Photos: Boston Fourth of July, 2005

Boston mayor Thomas Menino and representatives of the US Military honored revolutionary leaders in the Granary Burial Ground in Boston, Massachusetts on 4-July-2005

TORONTO, ONTARIO - This week's update to my photo site again dives into the archives to feature the morning of the 4th of July, 2005 in Boston, Massachusetts. As occurs each year in Boston, a parade started at City Hall, honored revolutionary leaders buried in the Granary at their grave sites, continued to the Old State House for a reading of the Declaration of Independence, and then proceeded to Faneuil Hall for more speeches, finishing about the time the USS Constitution started its turnaround cruise to Fort Independence.

Radio Pick: As It Happens Hockey Prank

TORONTO, ONTARIO - I can't let the week of April Fool's Day go without citing an on-air prank as my radio pick of the week. For the most part, I was disappointed with the April Fool's stories I heard on the radio this year. However, for the second straight year, the CBC's As It Happens pulled off a very good one. After all the talk about "pansification" of hockey this year and admonitions on the show that they were unable to run their intended April Fool's prank because of recent news stories related to the environment, their story on the banning of away-team jerseys in the National Hockey League was very nicely done, about half-way through the 24-minute second segment of the show. As always, the follow-up on the show was almost better than the original joke, the second story in the 24-minute second segment the following day.

Listen to streaming Windows Media of As It Happens "Hockey Jerseys", and listen to streaming Windows Media of follow up to As It Happens "Hockey Jerseys"

Heritage: No Generation Gap in Swansea

George Jardine presented to the Swansea Historical Society with musical accompaniment from Flo Thompson on 1-April-2009

TORONTO, ONTARIO - I have to admit that I wasn't especially looking forward to this month's Swansea Historical Society meeting. The newsletter stated that George E. Jardine would be speaking about his book, "Becoming Me: As I Think It Happened, Growing Up in West Toronto in the Mid-Twentieth Century". I figured I might pick up a few historical tidbits, but would likely have a hard time relating to his stories, since I am only a recent arrival in Toronto.

Yet, as Jardine started to read some excerpts from his memoir, I did start to find some things I could relate to. In the first section of his presentation, he spoke of various early experiences, including his time spent listening to the radio for entertainment and of the value of radio drama. When he broke to take comments and solicit the reminiscence of others in the audience, I was surprised to find everyone focus on the radio topic, speaking of their favorite shows and sharing how they still listened to such shows. It is no wonder my favorite Imagination Theater radio show is so popular--just about every person in the room had a favorite radio drama.


George Jardine spoke about his experiences growing up in West Toronto to the Swansea Historical Society on 1-April-2009

During his second section, he spoke of various activities around West Toronto including going to the West Toronto train station and the various places he could go on a day trip from Toronto by train in that era. Again, that was the aspect that the audience latched on to--the various places they had gone by train, the punctuality of the trains of the era, and how they missed that form of public transportation. Clearly, the people in this room thought about the same way I did about the utility of railroads as transportation!

After a break for a sing-a-long of "No Man Is An Island" based on the John Donne poem, Jardine continued into other portions of his life, including some opinions based on his life experiences. None of it drew the kind of audience response that radio dramas and railroad sections had done.


The audience at the Swansea Historical Society rose to sing along with speaker and author George Jardine on 1-April-2009

There may be a generation gap between many other members of the Swansea Historical Society and me, but there's no generation gap in our attitudes about radio and railroads, and it took George Jardine's presentation to make that clear.

Media: More on the Future of Journalism

TORONTO, ONTARIO - Earlier this month, the Project for Excellence in Journalism released its annual state of the media analysis, including a section on newspapers. Considering that this report amounts to some of the best minds in the industry trying to chart out a future, it's pretty sobering that the suggestions for the future of newspapers as summarized in a Christian Science Monitor article don't seem to hold much promise--and I mean that even in terms of news organizations, not just physical newspapers.

The first idea is one I have advocated for both newspapers and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation--creating non-profit foundations, like ProPublica, to produce high-quality news. However, they point out that it is unlikely that there is enough funding to become a general ownership model. It's hard to argue with that assertion, though maybe it can save a few newspaper organizations as they turn into general journalism organizations.

