THE DALY SHOW

Thanksgiving Story

My wife Teri told me this story on the eve of Thanksgiving.  Teri, as many of you know, is an exclusive personal trainer with her own business Daly Workout.  She also teaches a couple of group classes for the Las Vegas Atheltic Club.  This story happened right after one of those classes.

LAS VEGAS, NV (November 26, 2009) — So Teri finishes her group class and notices that two women in the class are talking very warmly.  One of the women was from Iran; the other from Israel.  They’ve lived here for a number of years and each still have the accents of their homelands.  But apparently not the animosity.

Teri watched as both of them spoke in another language as friends.  Then they wished each other “Happy Thanksgiving.”

“Only in America,” Teri said to me as she recounted the story on Thanksgiving morning.

It is something to think about — on the positive side — as we go through this recession and we find it hard for countries to find common grounds for peace.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Become Your Own Journalist

If you don’t, your business might not survive.  Here’s a posting at JohnDalyConsulting.

Conference On Global and Green Economy

I am emceeing a big event in Las Vegas November 17 and 18 at the Las Vegas Hilton.  Here’s a video to explain it all.  If you’re looking to jump start your business in this new economy and go green, this is the place to start.  You will also have a chance to network with companies from around the United States and around the world while also being a part of the International Congress of Business Professionals.  I was enticed by their strong educational programs that will train and re-train workers and executives in this new world.  I’ve written many times here that the economy went through a tectonic shift in the past two years.  Those who understand it and are educated to navigate the wreckage and the opportunities will thrive in the next few years.  I think this is one place to start.

Need Your Help And Unbiased Opinion

I’m about ready to embark on an internet TV show. I need some feedback to mold it the right way.

In generic terms, here’s what the show will be:

It will air live on the net — and then eventually other venues such as TV, radio, satellite radio, cell phones. The show will cover news, live breaking news, news analysis, sports, entertainment, business, consumer, and how it is all changing due to our new world. It will have the feel of talk-radio but on television with tons of interviews with journalists, experts, leaders, newsmakers, and the audience. The tone of the show will be fun but fair: think of the messages in my book; no Fox or MSNBC bias. The show will last 2 to 3 hours but viewers can come in and out throughout the time period. All the segments will then be archived for future viewing or if there’s a specific segment that needs to be watched or used.

Here are my questions:

1.) Is there a particular 3-hour time period you would prefer to tune in for the live show? Give it to me with your time zone.

2.) Is there something special you want on a show like this? Certain topics? Certain kinds of guests? In other words, what is not being done for you in the media that you would like to see.

3.) Is there something you don’t want?

You can respond to this blog, on my facebook page, or to info@johndaly.tv

Thanks.

Baseball, Cuckoo’s Nest, Casablanca: Explain It All

T.S. Eliot wrote about writing: ”Words strain, Crack and sometimes break, under the burden…”  Trying to explain what is really happening in this economy and changing world is a tough but invigorating battle.  So in this column on JohnDalyLive, I use our national pastime, a classic film from the 1940s and another classic from the 1970s to help you understand what the freak is going on now.  Please fill in any lost thoughts or words.

Twitter-led Protests in Moldova

This is a new posting on JohnDalyLive about the social networking technology used as a mobilization tool for protests.  What does this mean?

Make Your Business A TV Star

This is a posting on JohnDalyConsulting.  The way you reach your customers and deliver goods and services is changing drastically.  Your storefront on the internet has to be as inviting or sexy as your storefront on Main Street.  Internet TV is the way. 

The Death of News…As We Know It. And It’s Rebirth

This is a posting to show you what the news business will look like soon. Newspapers are folding, broadcast news is cutting back, and cable news is now the combination of bad local news’ entertainment bias and talk radio’s right-wing screaming tactics. Let me show you the future and how you will be a big part of it. And I’ll give you a glimpse of what I will be doing soon in this new news landscape.

LAS VEGAS, NV (March 1, 2009) – A number of media analysis is writing about the financial and cultural demise of network television. Dramas and comedies are all going to cable or at least a cable model. Jay Leno might be on NBC next fall, but it will look like Comedy Central.

The same is happening with news. But it will be more drastic.

