Don't blame AIG

As the US public collectively collects its breath from all the huffing and puffing over the news that AIG was giving bonuses to the same executives that dragged the company into the ground, bringing along the US economy with it, it's important to remember who is tresponsible in this mess.

For the most part in this country, companies follow the law. Whether its labor laws, tax laws or "Hey, you shouldn't pay women less than men" laws. They do so because generally its more cost efficient to follow the law rather than try to make a buck or two breaking the law. Sure there are the occasions when companies try to skirt the law, like with the cases when Wal-Mart was forcing employees to work off the clock or industrial companies trying to get around environmental laws. But for the most part, following laws saves companies more money than they would make by breaking them. 

So when a company does something that pisses you off, that you think is unfair and unjust, blame the folks who make the laws. In following the laws, companies will just do the bare minimum to get by - i.e. minimum wage, insurance and privacy rights. So, when AIG decided to pay out these bonuses, the law was on its side. They had the right. I have found that when companies are accused of wrongdoing, there is a law protecting them from their actions. Companies are not going to do anything more than they are legally obligated to, they should but there is no bottomline incentive. 

Laws in this country so heavily company/business/corporate friendly. Companies hire armies of lobbysts and lawyers to ensure that the law is on their side. It's not fair, but do you expect anything less from our elected officials? 

Now, we could try to pinpoint the blame on the White House for not foreseeing said bonuses and denying companies who received bailout money to pay them or Congress, who approved loopholes, giving companies AIG the legal way to allocate these bonuses. 

I have to admit that I too got caught up in the ire over the bonuses but after I cooled off and reminded myself that the $164 million or so represented less than 1/10 of 1 percent of the total bailout money AIG has received. But I'm not so sure all this rage is constructive toward the bigger picture - fixing this economy. I can't even start on how we do that. 

IDing Rihanna

For the most part, journalists are godless pinko commies. But most journalists cherish and honor their code of ethics. I have worked for five newspapers and at one I was the crime reporter. There, it was routine for me to do stories about domestic abuse and sexual violence. In every case, I and the newspaper, protected the identity of the reported victim. Newspapers do this because of the stigma attached to victims of domestic abuse and sexual violence.

I only bring this up because in all of the Chris Brown stories, none of the news outlets have shied away publicly identifying singer Rihanna as the victim in this case. Do anchors and reporters think that because she is a public figure that allows them to get away from the responsibility of naming her as the alleged victim?

One of the pillars of journalistic ethics is minimizing harm. Are journalists doing that in this case? Though it's probably safe to assume Rihanna is the alleged victim here but how did reporters source this? Did the cops release her name in documents? It's always been my experience that victims of abuse are named Jane or Jon Doe until court proceedings. Apparently in this case, in the police complaint, the alleged victim is identified as Robyn F. Rihanna's real name is Robyn Rihanna Fenty. Still, the media has an obligation to the alleged victim to keep her name from news reports. I'm not worried so much about this case since most of the public familiar with the couple probably correctly assumed who the victim was before the name was released but what if news outlets apply the same rules to private couples and "real" people in "real" communities?

Why don't standard journalism ethics apply when it comes to celebrity coverage?

Cheap shoes

Looking at myself in the bathroom mirror

I need a haircut but doesn't matter today

Not even bothering with a shave

Where I'm headed I'm not expecting to pose for any group shots

Sitting at the edge of my makeshift bed

Trying to collect enough momentum to get through today

I put put my plastic Payless shoes over my mix-matched black socks

The cheap shoes will have finished their sole purpose after today and no one is going to be looking at my socks

Will have to use my mind as a shutter today because none of this will be remembered on cellulose

My jacket still carries dust from its last funeral

Meant to get it cleaned by didn't plan on wearing it to another one quite so soon

None of this matter because no one takes pictures at funerals

I used to think I was two inches too short from being content with life

Now after today, I can add I'm short a brother to say the same