Kent Ninomiya news - Articles - Zimbio

Oil Culture Collapse - Kent Ninomiya

Sat, 19 Apr 2008 23:51:42 -0700

by Kent Ninomiya

We are in trouble. Really, really big trouble. Monster trouble that few of us think much about. It's all about oil. That stuff that used to shoot out of the ground is getting harder and harder to find, pump and refine while the demand increases by the day. Most people glaze over when the subject is raised. Our "oil culture" has been around all our lives. Since the 1970's we've been inundated with stories of gloom and doom, yet the oil still flows. Sure we pay more for gas and we gripe about it, but we still fill up our gas guzzling SUV's and drive around the block to buy a quart of milk. It's like we are in a societal state of denial. Denial of what you ask? Denial of these simple truths.

1) There is only so much oil in the ground. We are getting better and better at extracting it but someday it will run out.
2) Demand is exploding. Not just in the west but also China and India with more than 2 billion people between them. The International Energy Agency says oil consumption will skyrocket 35 percent by 2030! That will require an additional 11 billion barrels of oil every year! This isn't just gasoline for our cars. It impacts airplanes, electricity production and manufactured goods. Any economist will tell you that when you have a dwindling supply and hefty demand you get higher prices.
3) With the rising price of oil comes the rising price of everything. Just about every person on Earth needs oil to get anywhere. Just about every product you consume got to you on a truck, train or plane using oil. Just about every service you require needs oil to provide it. That means everything gets more expensive when oil gets more expensive.

Now visualize a world where you just can't get your hands on any oil at any price. That means prices of everything will skyrocket. People wont be able to get to work to make money to buy things that wont get to them anyway because there is no oil to ship the stuff around the world. Economies will collapse followed by societies, cultures and civilizations. Is this an exaggeration? Not really.

So how did we get in such a mess? About a century ago a relatively small group of people saw big bucks in oil. It improved human standard of living in ways we couldn't imagine before. Suddenly we could travel around the world, get exotic items from just about anywhere, and do away with countless age old limitations involving distance. A steady stream of cheap gas fed our habit until it was all we knew. Growing up in the suburbs, getting your own car as a teenager, hitting the highway as an expression of freedom... all became part of our culture. It is now who we are. Asking us to give it up is asking us to deny who we are.

We've known for a long time that oil pollutes the planet and that we would someday run out. Yet we have done remarkably little about that. Technology for wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, tidal and other alternative energy sources have been around longer than oil in some cases. So why have we not done more to switch to those sources as we face our own demise with the end of oil? Conspiracy theorists will tell you the oil barons squashed alternative fuel technology to stay in business. While this may be somewhat true, it doesn't entirely explain how an entire species would buy into an oil habit that everyone agrees we will eventually have to go cold turkey with.

The answer is that oil was easy. Running out of it and the damage it did to Earth was a future generation's problem. We just didn't care enough to do something about it. Well... now we are starting to. We might not run out of oil in our lifetimes but we will certainly suffer for it. The pain we feel now paying higher prices is just the beginning. The strain on our currency, supply chain and way of life will become more and more pronounced. Larger and larger chunks of our household budgets will go straight to the oil industry. Care free days of driving to the store to buy the latest fashions or stock up at the supermarket are disappearing. What will happen to a society that defines itself by what it does with its cars? We shall see.

*** Kent Ninomiya ***

The Race Card - Kent Ninomiya

Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:46:40 -0700

Since when does something someone else says automatically mean you endorse it? Since when do you have to agree with everything an authority figure believes in order to respect him? Since when does a stupid statement another person makes reflect on you?

All of us have friends and relatives who have beliefs different than our own. Think of all the elders, teachers, preachers, and role models you know. Do you agree with each and every thing that they all say? Of course not, but that doesn't mean they aren't important influences in your life.

Indeed, that is what we are supposed to do in life. We are influenced by others. We adopt beliefs we agree with and reject those we oppose. So why is Barack Obama being blamed for Reverend Jerimiah Wright's inflamatory statements? If you listen to someone making anti-American statements does that make you anti-American? Of course not. Obama's statement that he could no more disown his long time pastor than he could his racist grandmother is reasonable. Most of us can relate to that.

That's what makes Hillary Clinton's comments all the more disturbing. After staying out of the fray for a week enjoying the heat focused on Obama, Clinton decides to chime in on Rev. Wright. Could it be because she was caught exhaggerating the danger she faced during a visit to Bosnia? Clinton now says she would have disowned Wright. It guaranteed the issue would stay in the news another day and turn the focus back on Obama.

As strange as it might sound, Clinton is playing the race card. Obama enjoys wide support among white voters who see him as an unthreatning black man. The Rev Wright issue plants seeds of doubt in the minds of many white voters. Could Obama really be a radical black activist in politically correct clothing? Clinton would love for voters to think so.