Here I’ll show you how the newscasts – as we know it – are also moving toward a cable model and how that will fail and change very soon.

The three reasons news is either changing or collapsing are:

The failure of the electronic news media to use competent and boring experts; the death of journalists – literally their lives and figuratively their careers; plus the rise of the internet and other new media; and whether you like it or not, the new citizen journalist – you.

Let’s look at network and cable news’ failure to give us real information. Watch Sunday’s mainstream media news shows NBC’s Meet the Press and ABC’s This Week. They both sounded like Fox News Channel’s Hannity or O’Reilly: screaming and yelling over each other.

At moments, these shows – like cable news — are unwatchable. Let me clarify that. They’re unwatchable for people who are serious about getting news and information. If you’re looking for entertainment or drama, namely verbal conflict between people, then this might be good TV. Me? I’d rather watch House or Burn Notice.

Unfortunately, this type of newscast creates more heat than light. And right now we need light.

CNN’s Fareed Zakaria’s GPS had a roundtable Sunday about the relevance of Islam that was just as bad as the other two Sunday shows. The saving grace for the show was Zakaria’s insightful – one-on-one — interview with Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf. Most Americans won’t agree with Wolf’s theory that the stimulus packages are too small, but at least Zakaria gave us an uninterrupted listen to a thinker with a cogent theory.

Yes, Meet the Press and This Week had one-on-one interviews, but they were with politicians or appointees who have their own bias.

Too often, cable and mainstream media rely on politicians, who are biased by nature, and commentators who spin for one side or the other. Or they carry another bias – entertainment bias. They have to pretty or funny. As a result, we rarely get to hear from experts – like Wolf.

And in these times, people want information as raw and untainted as possible and quickly. I wrote about “The Paradox of the Twenty-first Century Media in my book more than three years ago and it still applies today.

The overabundance of news and information we have today has forced news consumers to work harder to gain the truth.

Think about it. The media, as we have it today through all mediums, has actually created more questions, distortions, and outright lies.

What’s even worse for most of us news consumers is the dearth of true journalists. And the number of true news gatherers is dwindling fast.

The headlines – or the lack of them now — speak for themselves. Newspapers are dying and they haven’t figured out how to make money online yet. Or they haven’t figured out how to make enough to pay reporters.

This greatly affects TV stations. Where do you think most of the news you see on local TV comes from? That’s right, newspapers. TV stations cut what news relevance they had by dismissing higher paid and more experienced journalists.

While America is killing the careers of journalists, other countries are literally killing journalists. Anastasia Baburova was a Russian journalist who wrote about the growing Fascist policies of Russia. She was gunned down January 19, 2009 in Moscow in broad daylight. According to The Economist, “The next day, a party of nationalists brought champagne to the murder scene to celebrate the ‘elimination’ of their enemies.”

The America news media we have today has been silenced in a more subtle way. Because most of our news organizations are non-profit, investigative reporters (or what remains of them) won’t aim their flashlights at sponsors or potential sponsors. Sponsor and advertisers pay the bills and the journalists’ salaries.

Watch an investigation by a local TV station. If they go after a business, then that business is usually a small mom-and-pop and not an advertiser. We see the investigative mantel in TV stations becoming consumer reports. An angry viewer gets ripped off and the TV reporter comes to the rescue by uncovering a retail operation that has bad practices.

Trust me, I’ve witnessed this.

We had a great undercover investigation at KTNV that showed how women car buyers were getting ripped off compared to men car buyers. The investigation, complete with undercover audio and video, never ran. The Las Vegas Car Dealers Association went to my bosses and said if we ran the investigation KTNV would receive no ad dollars from any car dealer. If you watch any local TV you know that car dealers and personal injury lawyers keep TV afloat. The choice for station management was run the investigation and get some publicity but possibly lay off a number of newsroom staffers.

This same tactic has happened in even the biggest and best of journalism. Ask yourself this. How could the Wall Street Journal – with all of its accolades and crack financial reporters – have missed the corruption with subprime mortgages and credit default swaps? I’m surmising here. But those reporters were not allowed to bite the hand that was feeding them.

