includes

the news broadcast. We've seen the stories to the fact that

news broadcasters are more entertainment and they really are

reporters and those kinds of changes really taken place.

Certainly they argue continuously that they present us the

material that because we're willing to watch it. So we run

to the scene of an accident to view it and they present it

because of that basis. The question is responsibility. Is

that really what they should be doing in leadership? Should

she be playing with our weaknesses? With our inability to

maintain our quote unquote base or instincts and of course

the other question that I touch on in my book is that when

the media plays with our base instincts, does it reduce our

resistance so that our instincts become more base?

Translation, desensitized. But more so, not just

desensitized and I touch on desensatization, I talk about

resistance. All of us who were healthy, knock wood, I'm

healthy, have resistance. It's hard sometimes. I got on my

E-mail yesterday. This, you know, real nice ad for this

pornographic site. Now I'm perverted enough that I want to

go up there, but I dumped it. You know, get rid of this and

I made sure to get it in my trash, fast so my resistance

would be dune. However, what happens when we make these

things more acceptable by showing them? Translation, when

we see violence does it bring down your resistance?

Probably not. We all have strange emotion, kill your

brother, murder your sister, marry your mother, you know,

screw the priest, whatever it is. These things at times go

through our heads. However, the hell this person pushes

them aside and blocks them. And gets upset sometimes and

guilty that they even think with it. The Jefferey Daumer's

and others become unhealthy. This because they can't

resist.

What happens when we see the adds on TV emphasizing

satomasakism or emphasizing violence against women in some

fashion? Does that therefore breakdown our resistance and

make us tend to believe that these things are acceptable?

When pornography shows rape, women being raped as something

they enjoy, does that open the door to the rapist? Does it

make somebody a rapist? No, not you or I into a rapist, but

that ten percent or fifteen percent who were borderline.

What happens to their resistance in society? And therefore

doesn't become the responsibility of the media to try and

cut these things. We hear about it all time but where do

you draw the line?

For example, obviously not everybody watching Taxi was

going to turn into an attempted assassination to please Jodi

Foster as happened. But do you show as occurred awhile back

a TV show where you know a woman gets raped, a girl gets

raped in the shower with a broom stick, and it's all

identified and then the next day some kids try it? Some 12

year olds do it to another 12 year old girl? Why? Well

okay. Maybe, but do you show it at seven o'clock in the

evening when kids are up? Do you have -- do you at least

put parental warning? Is there anything wrong with V chips

so that in some extent there can be certain resistance and

those are the kinds of questions that need to be posed when

it comes to this whole issue of the media.

Most people in their chapters dealing with the media

tend to raise questions that I don't think are as dangerous

to society. Some people do. Does the media control our

political philosophy? Does the government control the

media? Do we control the media? Does the media control

government? Is it the wealthy who were really controlling

what we're thinking through the media? Okay. Those are

questions that definitely the whole sense of controlling

media and that it means and those issues the number of

newspaper the editorials, the liberalism, or the

conservatism, those are debates that appear in political

science text, but from my perspective there's a far more

important issue of our a bitty to critically think of

media.

What could I mean by critical thinking? I define it in

my book. Two ways that I thought were easy. Somebody want

to give me one of the definitions for critical thinking?

No? you should have read the book and certainly doing the

interfaces at least I'm hoping that you did this. How do I

define critical thinking? They're pretty easy. Thinking

about what you think while you're thinking. Good. Thank

you, Karen. Thinking about what you're thinking while

you're thinking. Does anybody remember the other one?

Which probably applies more to the media. Reading between

the lines. And that is the major emphasis of my chapter.

but let's return a little back to where we started those

things in the household that provides you information about

politics. We mention television. We mention newspaper. We

mention the radio. What else? Movies, video games.

Videos. Most people have VCRs or DVDs. How many of you

have DVD players? Two. Three. Yeah, I didn't figure it was

a lot. Four. Yeah the DVD I suspect is especially good for

deaf students in the sense that they have good -- yeah good

caption. How about family friends? Well, I said that those

are animate only. I'm talking about inanimate. What else

is in the household that provides you in your house that

provides you with information? Computer. How? The web

pages that they have. The web pages certainly. E-mails.