The other ideas? Adopt the cable model, in which a fee to news producers is built into monthly Internet-access fees consumers already pay. I like this one, but I see only one way to administer it--as a tax. That will never fly in the United States, so unless someone figures out a better way to administer that idea, I'm afraid an idea that makes a lot of sense will be stillborn.

Next, build online retail malls within news sites to create a local search network for small businesses and link them directly with customers. I like this one as well, but I don't see how if the current advertising-supported methods are failing that this one will bring enough additional revenue to work, either.

Third, develop subscription-based niche products for elite professional audiences, which have already proved to be a profitable growth area in journalism. Clearly, this may work for some publications, but it's hardly a recipe for providing general news.

Finally, collaborate to challenge aggregators, especially Google, to start sharing more revenue. I don't see this happening. There are too many options for news collection (say, Al Jazeera for national news in the United States, which as a reminder is government-funded) for there for be any incentive for the aggregator to do this--and some have said as much.

Interestingly, my other standing idea, an official fourth estate funded by government is not listed as an option for newspaper organizations, which may say more about the mind-set of the United States than it does about the actual practicality of the idea. Indeed, it seems to be so far removed from what is considered acceptable in the United States that it isn't even worth mentioning and rejecting. Considering the lack of other options, I am reaching the conclusion that this must change and the idea must be taken seriously.

Culture: April Fool's Day 1994

TORONTO, ONTARIO - Those that knew me during my undergraduate years know what has to be posted on this day. Throughout my freshman year, during dorm meetings I would provide an oral summary of the news of the week for people who didn't bother to read the newspaper or otherwise stay informed about what was happening beyond our campus. The first dorm meeting after spring break just happened to fall shortly before April Fool's Day, prompting me to take advantage of the situation, hoping to make a point that people didn't question my credibility enough. Most sound clips had been recorded since the last report (a few were from somewhat earlier in the year), but obviously were taken way out of context. A transcript of the report follows:

"There was quite a bit of discussion between the RAs and I about what kind of report I should give: a summary of spring break news, just the last week, or whatever. They basically gave me a time constraint and I was going to put it to a vote, but clearly...the events of earlier today just made it really...obvious what I should report. I'll try to stay positive. On the bright side, we do have a new news theme."

[News theme: "Would I lie to you?..."]

"The top story...clearly, today occurred just this evening. President Clinton was giving a speech in his home state on health care...Perhaps the best way to do this is to play the live coverage on NPR:"

[Clip from state of the union: "For too many families, even with both parents working, the American Dream has been slipping away. In 1992, the American people demanded that we change. A year ago I asked all of you to join me in accepting the responsibility for the future of our country." Clip turns to gunshots, taken from the Johnannesburg riots earlier that week.]

"Clearly, there were multiple gunshots. Apparently, the first did not hit Clinton, but later ones did...he was transported to a Little Rock Hospital where vice president Al Gore gave a press conference about half an hour after the incident, naming a prosecutor to look in to the shooting:"

[Clip on Whitewater taken from the January 9th Face the Nation program: "He's a career prosecutor, an official in the justice department, who is a Republican incidentally, who came in on the Nixon and Ford administrations; he's a man of unquestioned integrity, Donald McKay, who came back as part of the Bush justice department. He's being given every single shred of information about this. Uh, there has been no specific allegation of criminal wrongdoing. What there has been is a series of political attacks. Frankly, you know, the opposition has watched this past year as President Clinton has done everything right, put our country back on the right track; economic indicators are up; the economy is recovering. They attacked his policies all year long, to no effect. I think there's a little bit of political panic about the fact that everything's going so well. So, they're unleashing these attacks on him."]

"It should be noted that there is NO evidence that the Republicans were involved in this attack....What vice-president Gore didn't know at the time was that Clinton would die as a result of his wound. That occurred at 8:46 pm tonight. However, the man you just heard, Al Gore, is not president of the United States. The big news last week that you may have heard about was that the constitution was amended by Congress so that first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton was first in line, so she has been sworn in as president. Here's what Al Gore had to say about that:"

[Clip from same interview: "So, it seems to me that it's politics."]