Look at steroids. Only one sports reporter – Bob Costas – raised the issue. Yet, hundreds of other sports reporters covering the games and interviewing in the locker rooms couldn’t see the massive body changes and the increase in power numbers? Of course, they saw it. However, to save their fun jobs or to save the revenues of their publications from the sports franchises, they said nothing.

Feel alone? You should.

The solution? It’s you.

Ask yourself this: who is your travel agent? For most of us, the answer is ourselves. We now book all of our flights online. Granted, if we (ever) go on a long and expensive vacation, we’ll use a qualified travel agent. But if you’re traveling for business or a weekend getaway, most times you are the travel agent.

The same is true now of the news business. You are the journalist. I speak at numerous events and the topic is usually “The Most Important Journalist in Your Life is You.”

The good news for you is this. Technology today makes it easier to become a journalist or citizen journalist.

As far as gathering news, the internet is a wealth of information. RSS feeds can act like what was once the newsroom ticker tape. Your cell phone or services like Skype give you instant access to people around the world.

Creating your own website and blog gives you worldwide distribution access. Twitter can allow you to report from the scene of an incident or event. In fact, Twitter proved the best news tool during the massacres in Mumbai.

And like me, you will be able to produce newscasts on your website.

The bad news is this. Most of us aren’t journalists. The information you get on the internet can be tainted. You might not know how to decipher what is news and what is propaganda.

Here comes the book plug. Yes, my book can help you think like a journalist for yourself.

But for those of us who don’t want to be journalist, those who already have a career, those who don’t have time to keep government and business on an honest path, the new journalists and the out-of-work journalists who are open to new business models will eventually return as our journalists.

You will start seeing newspapers popping up on the internet. The Pasadena Today is a daily newspaper online that is reported by journalists in India. That’s not the most ideal situation for news consumers. However, if journalists want to continue their work they will have to do two things: take less compensation and work harder in a different medium.

TV news will pop up on the internet with more regularity. I can’t disclose anything specific here. But I am involved in a number of TV news projects for the internet. You will see old name publications and networks rising again but in entirely different and modern day forms.

However, here’s what these shows will offer.

The news will be designed for specific audiences. It might be people in a specific profession. It could be a community of people like a neighborhood.

The news programs will have no time limits. In other words, the interviews or segments will be the length of time needed to cover an issue adequately. It might be five minutes but it might be two hours.

The problem with TV news today is the 30-minute window. As a viewer, you either feel cheated by not getting enough information on an important topic or you’re bored when there is not enough news and the show producer fills the time with nonsense.

Another problem with TV news today is the schedule. You have to watch the show when it’s aired. With the new news model, the shows are archived for the viewers’ convenience.

In addition, these new type shows won’t be just seen on computers but cell-phones as well. That will mean larger audiences than TV could deliver – and at lower costs than TV has.

In the shows I’m developing, I have some clear rules.

First, the shows will be loaded with experts. These experts will generally be allowed to speak their minds without interruption. I will use my skills as an interviewer to make them explain in greater detail their theories.

Second, I will use very little roundtable discussions with experts. If I do, I will have control of the microphones.

Third, I will have few politicians on the shows. There will be no politicians in roundtable discussions.

Fourth, I will go after everyone.

Five, if there are entertainers on the show then they will have a relevant topic to cover. For instance, my good friend Bryan Cranston, the Emmy Award winning star of the show Breaking Bad, will come on the show to help me discuss the issue of legalizing all street narcotics.

Six, there will be no discussion of Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan type stories.

Seven, entertainers like talk Limbaugh, Kudlow, and Hannity won’t be discussed. I won’t waste your time.

Eight, I will disclose every conflict or monetary gain I or the show might be receiving by doing a story. (Disclosure: In fact, this column is a little bit of a plug for these upcoming shows.)

When this all happens, I’ll let you know. Until then, hang in there.

Fairness Doctrine Mumbo Jumbo

This posting deciphers the silliness on both sides of the political spectrum about the so-called Fairness Doctrine for broadcasters. I’m against bringing it back. Tell me your thoughts.

LAS VEGAS, NV (February 7, 2009) – Newsmax is a conservative news website. It’s not bad, even though it only highlights stories that will hook the right-wingers.