Jokes. Yeah a lot of political jokes. Half the jokes I get

are political in one. In fact, more than half. I don't

read most of the them. I get this load of stuff from people

at times that seems to be the biggest thing of E-mail are

the stupid jokes that have been going around for sixty

years. They just keep repeating themselves. I get it from

12 I get the same joke from 12 people. I'm not one for

canned memorized jokes. I like the humor that is

spontaneous. He always gets upset with me because I never

laugh at the jokes he tells me. I laugh at him. He's funny

though. Individually he's very funny that's the point when

he make his comments spontaneously, they are hysterical but

I don't find stuff where somebody repeats some story joke

that everybody else has told is very funny. They're just

not. It's not like the same thing where you're being -- and

using your own sense of humor. I'd rather he used his own

sense of humor because it's much greater. It's not hard when

it comes to him. He's great. Mr. Santa Clause. Yes I've

had an office next to him since I got her. Does he scream

the same words in his office as he does in his class? No.

He does that for impact obviously. In fact he probably

curses less than I do, candidly, out of the class.

What else? E-mail, chat rooms, but you know also with

the computer CD roms. Time magazine -- there's a lot of

things on CD rom today and some of them are sent to you

providing you with information more so politicians give you

their E-mail addresses to contact them. Politicians appear

in chat room situations. Often many politics are brought

onto AOL or other kind of servers where they allow people to

raise questions and ask questions during that time. Probably

most politicians today including locally have web sites

where they will respond to you. Well not necessarily in

that sense but before you where you can get information even

if it's succinct not thorough about their points of view

their position where they stand what issues they're pushing

or what bills they've introduced.

All right. Information is so readily available. You

know, and sometimes I hate going on-line and doing it if you

you've got a computer that's on-line all the time, but I was

easy all over my house in calendars or the date for Easter

next year. And I could not find it. I couldn't find my

world almanac. I'm looking all over the place. My

calendars just didn't have it. Even my calendar on my

computer. So I went up on-line. I went to search and I put

in Easter dates and it was there instantaneously. Late April

23rd the year two thousand. I needed it because when I was

going to run my tournament again for the chess. So the

internet does provide instantaneous information and myself

is political science professor if I need to know certain

things like who is the present whip of the Republicans in

the senate that stuff was very hard to get hold of I'd write

to my senator years ago and you know I'd wait for an answer

or I'd by a book that would take a couple of books to come

that I carry with me now you go up to the web site and it's

there. I just go up to the congressional web site all of

the listing of all of the individuals that are now there.

It is constantly updated. I find it's pretty nice. I went

to Pete Stark's web site last night to look up some of his

views on certain issues and you can instantly access. They

have summaries of all his views on it and that's the kind of

stuff that is there. You can actually tell what your

politicians will do within limitations. But yes, you can

get a feel for what they're doing whether you agree with it

or not and of course it is summarized, but of course it is

there and that's important. And cheap. A lot cheaper than

the mailings that they used to do. To try and influence us

with that information. They still use -- well that's right

before an election. You'd have to wait often before the

election to -- yes they do use their privileges and what is

Franking, (word list) that's the right to free mail?

Franking privilege gives politicians the right to send

these out free through the U.S. mail. if it is pertinent

that's not the word I'm looking for -- if it pertains to

their role in office. It's usually campaign purposes. Well

they often do it for campaign purposes. In fact, he was

sued, Pete Stark, because when his activity was switched he

started sending out the material to what was then Don

Edwards because he knew that was the district that was

voting for him and he was fined for that because it wasn't

his district and he was using his Franking privilege for

somebody else's district because that will be his district.

So, yes. It is often done for that reason. Franking comes

from the first post master general of the colonies Benjamin

Franklin. His name carries on with the franking. His shape

carries on with another invention; the pot belly stove. I'm

just kidding, but he was responsible for the development of

the pot belly stove. And the other invention that he is

well known for besides lightening hitting the key of the

kite -- libraries and hospitals too, but no. One that's

even more important at least from my perspective; bifocals.

He was the first one to put together glasses that you could

see both distance and close.

What else? Well you just gave my one that nobody

mentioned. The mail. U.S. Mail provides us with

information in the household. What else can provide us with

political information? Telephone. The telephone. Yeah.

There's no doubt that people call up to provide you with

information, sometimes in the form of a questionnaire. A

survey, but, yes, not many times most of us don't get those

calls, but I have received them and anybody else ever

receive a political call or asking them to vote for

somebody? It happens, granted not as often as some of the

others.

So there are lots of numerous things around the home

that in a sense help us to identify what we mean by the term

media and it's influence on us. But I'd like to go back to

that theme of my chapter; critical thinking. I mention two

things -- desensitization was sort of the implied. I didn't

define it. The breaking down of resistance. If that's a

real word. Is it on the word list? Desensitization? No.