"Tributes are already coming in. Here's attorney general Janet Reno. I've edited out some tears:"

[Clip from her announcement of the resignation of William Hubbel from the March 14th All Things Considered: "But of the former I can say, unequivocally, he gave fully of himself to make America a better place, and I'm going to miss him."]

"And Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones:"

[Clip from press conference announcing the end of coach Jimmy Johnson's contract: "He has done everything in his power, and he has done it successfully."]

"I apologize for placing this last, but it came over the radio late. Here's the president's last words, recorded in the hospital."

[Clip from the Clinton Whitewater press conference as reported on the MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour on March 15th: "No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no!"]

"Uh...there is one other story I should mention, since we are students. Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders announced this week cigarettes will be banned as a result of nicotene being declared a controlled substance. So, stock up now before June 1st, because they'll be gone. Here's her explanation from last week's Face the Nation program with Bob Schieffer:"

[Actual clip of Elders: "Bob, I feel that there is much evidence to say that nicotene is a drug. We've considered nicotene a drug for a very long time. And I think the way the FDA classifies drugs is based on their intended use. So, if they're just using what's in cigarettes already, and what comes in the form that they use, I think that's how they've escaped regulation."]

"In light of the other stories, I don't think a kicker would be appropriate tonight. But, read your e-mail for real news tonight, and remember, April Fool's Day is just around the corner."

[End news theme.]

Apparently the performance was too good, as people took it seriously, and some left the room before it became obvious that that the reports were not accurate. A passionate war of e-mails started on the dorm list. A number of people defended my actions and an apology that was issued that evening, but an equal number were upset and questioned the sincerity of the apology. That chain seemed to end a couple days later when a forged e-mail from "president@whitehouse.gov" issued a pardon for my actions. However, not until years later did I find out that an application had been filed based on Stanford's Fundamental Standard to have me expelled from the university, and only the withdrawal of faculty sponsorship of that application had prevented it from reaching then-Provost Condoleezza Rice's desk for action. For the remainder of my time at Stanford, my April Fool's editions featured only true stories--very weird true stories, but true stories nonetheless.

Media: Why I Don't Twitter (Much)

TORONTO, ONTARIO - A friend once told me that he didn't think podcasting was such a big deal, because if you could download the files, then subscribing to a podcast was just a different interface to do something that was already possible. That was largely true for engineers like my friend and me, since we did download MP3's and other sound files of programs before podcasting had been invented. However, my answer to him was that the new interfaces available in iTunes and other programs designed for receiving podcasts were so easy that people who previously didn't know how to download files could have them automatically delivered to their computers. Indeed, podcasting has now allowed millions of people that previously would not have listened to all kinds of programming to listen at their leisure. The phenomenon even prompted me to write on this blog about people effectively becoming their own radio program directors using podcasts.

Twitter is a similar kind of advance. It was already possible to set up a mailing list to reach a group of people via e-mail (in fact, it's been possible almost since the inception of the Internet), and if those recipients had a "smart" phone, they could receive those messages on their mobile device rather than just via e-mail. (Similarly, properly equipped individuals could send to their lists from a mobile device.) Twitter just makes it orders of magnitude easier, especially from a subscriber's point of view. Managing whether one wants to "follow" the "tweets" or messages from a given person is almost trivial using the Twitter interface. The ease of use of the interface is why Twitter has become the hottest thing in technology in 2009, with even National Public Radio's 92-year old Daniel Schorr sending "tweets" (albeit reportedly with help).

Besides the interface, the other distinguishing characteristic of Twitter is that messages are limited to 140 characters. Some people consider it a challenge to write something meaningful in 140 characters, but in general I consider it hopeless. Most of the time, I probably don't provide enough context and explanation for my ideas in this blog--trying to express such ideas in 140 characters is essentially impossible. Markos Moulitsas tried about a week ago, tweeting "Geithner is starting to look like Obama's Rumsfeld." If there was every anything that needed a full essay expanding an idea, it was that one. As talk show host Dave Ross pointed out, his next tweet three hours later was "At park, my 2yo is beating up on 5yos. She doesn't take crap from anyone. My 5yo, on the other hand, gets beat up"--which clearly didn't need more explanation, but nobody outside of his family really needed to hear about.