I am disillusioned with the Clintons. I bring Bill into the equation because he is on TV every day as the blunt instrument of Hillary's campaign. The two are politically entwined and of like mind. That's a fact on the record, not my opinion. Throughout the Bill Clinton presidency they were outspoken advocates for equal rights. I remember doing a story about Bill being named the first "black" president for his tireless work for the African American community. However POWER seems to be a more tempting motivation for the Clintons. They are proving they are willing to sacrifice some of their core values just to get elected. Not only are they standing by while a black man is unfairly maligned, they are actively exploiting latent racist fears among white voters for their political advantage.

If Hillary Clinton suggests that Obama should be held accountable for Reverend Wright's comments then she should be held accountable for Geraldine Ferraro's comments. To suggest that Obama has it easy as a candidate because he's a black man is the height of idiocy. Since when do black men get anything easy in our society? If it was true, then we should have had lots of black male presidents by now. You can't have it both ways Hillary. Politics is a nasty game with few rules, but going to the racial game when you're a woman is a new low. It plays prejudices off of prejudices. A true advocate for civil rights speaks out against bias in all forms at all times. There is no free pass for presidential elections.

Kent Ninomiya

Cellular Phone Scam

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:51:34 -0700

How many cellular phones have you owned in your lifetime? If you're like me you have no idea. When I got my first cell phone in the early 1990's it was the size of a brick, cost $500 and the calls cost 75 cents per minute. I felt cool carrying it around but was afraid to make calls fearing an outrageous bill. Fast forward a decade and a half and cell phones are like pants. Quite literally everyone has them. In fact I don't know a single person past puberty who doesn't have one. The once pricey phones are now given away "free" when you sign a contract and call minutes are conveniently packaged in monthly bundles for you. It would seem that we've made progress with cellular phones... but have we? Sure they're smaller and do cooler things, but we are paying more than we ever realized we would for something nearly all of us didn't have nor need 20 years ago. Cell phones are now a necessity of life. Even the eccentric families who don't have TV's have cell phones. The cellular phone companies realized that the key to raking in money was volume. Like the drug dealer on the corner, they started giving away the phones for "free" knowing you would be back for more and willing to pay for it. You see... cell phones are every bit as addictive as drugs and much harder to quit. You are encouraged to use them more and more with the minute bundles. When you don't think about the minutes that are ticking away, it's easy to forget you're paying extra for the convenience of a cell phone. Before you know it, a family is paying more than one hundred dollars a month on a cell phone bill. Multiply that by, well everybody, and you have a very lucrative business. Now the only thing the cell phone companies have left to do is fight over market share. They fight hard over that too. Once you are on the hook for a contract you can't get out without paying an outrageous penalty. Have you ever noticed that the cell companies push two year contracts but the free or discounted phone they gave you only lasts about a year and a half? It has happened to me and countless others I know more times than we can remember. When you call to complain they tell you the warranty expired at a year but they would be happy to give you a brand new phone... IF you sign a brand new 2 year contract. THIS IS THE SCAM! It is my hypothesis that the phones are deliberately designed to last less than two years so the cellular phone companies can trap you into renewing your contract. What do you think? Kent Ninomiya

Correct ID - Kent Ninomiya

Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:17:58 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - You can never be too sure when it comes to correctly identifying the people we show on the air. The history of broadcasting is full of examples of botched identifications. Remember the taxi driver identified as a terrorist on network news because he had the same name? Who knew Mohammad was a common name in the Middle East? The latest example of a mix up comes from Colorado. Take a look at these two gentlemen. The one on the left is Representative Terrance Carroll, a member of the Colorado legislature. His picture appeared twice on over the shoulder graphic on a Colorado morning news broadcast. The problem... the story was actually about the election of Colorado's first black Senate President Senator Peter Groff. He's the guy on the right. What compounds this error is the fact that there are exactly two African Americans in the Colorado legislature. You would think journalists at the station would know who they are. Groff made a joke about the mistake saying "There are two African-American males (in the legislature), so they had a 50-50 shot." While no one was gravely harmed by this mix up, don't allow that to minimize the significance. What if the story was about a criminal charge, or victim, or terrorism? Lives can be ruined and lawsuits filed over innocent mistakes. It is up to everyone in the newsroom to check, double check, and triple check facts and photos. How many people must have seen that incorrect graphic before it was pulled from the air? Someone needed to speak up. Once I had a graphic pulled seconds before it aired because it spelled the capital of South Korea as "Sole." How stupid would I have looked if that got on the air? Kent Ninomiya

Are the Remarks Offensive? - Kent Ninomiya

Wed, 9 Jan 2008 11:42:21 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - Should someone lose their job and career for saying the wrong thing? Is it right that years of unblemished service be wiped out by a single off hand comment? The answer is... it depends. Last Friday, Golf Channel anchor Kelly Tilghman said young pro golfers trying to catch up to Tiger Woods should "lynch him in a back alley." Naturally this comment sparked outrage since Tiger Woods is part African American. The anger further intensified as Tilghman was allowed to appear on the air all day Saturday as if nothing happened. She issued an on-air apology Sunday and said he apologized directly to Tiger Woods, however she remained on the air that day. The Golf Channel issued a statement saying "we regret if any viewers were offended by Kelly's choice of words."
Tiger Woods is apparently taking the high road and not making an issue out of it. Woods' agent is quotes as saying "It is a complete non-issue. Kelly and Tiger are friends. It might have been a poor choice of words, but there was absolutely no ill intent whatsoever."