Breaking down resistance. Another term that I think is

important dealing with my chapter is the issue of moral

indignation. And a couple of other things that tie to

this whole issue from my perspective are the question of

creative and nation without critical thinking because of

what happens through desensatization. Where to start?

Let's start with moral indignation. We live in a world

today of advertising. Advertising attempts to prevent us

from critical thinking because they want to sell us on base

emotions, wants us to buy products and of course that is

carried over to the political atmosphere because most

politicians today hire advertising agencies, the higher they

go in politics the more likely they are to hire actually an

advertising agency who engages both in -- not just PR men.

Not just individuals whose job it is to support. Not just

spin doctors. I use the term spin doctors, but actual

advertising and the agencies often use psychological testing

and control testing to sell their product. And politicians

today are doing tests in ads. And certainly they know the

kind of tests being used.

Perhaps the most popular ad that's often shown is an

emotional impact. That impact was one that helped Lyndon

Johnson get elected. Against Harry Goldwater in 1964. I

almost said -- in 1984. I got to get my dates right here.

The ad had a little blond girl sitting there picking a

flower and an atomic bomb going off destroying everything.

The reason? Because he was accusing Goldwater of being a

war monger and trying to get us into Vietnam and the

danger. Nothing had to be said -- people new. Or another

brilliant campaign by an agency when George Bush ran against

Michael Dukakis they never mentioned the fear of racism, but

they showed a man name Willie Worton, a black man who had

been released on a furlow program in Massachusetts when

Dukakis was governor, although he didn't do the releasing in

the furlow, the fact is that he then went and killed --

committed murder -- he was allowed out and was going to go

back and so it played on the fears of white Americans which

the republicans were appealing to about black crimes. The

study showed it dramatically. They never said it. They

never played with the -- they never said racism, but the

implications were quite obvious and it -- those become

classics of what an advertising agency can too.

Of couse the danger is both sides can do it. And we

lose the ability to think about what the issue really mean

unless we critically think. We lose the ability we stop

thinking -- what people really -- what positions are there.

what do I mean by moral indignation? We get pissed off at

the wrong thing and we become deceived when words have no

meaning we blame the wrong issues. We lose the meaning for

words. Most recently it pissed me off as a critical thinker

as I constantly hear politicians, the president, imply if

not say, that Milslovic and the Serbians are committing

genocide. Genocide is the intentional elimination of a

whole race of people. They are clearing the Albanians out;

granted some people are being murdered. It is a human

tragedy, but it is not genocide. It is not the intentional

of concentration death camps where every Jew was placed into

gas chambers or lined up and shot and pushed into line

pits. This is a different -- but the word creates emotion

and reduces the meaning of genocide. In a sense, it kills

the indignation.

A Well I was going to say how also how advertising gets

involved in the media because I know the Albanians hired one

of best PR firms to represent their side of the story.

Q Interesting. That's why if you -- the Croatians always

did it with the Serbs are stupid and stubborn. Well you

know who found himself in the same position? Bill Gates.

He had spent very little on advertising, very little on PR

people. He had maybe one lobbyist now he's got two hundred

ever since they filed charges. And he was not giving

campaign contributions. What a change.

So yeah I did not know that because it does not surprise

me. Thank you for that input. Um, again, it does show what

we're talking about. The kind of media implications that

can be done through -- shall we say an advertising certain

politically and then we use the words. I get into that we

call double speak. Or Washington speak or Watergate speak.

How words become meaning -- so we didn't become indignant.

They didn't mean anything to us.

People aren't murdered anymore; they're neutralized.

It's just like we don't lose jobs, we are not fired; we are

not unemployed; we are downsized. You don't even by used

cars anymore; preowned. Our words change. Our impressions

visualization changes. Tucson doesn't have pot holes; it

has pavement deficiencies. We don't have budget deficits;

we have short falls. We didn't destroy documents; we deep

6thd them. We didn't break and enter; we entered

surreptitiously for political expediency. And we didn't

invade the island of Granda where the military force the

Caribbean peace force; it's always now a piece keeping force

had an early morning vertical inversion. Now how can

anybody -- to an early morning vertical inversion.

A I have those every ones in awhile.

Q You're hoping. We're talking about dreams, you know,

right now. In fact, sadly to say the indignation and gets

us into another type of thing. The fact is that because

today things are totally shown, we lose the ability of

creativity and that's where I want to get into next time and

talk about your wet dreams. We'll see -- remind me what I'm

starting with on Thursday.
1