I see the point of Twitter in following a breaking event--getting the perspective of someone watching a sporting event, for example. Tweeting that you are okay after a major earthquake might be an efficient way to avoid having to call all your friends and relatives. If following a steam train to take pictures of it, following someone tweeting the location of the train would be useful. My life simply doesn't have those kinds of events going on very often, so this blog makes much more sense as a forum to share with the world.

So, technically, I'm on Twitter. But, unless there's some sort of real-time event going on, don't expect me to be sending tweets--or following anyone. And, remember, you can subscribe to this blog using a RSS feed, if you are so inclined--that will provide far more information than following me on Twitter.

Economics: Why Would One Go Into Science?

TORONTO, ONTARIO - Recently in various media, Roche's head of global pharma research, Lee E. Babiss, has been quoted as to why the Swiss-based pharmaceutical company has opened an R&D center in China. In the United States and Europe, Babiss has stated, "many kids are not choosing to go into sciences. That is the primary reason we went to China. So many of the young people we were hiring were from China, so we thought 'Why should they have to come to us? Let's go to them instead.'"

Roche happens to be one of the world's large corporations that I actually have reasonable respect for after seeing how they treated their technical employees at their headquarters site in Basel, Switzerland and in Nutley, New Jersey, and how they handled the swallowing of Syntex in California. They're not perfect, but I think they have their priorities better placed than most international corporations with more than 10,000 employees. So, when Roche implies that they are not finding talent in the United States and Europe, I take that statement at face value.

There really should be no surprise about the statement. Most of the most intelligent people I know did not go into science or engineering, or got out of those fields as quickly as possible. In the group of twelve people that graduated in my class of chemical engineers at the undergraduate level, only three of us planned to stay in the field. (If someone else ultimately did, I've lost touch with them and don't know about it.) Of those three, one went into academia and remains in research, one went straight into industry and rapidly transitioned into product management, and I did a graduate degree and went into industry, into a career track like one that Babiss claimed was not often being chosen. Notably, two of the three of us in the group choosing to pursue the field were in the bottom quartile of the class. So, less than one-fifth of the class even tried to make a career out of the field, mostly from the group of weaker students, and only one remains employed--I'm looking for new career.

What did everybody else do? A smattering pursued eclectic dreams like sailing and made a career out of those, but just about everyone in the top two quartiles intended to go to business school or directly into financial fields, and near as I can tell have been very successful in doing so. At the graduate level, the pattern of my colleagues was similar. There was a greater percentage intending to stay in academia that have done so, but again many of the top students simply used their chemical engineering degrees as a way into the financial industry, with a good portion also heading into consulting or other business-related fields successfully. The exact pattern that Roche was seeing, that the best and brightest don't go into technical jobs in industry, was clearly there.

It's not hard to see why. While science and engineering salaries may certainly be higher than the national average, they are way below the compensation packages available to investment bankers, business school graduates or in management. There is little room for advancement in technical positions other than going into management. What's worse, people running the companies view their technical employees strictly as expenses--not as resources, since those in research and development (R&D) technically aren't making anything. When demands come for greater return on investment--whether for corporate survival during a recession or just from investors in boom times--it is easy to justify cutting the expensive R&D employees, and the jobs disappear entirely, or at least get moved to China or India where they can be done less expensively.

Some of the people I know that went into the financial industry or to business school are also out of work in this economy, but they have financial reserves that are five to ten times what mine were when my last job ended and they can live off the interest from their wealth even at current interest rates. Those that went into academia are all employed, if blocked from advancement in the current conditions. They will be okay. Clearly, the people that made the decisions to go into finance, business, or academia made smart decisions.

Meanwhile, those of us that tried to become the R&D workers that Roche claims it can't find in the United States and Europe have been laid off and some of us may never work in the industry again. Is there any wonder that "many kids are not choosing to go into sciences?" Taking a rational view of the job world, why would they?