It is entirely reasonable to assume that Tilghman did not mean to offend anyone and is not a racist. It was most likely a slip of the tongue and she did not realize the context of the word "lynch" when she said it. So then, what should be her "punishment" if anything? The Golf Channel is obviously concentrating on intent. Since she has no ill will then it's a simple matter of apologizing. The fact that their viewer base is primarily white and not overall offended by her remark anyway also limits their motivation to dole out any punishment. To some this makes the Golf Channel seem apathetic and racist. Other groups out there are horribly offended and want Tilghman's head. It doesn't matter to them that Woods himself says he's not offended and is willing to drop the matter. They want to make an example out of Tilghman as if punishing her will stop others from making slips of the tongue in the future.

I have worked in television for more than 20 years now. Many comments have passed my lips that came out differently than I intended them. When you talk for a living on live television you sometimes say stupid and inadvertently offensive things without realizing it. Is that a punishable offense? One time in San Francisco I was chatting on air with my co anchor about a man who found several stolen Oscar statues in a trash dumpster. His reward for returning them was an invitation to the Academy Awards ceremony in the next day or two. I commented that I hoped he had time to find something nice to wear since the Academy Awards are all about what people are wearing. The man happened to be African American. One viewer was greatly offended by my comment and wrote a letter accusing me of being a blatant racist. He said I claimed African Americans are too poor and stupid to dress themselves. I have quite honestly never had that thought in my life and was not thinking about the man's race at all when making the comment. I was talking about clothes. Despite this the viewer was irate. I personally expressed my regret to the viewer if my comments offended him and explained that I did not mean what he believed I did. It did not satisfy him and he continued to be angry and convinced I was a racist. Nothing I could say or do would satisfy him. He just wanted to be offended.

I have also been on the other side of misspoken words. I was hired to be a primary anchor at a television station in Minneapolis and partnered with an African American woman. The general manager who hired me was a visionary. He was willing to create an all minority main anchor team in an overwhelmingly white market. When asked about this, he said when it comes to anchors it didn't matter the color of their skin or the "slant" of their eyes. Columnists and Asian American groups around the country took it upon themselves to be offended by the "slant" comment. Some called for the general manager's firing. They didn't bother to ask me if I was offended. I wasn't. I knew this man to be honorable and brave. He took a huge risk hiring me and was in no way a racist. His words came out wrong. That's all. The story diminished what should have been a hugely positive story about the landmark all minority anchor team in Minnesota. Those who were so offended missed an opportunity to focus on a positive accomplishment by being petty and negative.

The bottom line here is that words are powerful, but they're just words. A sum of a person's character and accomplishments can not be reduced to a single inadvertent comment no matter what it is. If there's a pattern of offensive behavior or words, that's different. If it's a single off hand statement then it should be judged in the context under which it is said. Making a big deal about an innocent statement harms the movement for equality. If the mainstream sees minorities as over sensitive and unreasonable then they will ignore legitimate complaints. Likewise, the mainstream needs to understand that offensive comments do harm us all and use these incidents as opportunities to focus on removing them from our lexicon. There is work to do on both sides. Kent Ninomiya

He said She said

Sat, 12 Apr 2008 23:29:06 -0700

by Kent Ninomiya -

How sad is it when candidates for President of the United States of America reduce the election to a "he said she said" worthy of an elementary school student council race. Hillary Clinton wants to be president so bad, she is eager to take a comment made by Barack Obama out of context and suggest it makes him unworthy of being commander in chief. John McCain piled on, agreeing with Clinton. Last Sunday, Obama made private comments at a San Francisco fundraiser. He was trying to explain why it's so hard to win over some working-class voters because they are frustrated by economic conditions. Obama said, "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Clinton now says Obama is "elitist and out of touch" because he went to Harvard. Never mind she went to Yale law school. She isn't arguing that there was something inherently inaccurate in his statement, only that he is acting superior to working class voters so is somehow unworthy of the presidency. Let me be clear. If Obama was reacting this way to a Clinton statement I would be calling him on it as well. My only point here is that this election isn't about issues, it's about perceptions. While it can be argued that all elections are about perceptions, that doesn't mean they should be. The media works in perceptions. Candidates should focus on issues. When a candidate openly seeks votes by reenforcing a false perception, it crosses the line. It's the same thing Clinton did on the race issue involving Obama's former pastor. At this point it's obvious Clinton will say just about anything to get votes, regardless of whether it is about a legitimate issue or not. While that may get her some votes (and the jury is still out on that) it's costing her a lot of respect points with people who thought she cared. *** Kent Ninomiya ***

