Black Friday: A Doomed Tradition?

On the night of Thanksgiving last year, I didn't get a wink of sleep. I did shots of expresso and slapped myself awake every once in a while. When the clock finally struck 3, I threw my caffeinated body into my freezing car and picked up my equally zombie-like friends. A few moments later, we arrived at a local mall, which was already bustling with activity. Finding parking was painful, but we were prepared for this. Black Friday comes just once a year, we told ourselves. It's time to get our game faces on.

According to this CNN article, this yearly tradition is on the brink of extinction. And even worse, getting trampled on by flocks of rowdy, shop-crazy tweens at H&M at 4 in the morning could've all been in vain -- thanks to the ever-becoming trend of online shopping. According to the article, online shopping is not only much more convenient, it's where all the best deals are. And while Black Friday lasts just one day (or in many cases, just a limited span in the wee-hours), online sales aren't tied to specific days. This holiday season, analysts are predicting a 9 to 16 percent increase in online sales compared to a mere 2 to 3 percent increase in real-world spending.

This trend adds to my growing concern that everything is going virtual, and we're going to stop experiencing things in real time. With the Web, the world is filled with numerous opportunities for new interactions, new experiences, new niches, but it's not the same as really being there. Many of my favorite memories come from nights like last Black Friday, when at one point, my friends and I -- delirious from lack of sleep -- were fighting off fellow shoppers with such silly tenacity that we laughed ourselves to tears. And at the end of the shopping frenzy, we'd come out with such proud grins on our ashy faces and dark rings around our eyes. True, the deals found during Black Friday are amazing, but I think that's only half the reason why the sleepless night is be worth it. After all, long-lasting memories aren't made from convenience but from fighting some sort of obstacle.

In just five years, I doubt Black Friday will still be around. We'll one day tell our kids about our crazy Black Friday stories, and they'll just stare back blankly, unable to comprehend a concept as ancient as shopping without the click of a mouse. Soon, everything will be done on the Web. Sure, I'll appreciate the few extra hours of sleep in my warm bed, but I'm definitely going to miss these nights.

Giving Birth is NOT a Community Decision

Here's something crazy: A couple is leaving the fate of their unborn baby to the online community. They created a website that allows anonymous visitors to vote whether they should keep the baby or have an abortion. So far, they've received a whopping 200,000 votes-- 64% says to keep the baby, 36% says to abort the fetus.

On the website, they explain the rationale behind this unconventional approach: They want to illustrate the power of democracy and the impact of an individual's voice on the outcome, very much unlike the democracy of today's politics.

Although I understand what they're trying to do, putting the future of their baby fetus at the mercy of strangers behind computer screens is not only abominable in the moral sense but also evidence of a generation becoming too comfortable and reliant on the integrity of the online community.

I believe that giving birth to a child should be a personal decision between the couple. They know best about their financial and emotional readiness. The decision to keep or abort the child under their personal circumstances should be the result of a deep, thought-out analysis by the mother and father -- It should not be the result of a computed online poll of strangers. Sure, the couple briefs the strangers by summarizing their lives with bulletproofs: their level of education, current occupation, marriage background, parents' level of education (this is relevant...why?), etc., but how do they expect these factoids to provide strangers with enough insight to know better than themselves whether they should keep the child or not?

Yes, the online community is the most diverse forum out there, with people from all sorts of religious and political backgrounds, upbringings and beliefs. It's great for general poll-taking, regarding politics, ethics, etc., but it's not always dependable. It can easily become rigged. It can easily become one-sided, if, hypothetically, a pro-(fill in the blank) finds and circulates the website among its followers, while the con side isn't even aware of the poll's existence. That's just one example. Or, someone could think it'd be funny to vote over and over again against the general current. While this wouldn't have a lasting effect in general polls, in this case it will determine the future of the baby and this couple forever.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not condemning the couple for considering abortion as an open option. Rather, I'm condemning their method of making this decision. This should not be a matter of public discourse but a matter of logical dialogue in a family.

The Kindness of Online Strangers

Check this out. The world is filled with fantastically generous people, and Reddit is their outlet.

Op-Ed: Barack Obama, Our President and Celebrity Friend

With his upcoming special appearance in the Dec. 8 episode of Discovery Channel’s "MythBusters" to promote math and science education, President Barack Obama is making one thing clear: He really likes being counted as “one of us.”

And it’s a good thing.

First there was his appearance last May on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno. Then there was his stint on The View in July, followed by his recent exchanges with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, in which Stewart, at one point, candidly referred to the president as “dude.” He sat down with Rolling Stones magazine last month, and was also interviewed by celebrity MC Ryan Seacrest on the day of the midterm elections.

This is the first time in history that an acting president has so willingly stepped into the pop culture limelight. Critics have been quick to dismiss these acts as degrading, misguided and a waste of time.

Simply put, they’re wrong.

As the face of media transforms, it’s crucial that the communication methods of the president follow suit. Imagine if, in this pop culture-infused digital age, President Obama merely depended on the annual state of the union address and newspaper headlines to reach the American people. That would be just about as effective as delivering a heartfelt speech to a snoozing crowd. It’s outdated and pointless.

It would be misguided to dismiss pop culture as irrelevant because let’s face it: Pop culture is what America pays attention to.

And so, the President of the United States is making leaps and bounds to meet us where the majority of America is: buried headfirst in celebrity culture, the internet and popular TV shows. And there, he delivers his message, promotes his political agenda, and raises awareness about the current state of national affairs.

On the other hand, what about Sarah Palin's new, self-promoting, reality Alaska TV show on TLC? Now that's a different story.

Obama and the White House aren’t the only benefactors of his active participation in pop culture. We are, as well.