One recent story on Newsmax – but not seen in too many other places was — “Democrats Look to Muzzle Conservative Radio” about Democratic efforts to bring back the Fairness Doctrine to broadcasting.

The Doctrine, passed in 1949 and repealed in 1987, calls for broadcasters to give equal time for opposing views. It gave rise to the legions of talkers like Rush and Hannity.

The article quotes Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) from a radio interview with Bill Press, a former Democratic Party leader in California. When asked if the Fairness Doctrine should return, she said:

“I think it’s absolutely time to pass a standard. Now, whether it’s called the Fairness Standard, whether it’s called something else — I absolutely think it’s time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves. Our new president has talked rightly about accountability and transparency, that we all have to step up and be responsible. And I think in this case, there needs to be some accountability and standards put in place.”

Wrong, Senator. You’re merely picking a fight for political reasons. And if Democrats start taunting the morons on The Right, then they deserve all the headaches they’ll get.

First, the conservative right should have their domain in the media. AM Radio is that place.

Some background here: Does that mean cable and mainstream media are left-wing hate machines? No. It does mean the cables and mainstream “lean” to the left. I’ve always said that mainstream media has an inherent liberal bias – because their goal is to reach the masses. The masses tend to be poor and liberal-leaning.

Second, by trying to shut up The Right, you only antagonize them and make the so-called liberal media conspiracy seem more real. And frankly, in Congress there are far more important things to discuss – the economy and foreign policy, for example.

Third, who would dictate what’s fair or what’s not fair? I dislike the Left and the Right, but I don’t want anyone in the government to dictate that. Look at the recent Justice Department under Roberto Gonzalez. Seriously, do you want Rush Limbaugh on the FCC when the next GOP President takes office?

Fourth, the Right-Wing, as we’ve known it for the past two decades, is slowly becoming extinct. They’re the equivalent of the Politburo touting Communism as the Berlin Wall is falling. They are bankrupt of ideas. Even the evangelicals have moved away toward the environmentalists.

Fifth, AM Radio is becoming extinct too. Eventually, the talkers with any audience will go to the Internet where they will be lumped in with all sorts of views – and hopefully get diluted into intelligence. AM Radio is looking more and more like a home for audio infomercials.

Six, the majority of people who listen to talk radio are stupid. Not all of them are stupid. Some listen for the entertainment factor; these guys are hysterically funny because they’re so idiotic. But too many followers – the majority in my opinion — listen to guys like Rush – and this is important – for their only news and information. When I hear someone say, “I get all the news I need from Rush,” then I ask, “So is Lebron as good as Michael yet?” It’s not worth the time.

Now, before you think I hate The Right, think about this. When President Obama met with conservative journalists at George Will’s house last month, notice that guys like Rush and Hannity weren’t there. David Brooks was there – a real conservative thinker.

Have you ever heard David Brooks syndicated radio talk show? No, he doesn’t have one. I rest my case.

Allow the Right-Wing nut cases to have their place. Eventually they will die off.

Morons On The Hill

This is a posting about the Senate’s passage of two misdirected amendments giving tax credits to home buyers and car buyers. These measures should scream to Americans the need for public funding of campaigns.  I can already hear the screaming from my conservative friends like Jake The Weasel. And I have two new things for you to read.

LAS VEGAS, NV (February 5, 2009) – The Senate is proving as moronic as the House.

Today the Senate added two tax credits to the economic stimulus package: up to $15,000 for new home-buyers; and the deduction of loan interest and sales tax on new car sales.

Clearly, these additions are high-fives for the housing and auto industries – and the middle finger to the rest of us.

First, the amendments fail to address the core problem of our economic crisis: We can’t get credit. What good is a tax credit if someone can’t buy a house because they can’t get a mortgage? What good is a tax exemption if you can’t buy the car?

We need to unfreeze the credit markets first. See my column on resurrecting the Shadow Banking system.

The smarter thing to do would be to offer relief to people who have mortgages. Lower the amount due on the mortgage, lower the interest rate, and raise the number of years to pay it back.

Second, the goal of economic stimulus was to increase jobs in the energy and conservation sector. The tax exemption should have been for only energy-efficient, hybrid, or non-gasoline cars.