Baseball's Big Lie - Kent Ninomiya

Thu, 14 Feb 2008 18:13:55 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - The media circus surrounding Roger Clemens' congressional testimony isn't shedding much light on who is lying and who is telling the truth. However, it is exposing the crystal clear hypocricy of baseball. The surprising champion of truth in all this may end up ironically being Jose Canseco. Canseco cashed in on confessing his steroid use. He wasn't going to the hall of fame anyway so he might as well make some money off the scandal. While Canseco delighted in pointing his steroid inflated finger at big star after bigger star, he is coming to the defense of Clemens. Canseco insists Clemens was not at a 1998 party he hosted. Clemens' accuser, Brian McNamee says Clemens was there. Canseco calls McNamee a "dirty liar." Why would Canseco, a man who made a second career out of outing fellow MLB players, publically defend Clemens? On the other hand, why would Clemens' long time friend and training partner Andy Pettitte implicate Clemens? It's a huge mess getting bigger because Congress decided to sweep in with a holyer than thou condemnation. Jealous politicians, who I suspect once had fantacies about being a sports star like Clemens, take delight in tearing down this icon. It's the ultimate in player hating. I don't know if Clemens is lying or McNamee is lying. They may both be lying. The one thing that's certain is that steroid use in baseball was commonplace and condoned by MLB and lawmakers for decades. The joke about spring training is that it's a time to figure out the proper dosage. Lots of players took steroids and the league knew about it. Saying they're cleaning it up now is hypocritical. Remember, baseball was in big trouble after the 1994 strike. Fans were slow to return. The homerun contest of Mark McGwire and Sama Sosa, career homerun record of Barry Bonds and pitching heroics of Roger Clemens brought the fans back. Baseball now enjoys unprecidented prosperity thanks to these athletes. Now that the league is lining its pockets with the exploits, they are wagging their collective finger at the guys who did it for them. The true villians in all this are the owners and league officials who allowed it to happen. If they truely wanted performing enhancing drugs out of baseball they could have taken steps decades ago. They didn't. Looking the other way was paramount to condoning it. They do not have the right to act outraged now. Kent Ninomiya

Currency Karma - Kent Ninomiya

Fri, 11 Apr 2008 18:14:18 -0700

Right now is arguably the worst time in memory for Americans to travel overseas. The dollar is at record lows against many currencies around the world. Gone are the days when you could travel to “cheap” countries where the mighty dollar pounded the “monopoly money” of an economically weaker nation. America’s bully currency is now itself being bullied. The humiliation is humbling. I recently had to change an airline ticket in Europe. Even though I originally purchased the ticket in dollars, the airline demanded I pay the change fee in a more stable currency… Polish zloty. Business in third world countries often takes place in “hard” currencies instead of the inflation prone local money. Until now the dollar was the gold standard of hard currency. No more. I spoke to a friend of mine in Africa the other day who says no one wants dollars anymore. I remember back in the early 1980’s when a dollar was worth ten francs and nearly equal to the British pound. Americans ran off to Italy then Greece then Turkey chasing cheaper and cheaper sunspots where they could lounge on the beach while their dollars stretched further and further. If you believe in karma then this is just America getting payback. The euro came and did away with the lire and drachma. Southern Europe was no longer cheap. Our economy is now in the toilet and the United States is suddenly the travel bargain for international tourists, not the other way around. Could the day be coming when we have droves of Europeans talking loudly in our restaurants demanding to know why we don’t speak French or Hungarian or Swedish? If you believe in karma, it would only be fair. *** Kent Ninomiya ***

Super Showdown - Kent Ninomiya

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 21:16:29 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - The slugfest that was Super Bowl XLII attracted more viewers than any other Super Bowl in history. Nielsen Media Research says 97.5 million viewers tuned in. Likewise, I predict more voters will take part in this presidential election than any other in history. Just like the scrappy underdog Giants taking on the seemingly invincible Patriots hoping to cap off a perfect season, the Obama-Clinton matchup is intriguing. It captures the imagination of even the most apathetic citizen. We have had black candidates before. We have had women candidates before. We have never had one of each battle each other at the top of the polls. This is the first time in history that a woman and an African American have a legitimate shot at the White House. It's exciting to many, threatning to some, interesting to all. Expect record turnouts on this Super Tuesday and an even higher turnout for the general election in November. We are witnessing history and everyone wants to be in on the action. Kent Ninomiya