It’s like this: The old-fashioned ways of the president’s public dialogue work like a production. It takes months of preparation for a well-equipped, able staff and crew to produce the performance. The hired speechwriter writes pretty words, and the president reads them as his own. It’s a largely contrived process.

On the other hand, the president’s appearances on the Tonight Show, the Daily Show and The View are like improv performances—he comes before the audience, raw and unrehearsed, depending only on his wit as he can only guess how the night will unfold.

This is usually the best indicator of one’s persona, intelligence and capabilities. It forces the subject to be real—and vulnerable—without the layers of formalities and publicists. None of us have forgotten former Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s brilliant and light-shedding interview with Katie Couric back in ‘08, have we?

Obama’s own interview with the quick-witted Stewart was also a tough night filled with hardball questions and a no-nonsense audience. At one point, Stewart asked Obama if he would alter his famous slogan “Yes We Can” to “Yes We Can…Given Certain Conditions”—in tune with the nation’s current political gridlock. Obama stammered in response, “I think what I would say is yes we can, but… but it’s not going to happen overnight.”

That Obama would repeatedly place himself in vulnerable positions like this one shows that he is confident in his policies and in his aptitude as commander-in-chief.

The coming together of pop culture and politics is not a novel concept, but no acting U.S. president before Obama has ever embraced it like he does. And he does it quite well.

Because a drunken voicemail just isn't enough anymore...

Interesting story: Guy gets dumped, posts nude photo of girlfriend on her Facebook wall, changes her password so she can't delete it, and subsequently gets four months' jail time.

Read it here.

Ashby posted the photo in an "irresponsible drunken jealous rage" after the breakup of their five-month relationship, the judge said.

It is believed to be the first time someone has been sentenced for a crime committed using social media under the seldom-used morality and decency section of the Crimes Act.

What a tool.

Lamebook v. Facebook

Oh come on, Facebook. Don't be such a kill joy.

A website called Lamebook.com, which lets users share and mock all kinds of hilarious, silly or ridiculous content from Facebook, is suing the social networking site. Why? Because Facebook, as the arrogant, power-tripping conglomerate that it has become, has repeatedly threatened to sue the parody website for trademark infringement. So the folks at Lamebook.com decided to attack first as a form of defense.

I've been a fan of Lamebook for quite some time, not much as a regular contributor but more as the occasional lurker. The content, usually composed of status updates, comments, interaction between users and profile photos, can be laugh-out-loud funny. I admit, the construed humor is, more often than not, rudimentary -- ranging from really terrible spelling errors to friends burning one another publicly to, my favorite, parents making surprise contributions on their kids' vulgar status updates.

The folks at Facebook have no reason to lose sleep over Lamebook. It is clearly a parody, not a competitor. It does not in any way dilute the Facebook mark nor does it threaten to steal any of its 500 million+ users. It does not even offer the same services: Facebook is a social-networking website (and might I add, the largest one in the world) whereas Lamebook is just a user-generated niche forum.

Please stop power-tripping and leave everyone alone.

Op-Ed: You're Either a Team Player or You're Not

A news organization works like a sailboat. Its employees—from journalists to editors—write, report and edit, contributing to the operation’s smooth sailing. The intricate procedures within the collective operation all fall under the common umbrella of the organization’s standards and ethics. And these are clearly understood by every member, as the direction of the boat has long been established.

But what happens when one particular sailor whips out a pair of oars and starts paddling like hell in the opposite direction?

Such is the case of NPR veteran Juan Williams, who was recently fired for a controversial comment he made on the Fox News program, The O’Reilly Factor. Williams, who has been a Fox News contributor since 1997, admitted to the notoriously conservative host that he gets “worried and nervous” when he sees people in Muslim-garb on an airplane.

Those who are quick to criticize NPR’s decision should think twice, as his anti-Muslim comment was not the sole reason behind the organization’s seemingly swift termination of his contract. This event was actually the last draw. For example, Williams said last year on Fox that Michelle Obama has “got this ‘Stokely Carmichael in a dress’ thing going,” alluding to a leader of the black power movement of the 1960s.

One should not mistaken this NPR-Williams affair to be an issue of First Amendment rights of a matter of censorship. It was a matter of compatibility—or lack thereof.

Yes, journalists are people, too. They are entitled to their own judgment, values, opinions and prejudices. At the same time, journalists differ from everyday citizens because their values reflect not only their own but those of their news organizations. When these ideologies conflict in direction with that of the collective operation, it’s not necessarily taboo nor is it the end of a career. It’s a matter of conflict of interest, a conflict in direction. It’s just time to find a new boat.

Which is exactly what Williams did. He accepted a lucrative 3-year contract with Fox News immediately after his ties with NPR were cut.

This incident is not unique in the least. Earlier this month, Rick Sanchez made a controversial comment on a radio show, calling Jon Stewart a “bigot” and saying that Jewish people run CNN and all the other networks. He was subsequently fired from CNN. Octavia Nasr, a then-CNN senior editor for middle-east affairs, was fired for sending out a tweet that expressed reverence for a former leader of Hezbollah, an organization that the U.S. government designated as a terrorist group.

Yes, these statements may not have been politically correct, but that was not the primary reason for these journalists’ termination from their positions.

The success of news organizations largely derives from the trust and support from its readership. That readership is, more often than not, those whose values and political affinities match those of the publication. So when one member puts the entire operation in jeopardy with a comment that is out of line with the organization’s trusted and established standards, it’s a sensible move to let him or her go.

It may be a different story if the crew, as a democratic body, decides to shift gears and change directions. As long as that isn’t the case, however, the boat must keep on sailing towards its pre-established destination, even if the extraneous few must be left behind.