Read a study by Robert Pollin and the Political Economy Research Institute at UMass Amherst. It shows how energy conservation and not fossil fuel drilling creates more jobs and more sustainable jobs.

Why would they pass these silly measures? Because of lobbying efforts by the housing and car industries. Campaign donations by major donors are nothing more than legalized bribery.

If President Obama is serious about removing special interest from government, he will make every election dependent on public financing. This way the people elected will be beholden to us, the taxpayers first; not the energy industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and not the banking industry.

Am I calling for more government intervention? You bet I am. And we need it because no one else will create a level playing field. Without a level playing field, the majority of us get screwed.

Pick up the book, The Case for Big Government by Jeff Madrick. There’s not a conservative out there who would dare read it – just based on the title. But if you’re someone neither liberal nor conservative – in other words you’re smart, pragmatic, and learned – you will at least give it a look.

Madrick shows that America’s gains in standard of living happened when government intervened to increase social and educational programs for lower and middle class folks, while regulating business for equality and transparency.

After the Civil War, the government stepped in with Reconstruction. That led to the Industrial Revolution.

During the Progressive Era, led by Teddy Roosevelt (a real Republican), government intervened by busting the monopolies and expanding democracy with powerful tools we still use today – initiative, referendum, and recall.

The New Deal took us out of the Great Depression with big government outlays which led to the Post World War II era from 1950 to 1980 which saw our standard of living increase.

Since 1980, Madrick argues, our standard of living – along with the notion of less government and lower taxes – has dropped. Most of us baby-boomers didn’t grow up in two income households and we could reasonably pay off our college tuition. It’s a different story today as Mom and Dad must work while Junior takes six years to get a four year college degree and barely pays off his loans well into his 30s.

Historically, if you look at the times in between big government spending and good economic times, we saw other austerity movements and distrust of government; the late 1890s and early 1900s; and the roaring 1920s – which all led to economic crisis like the one we’re living today.

Yes, the stimulus package needs to be bigger and more widespread.

Here’s what needs to be done.

We need to take care of current homeowners and get the mortgages in line with the true value of the homes. We need to remove the toxic assets from the banks and get the Shadow Banking System moving again to finance the mortgages and loans – with more regulation. We need to step up energy conservation including an increase in the gasoline tax. And we need to reduce the cost of education and increase the incentive to get more learning for this new world, meaning more math and science.

Is this expensive? Yes. But if done right, it can lead to more jobs, wider economic growth for more Americans, and expanded tax revenues.

And for all of you out there who will say we can’t trust government, well big business has done little to foster our faith in them lately.

Sure, the deficit will balloon. But we’re in drastic economic times. You don’t ask the price of water when you’re house is burning.

And yes, we need to look at Medicare and Social Security. But we need to create more jobs and more educated high-earning workers that will work in this new era to gain revenues to pay for these entitlements while demanding more from the recipients.

Besides the greed of most lawmakers who cater to their campaign donors, today’s members of Congress fail to see the history that is happening around us.

We are in the midst of massive change. This isn’t the 1980s. 2009 is the equivalent to the Progressive era, the 1930s, and post World War II rebuilding which led to our current interstate highway system.

We’re no longer a manufacturing economy; we’re a service economy. We have to rely on our smarts, not our brawn. This requires education about the new world – and paying qualified teachers. Although we are still a dominant economic power, we won’t call the shots entirely: India, China, Russia, and soon Brazil have enough influence to make us pay attention. And right now two of those countries – China and India – are out-educating their kids compared to ours.

We’re also seeing the world’s distribution system changing. I’m reaching you and millions of others over the worldwide web. We’ll be getting most of our goods services through the Internet and not at our local stores. The Internet has democratized business allowing poor countries to become competitive while dropping the cost of goods. Yet, a measure in the current stimulus bill calls for Buy-American only. And the major broadcast and cable companies continue to fight measures for free wireless service.

If we really want to invest in America only, then we need the government to invest in educating our children and conserving energy, while creating jobs.

Cutting taxes for the rich and big businesses that already get massive tax credits – the 1980s way – is not the answer.