Our Fragile World - Kent Ninomiya

Tue, 22 Jan 2008 00:41:32 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - Asian financial markets are making it clear that they fear the economic crisis in the United States will spread world wide. Today Japan's Nikkei 225 index dropped 5.1 percent after falling 3.9 percent Monday. They stopped trading in India when the Sensex index free fell 9.75 percent in the first few minutes. Hong Kong's Hang Seng shrank 8 percent after diving 5.5 percent the day before. The same is happening in the rest of the world. In Europe Monday, Britain's FTSE-100 fell 5.5 percent and France's CAC-40 Index slid 6.8 percent. Germany's blue-chip DAX 30 plunged 7.2 percent. Likewise, benchmark indices in China, South Korea and Singapore each fell at least 4 percent. Australia's benchmark index slid 7.1 percent and Indonesia's market was down 9 percent. The pain is expected to come full circle. American stocks will probably fall even more leading to more selling around the world resulting in a planetary economic slowdown.So what is this we are facing? Is it just another economic swing or something much bigger? Ask 100 economists and you will get 100 answers. Here's my take on it. We are realizing that everything in our world is interconnected. The war on terrorism, the war in Iraq, our unpopularity overseas all have economic components. We are spending a whole lot of money to support our agenda around the world. The United States is a rich nation but we have a finite amount of money. This is all catching up to us and there will be a reckoning. Most Americans alive today are too young to remember truly difficult times. 9-11 was certainly a crisis but it didn't impact most of our lives directly. Most of us don't believe we face something of the magnitude of the Great Depression or a World War. The truth is we can and may. Our economy, security and environment are more fragile than we know. We may soon find out just how fragile. Kent Ninomiya

Suspension of the Week - Kent Ninomiya

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:19:04 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - Suspending TV talent for off hand remarks seems to be in vogue these days. Now it's ESPN's Dana Jacobson who is on the hot seat. The co-host of "First Take" on ESPN2 is reportedly serving a one-week suspension for comments made at a January 11 roast of ESPN Radio personalities Mike Greenberg and Mike Golic. Jacobsen is said to have made vulgar comments about Notre Dame as a joke. Jacobson is a Michigan graduate who often kids Notre Dame alumnus Golic about the rivalry between the schools. Apparently it went too far. Jacobson reportedly made a number of apologies the next day to Greenberg and Golic, and issued a statement saying, "I am sorry. My remarks about Notre Dame were foolish and insensitive. I respect all religions and did not mean anything derogatory by my poorly chosen words. I also deeply regret the embarrassment I've caused ESPN and Mike and Mike." The apology wasn't good enough for ESPN.

The question I have is: would Jacobson have been suspended if the Golf Channel's Kelly Tilghman had not been disciplined for her comments about Tiger Woods recently. Then Golfweek ran a cover of a noose to exploit the controversy. Editor Dave Seanor got fired for approving it. It seems to be a feeding frenzy on TV talent.

I watch Dana Jacobson on a regular basis. She is a classy professional who presents herself well while doing hours of live television involving contentious debate. She was making jokes at a roast. Did she go to far? Maybe, but come on, it was a roast. A McCarthy style witch hunt is brewing in the broadcast industry where everyone is hypersensitive about what they say and intent is determined by public opinion days after the fact. We need to be careful not to lose our freedoms of expression and press by pandering to "pile on" outrage. They are just words. Let's not make them about something they're not. Kent Ninomiya

Celebrity Death Coverage - Kent Ninomiya

Tue, 22 Jan 2008 18:39:07 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - Add Heath Ledger to the list of young Hollywood stars who died too young. His mysterious end in a New York apartment, naked with a bottle of sleeping pills nearby, has all the ingredients of a posthumous legend in the making. Like James Dean and Marilyn Monroe before him, an early tragic death of an up and coming star has a way of immortalizing and exhagerating a personality, talent and accomplishments. It is unclear how Ledger died, but whatever the eventual explaination, it will be doubted and conspiracies suggested. Celebrities are bigger than life for the masses. When they die tragically we tend to claim a piece of them for ourselves. This way we can feel the loss as if they were acting a role for us. Never mind that we may not have noticed the dececed much when they were alive. Their passing forces us to reflect on what they were and ponder what will never be. That imagination usually surpasses the reality.I remember covering the death of Chris Farley in Chicago in 1997. He was found dead in his apartment by his brother. Farley was 33. I traced his steps the night of his death and spoke to several people who spent time with him. They told me he seemed a bit preoccupied and drank alone in a number of bars and clubs. The coroner later said a drug overdose killed him. It was a tragic story. Despite this I remember many people, fans and commentators alike, trying to turn his death into something noble. I actually heard one person say "at least he died doing what he loved." I doubt very much that would be the reaction if Farley wasn't a celebrity.We shouldn't forget that celebrities are people like all of us. They have problems and demons plus the added burden of dealing with them under public scrutiny. Whatever the cause or reason for Heath Ledger's demise, let's not make it into something it's not.Kent Ninomiya

Roger Clemens - Kent Ninomiya

Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:23:21 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - As Roger Clemens awaits his February 13th meeting with U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, he ponders the seemingly impossible task of clearing his name. The seven time Cy Young Award winner and, until recently, shoe in for the Hall of Fame, was named in the Mitchell Report as a user of steroids. The apparent source of the allegation is a sole trainer who claim he injected Clemens years ago. Clemens vehemently denies the allegation. He is doing what he can to fight it and the public perception that followed. He released statements, appeared on 60 Minutes, and filed a lawsuit against his accuser. Clemens also plans to testify before congress. He is doing more to clear his name than any other athlete who has been in this situation. If Clemens is guilty and there is convincing proof out there then he is in big trouble. Doing steroids is bad enough. Lying about it under oath will land you in prison. Just ask Marion Jones. However, if Clemens is not guilty then he is doing quite literally all he can. He is fortunate to have the money and resources to fight allegations in a way few others can. He will, no doubt, spend millions in his attempt to save his reputation. It will be worth the expense if he is able to turn around public perception and save his legacy. By all accounts it is a long shot. It is more unlikely than a 45 year old who can still throw a baseball like Clemens. He seems to realize this. "How do you prove a negative?" Clemens asked rhetorically at his news conference. "How do you do it?" His voice dripped with anger and frustration. Clemens is going for broke in this ordeal. Either he will be completely destroyed and disgraced or vindicated and held up as a working class hero for overcoming the establishment and unjust accusations. Either way he will carry indelible scars. What else can he do though? Kent Ninomiya

Strike Changing Us - Kent Ninomiya

Sat, 19 Jan 2008 17:34:17 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - The two month old Writers Guild of America strike threatens to change every aspect of our media. That includes TV, movies, Internet, and much more. All indications are that both sides are digging in for a long fight. The union would not give exemptions for awards shows like Peoples Choice and Golden Globes. They promise to take a hard line on the Academy Awards next month as well. The studios aren't blinking. They have canceled dozens of writers' contracts suggesting they are willing to concede the fall line up. Ordinarily networks are ordering new shows this month but nothing is happening now. The Directors Guild of America just agreed to a tentative three year contract. The studios hope to hold that over the writers and force them to make concessions on the issue of revenue on digital entertainment. For now neither side is budging and it is laying waste to the industry.

As stockpiled TV shows are drying up, favorite programs are going into annoying reruns or disappearing altogether. Reality shows are becoming more popular and successful. This is tragic for lovers of sitcoms and well written dramas. Nightline is enjoying a ratings resurgence at the expense of late night talk shows that disappeared for a while. Many viewers are turning off the TV for other forms of entertainment. Video game and DVD sales are up. The Internet is seeing a remarkable increase in activity. If this continues for months what will be left of television? That isn't clear, but whatever it is, it will be drastically different than it was before.

When baseball went on strike in 1994 they lost a significant chunk of their fan base. It took MLB a decade to regain fan trust and flourish again. Likewise TV may see changes that take years to undo. It may also lose forever many of the programs and genres that were once adored. The way we entertain ourselves may never be the same again. Kent Ninomiya

It's the Economy, Stupid! - Kent Ninomiya

Fri, 18 Jan 2008 22:26:35 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - It's the economy, stupid! Remember when that was the rallying cry of the Clinton campaign? That's Bill Clinton. Back in 1992 that slogan helped him defeat George Herbert Walker Bush and move into the White House. It's ironic that 16 years later another Clinton hopes to replace another Bush with the economy becoming a pivotal issue in the campaign. There are more parallels. In 1992, a war with Iraq was fresh in our minds. Most potential candidates for president assumed that would be the prevailing issue in the campaign. Since George H.W. Bush was immensely popular for his handling of the war, none of the Democratic heavy hitters wanted to take him on. Only a little known governor from Arkansas had the audacity to think he could become President of the United States. What helped him do it? The economy went south and Clinton wouldn't let voters forget it. As we elect a new president in 2008, those lessons should be heeded by the candidates. When voters are out of work, watching their portfolios wither, and unable to buy or sell a home, a war on the other side of the world becomes less relevant. The Dow plunged more than 307 points on Thursday. It's down more than 1100 points this year. Housing construction is the worst its been in 16 years with home values plummeting. Oil topped $100/barrel and the dollar is losing value against every major currency around the world. These are significant numbers reflecting pervasive issues. There is no issue more pervasive than a thinning wallet. The first George Bush made the mistake of under estimating the impact of a bad economy on voters. I doubt very much the successors of the second George Bush will make the same mistake. Kent Ninomiya

Tilghman - Kent Ninomiya

Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:04:21 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - A few words about the suspension of Kelly Tilghman. The Golf Channel anchor will leave partner Nick Faldo and the network for two weeks as punishment for her comment that golfers should "lynch" Tiger Woods "in a dark alley" if they want to catch up to him. It was a stupid thing to say but no one believes she meant it literally. Tiger Woods, through his agent, said it was a non issue. The Golf Channel treated it as if it was no big deal and kept Tilghman on the air for several days after the comment. It wasn't until the next week when there was a public outcry and Rev. Al Sharpton called for Tilghman's firing that the Golf Channel took action. Suddenly they condemned her words. They released a statement saying "there is simply no place on our network for offensive language like this." Hmmm... such outrage. Why did it take them so long to feel it? I see hypocrisy here. If there is no room on the Golf Channel for that language then Tilghman should have been yanked from the air immediately. If it was a non issue then she should not be suspended. If you are going to take a moral stand then you have to make up your mind. You can't have it both ways. The late suspension was a compromise to hopefully get angry African Americans off the Golf Network's back. Tilghman's suspension conveniently ends just in time for her to work the Buick Invitational on January 24. It will be Tiger Woods' 2008 debut. I guess the Golf Network's timing isn't completely off... not when it comes to scheduling their outrage. Kent Ninomiya

Prepare to be Annoyed - Kent Ninomiya

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:04:46 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - If you live in a state where your presidential primary election hasn't been held yet, prepare yourself to be annoyed. You will likely be inundated by robotic telephone calls asking you to support one candidate or another. Since there are lots of candidates on the ballot expect to get lots of calls. Nothing is more annoying than a machine interrupting your meal, sleep, family time, etc. Now imagine getting multiple calls for days in a row prior to election day. Candidates are turning to robo-calls because they are cheap and efficient. Volunteers used to make the calls but they were slow and limited by the number of people you could round up at your phone bank. Machines can call every number in the phone book and never take a bathroom break. If you think being on the "do not call" list will protect you guess again. Sales calls always get past the list and the sheer volume of political calls guarantees that more will slip through. Some states are making efforts to limit robo calls but effectiveness varies.

Here's my take on the trend. I am so annoyed when I get a robotic sales call I vow never to do business with whomever calls. Likewise, I'm sure many voters will decide against candidates who sanction robotic calls to their homes. This whole robo call thing could backfire on presidential hopefuls. Kent Ninomiya

Let Me Get This Straight - Kent Ninomiya

Sat, 9 Feb 2008 20:52:59 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - Let me get this straight. Roger Clemens' former trainer Brian McNamee now says he injected Debbie Clemens with HGH. Roger Clemens' wife is now an alleged doping fiend? The story from McNamee seems to get stranger and stranger by the day. As far as I can tell it's just his word against everyone else. Unless, of course, those bloody syringes he supposedly hung on to for 7 years turn out to prove something. What I find off about the story is that it is trickling out. It's as if it is being made up along the way. First it's a legendary pitcher being accused, then his wife. Who's next? His kids, his dog, his ham sandwich? The unfortunate part of all this is that Clemens may never get a chance to clear his name. Meanwhile he is being smeared weekly with fresh stories about his alleged drug use. It's time for McNamee to put up or shut up. Every day this drags on make it more of a travesty of justice. If Clemens is guilty prosecute. If he is innocent then clear his name. Trial by media benefits no one. The guilty have justice delayed. The innocent are unjustly tormented. The media loses its soul and credibility. Kent Ninomiya

Super Bowl vs Super Tuesday - Kent Ninomiya

Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:34:42 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - It was as unlikely as the wife of a former president or a black first term senator becoming president of the United States. The New York Giants defeat the then undefeated New England Patriots by a mere 3 points in the closing minutes of Super Bowl XLII. This Super Bowl was indeed a "super" football game just as Super Tuesday promises to be a "super" political contest. History shows that both tend to disappoint. The Super Bowl is usually a blow out and Super Tuesday often is a coronation rather than a competition. However, 2008 is turning out to be a "super" year for head to head battles. That is very good news for the news business where conflict is king. It gives us plenty to talk about and analyze and get wrong. That's right... "wrong!" How many of the experts picked New York to win the Super Bowl? Not many gave them a prayer. Remember the New Hampshire primary? The experts said it would be the end of Hillary's campaign. I don't like the cliche "that's why they play the games," but it really is appropriate here. We can expand that to "that's why they hold the primaries." Kent Ninomiya

Is Racism in Vogue? - Kent Ninomiya

Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:15:41 -0700

What is all this about the cover of Vogue being racist? Take a look at the image here on the right. The offended say LeBron James' expression combined with his arm being around Giselle Bundchen's waist “reinforces the criminalization of black men.” What?! Since when is an expression racist? People often see what they want. Perhaps the offended want to see racism here. It's not as though Giselle was in black face or LeBron was flashing gang signs. It's just a picture of two people on a magazine cover! There is enough REAL racism out there to worry about. When a big deal is made about imaginary racism like this magazine cover, it distracts from a real problem in our society. It also gives society an excuse to turn a blind eye when racism does rear its ugly head. When you cry wolf too many times, no one listens when the wolf really comes. Let's call racism what it is. Let's not call it racism when it isn't. Kent Ninomiya

State of the Union - Kent Ninomiya

Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:57:07 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - President George W. Bush's final State of the Union speech seemed more about his legacy than the state of our union. He expended great effort to give his spin on the war in Iraq. Bush realizes that history will judge him by the outcome of the Iraq war. Convincing the masses that the cause was just, will determine whether Bush goes down in history as a great leader or a butcher. Bush even floated a Mid East peace agreement. Bill Clinton wanted that to be his legacy but failed. Bush hopes to one-up his predecessor. What the State of the Union speech was NOT... was politics. Bush did not overtly press a republican agenda that could help GOP candidates for president. None of the candidates want to be associated with Bush. The president is remarkably unpopular these days. It's quite a change from his nearly 90% approval rating he enjoyed just after 9-11. That's a similarity he shares with his father. George H.W. Bush was hugely popular following the first Gulf War only to leave office after one term when the economy went belly up. How will history judge "W?" That depends on how the Iraq war eventually wraps up. Kent Ninomiya

Who Would Have Thought? - Kent Ninomiya

Thu, 7 Feb 2008 11:26:22 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - Who would have ever guessed we would be where we are now? A few months ago all the political experts predicted Hillary Clinton had a lock on the Democratic nomination. No problem. Then they pronounced her campaign dead before the New Hampshire primary. Now she is in a virtual dead heat with Barack Obama. A few months ago John McCain was running out of money. All the political experts predicted he would drop out soon. Now he's the presumptive Republican nominee. Predicting politics is like predicting the weather. People who claim they can do it are usually wrong. Just like the weatherman, the "politicalman" can be wrong most of the time and isn't held accountable. The public expects them to be wrong, yet still listens to what he has to say. Funny how that is. I'm just glad that the race is interesting. Obama and Clinton could very well take their duel to the convention. Imagine the viewer interest in the Democratic convention if that happened. John McCain is a republican who arch republicans hate and many democrats like. Wont that make for an interesting general election. Kent Ninomiya

How Many Clintons are Running? - Kent Ninomiya

Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:20:59 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - If you look at the top three people getting media coverage in the presidential election for the week of January 21-27, you find it goes Obama, Clinton, Clinton. A Project for Excellence in Journalism study shows that Bill Clinton is third in news coverage behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Obama got a leading 41% of coverage, but when you add Hillary's 40% to Bill's 18% they dominate the coverage race. Is this media bias or are journalists nostalgic for good ole Bill? Regardless of the reason the discrepancy is helping Hillary Clinton's campaign. It's an established fact that the more face time a candidate gets the more votes they're likely to get. The Clintons are getting a 2-for-1 deal on air time. This media domination may play an especially pivotal role if Hillary gets the democratic nomination. The same poll shows republican candidates far down the coverage list. McCain is at 17%, Giuliani 14%, Romney 12%, Huckabee 6%. It seems the media finds the democratic Clinton duo more compelling than any republican. Let's see how the numbers shift after Super Tuesday. Kent Ninomiya

The Daily Show Brilliance - Kent Ninomiya

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:17:10 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - The Daily Show is always brilliant. Tonight they were especially inspired. They notched up their commentary on media responsibility showing anchor after anchor crowing on and on about outbursts and meltdowns on the presidential campaign trail. The anchors suggested Bill Clinton and Mitt Romney "lost it" on reporters. Jon Stewart then, in a way only he could, showed what really happened. Both men were calm and rational. Both discussed their point of views in a controlled manner. The Daily Show called the news industry on their tendency to exaggerate. It was funny and it made us look foolish. No wonder no one believes us anymore when we say the sky is falling. "Chicken Little" should be required reading in J-school. Being a journalist is a tough job. We are supposed to make news interesting as well as informative. This is especially challenging when the news really isn't very interesting. The problem is when we go too far and make story into something it is not. When we do that we lose the public trust. Thank you Jon Stewart for reminding us to keep it real. Kent Ninomiya

Republican Scramble - Kent Ninomiya

Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:50:15 -0800

Kent Ninomiya - So who is the Republican front runner now? Romney won the mostly uncontested Nevada caucus Saturday but McCain picked up the coveted South Carolina primary. Since 1980, every Republican who won South Carolina got the party nomination. However, Romney still leads in delegates. To complicate the situation even more, Rudy Giuliani is betting it all on the upcoming Florida primary, and Iowa caucus winner Mike Huckabee is hanging in there. So who's the front runner? That depends who you ask. It's a fun time to be a journalist or political junkie. It's any one's race in both parties and no one has any idea who will be the next president. Kent Ninomiya