WHO ARE ALL THESE "HATERS"? (AND THE LOST ART OF LIVING IN THE MOMENT)

"Tweeting" has made egomania a global epidemic. Or, as comedian Lewis Black put it: "If you're Tweeting about what you're doing, you aren't f***ing doing it!"

I'm sadly intrigued.

I quite often read or hear the word "haters" from young people. As in: "I don't care about the haters, I'm going to be me" or "All you haters can go to hell."

Who is it doing all this hating? Methinks they be mostly phantoms. While I grasp that hyperbole is in play, I still sense that something is awry. Is the collective psyche of today's youth so permeated with narcissism and paranoia that they really believe that everyone not only cares about their every move, but is "hating" on them?

Has advertising, reality TV, social media (where everybody is a star!), texting and tweeting and documenting their every move (groan), along with a mass-consumption mentality, really delivered a great many young people to this point? I never thought I'd say this but... get over yourselves! And if you're a narcissistic, Internet legend-in-your-own-mind who isn't so young, same thing.

I mean, take these folks who have 30,000 pictures of themselves jammed on Facebook. As far as I'm concerned, they've painted a huge target on their chests with the words "Guess who I love" painted on the bull's-eye. So expect people to take aim at you. You've earned it.

On the other hand, if you are someone who takes aim at people because they dare to be different or actually get off their butts and do things, well, back the hell off.

Whichever side of the fence you're on with this "hating" fetish, just take note: Life's short, ego is boring, and we're running dry on humility around here.

So take an ego check, grab an oar, and help us paddle this boat out of the mess we're in.

And bless yez all!
Adrian

IF YOU FOUND THIS POST INTERESTING you might like to take a look at THE DEATH OF PRIVACY.

THE DEATH OF PRIVACY

I haven't been blogging much lately.

There are several reasons. Life has been busy, personal matters, a minor illness. But I've also been experiencing a cyber-backlash, of sorts.

I've never been a big fan of the Internet... but I use it every day. Know what I mean? I'm a writer/editor by trade so I sit in front of a computer for about 10 or 11 hours a day, just for work. I also like to check sports scores, check out stuff on YouTube because I hate TV and don't have TV, and write this blog. And then there's the mammoth Email Imperative.

Toss in a casual acquaintance with Facebook, using the Net to order things I need, the many sites I've written for or commented on, and it starts to sink in that, in the new millennium, we are cyberspace and cyberspace is us. And that's scary.

I mean, I remember many times my father refused to fill out personal information on a paper form because it was being called for unnecessarily and therefore constituted an invasion of his privacy. (He would have hated the Internet with a passion.) But these days, someone can throw down a few bucks (online!) and get your freakin' life story emailed to them.

Then there are hackers; don't even get me started on those tossers.

And just the usual abuse of information. Like Facebook (and everybody else) selling your profile to third parties. And how many servers -- government, corporate and otherwise -- do you think we are all living on? A dozen more than a s***load, I'd say.

I'm just a bit tired of it. Jaded. I want my privacy back -- even though I know it's gone forever. Like I said, I've never liked the Internet, I've just tried to use it more than it used me. More and more that feels like a losing battle.

I write this blog because I want to do my little bit to make a difference. One of my few talents is the ability to write reasonably well. And so I blog. But the downside, for me, is that to be sincere, to be persuasive, I have to share certain stuff about myself, concede a little of my privacy. As I get older, that feels like a pretty substantial cost.

Over the years that I've worked as a journalist or writer or blogger or whatever, I've had some exposure to the psycho contingent out there too. I've always stuck by my views and, man, do some people hate my views (or maybe they just hate anyone with a view). Who knows if they're "sad sacks" living in their mother's basement or gun owners with mental issues and a death wish. Usually it's just nonsensical crap from near-illiterate whiners or bluster boys who just refuse to think. But again, it gets old.

It's kind of like that old gag: One guy says to another, "I didn't come here to be liked" and the other guys says "Well, you came to the right place."

I'll keep blogging for now; but this cyber-privacy thing is something I feel we all need to think about. And something we are all responsible for. I'm not sure what to counsel here, other than keep your wits about you and make careful choices. And I do think it's important that, since the Net is here to stay, at least until we all get our micro-chip implants in our skulls, that it not be totally overrun by the money hounds of hell... which is happening already. So I'm all for Net Neutrality.

Maybe I'm just getting more suspicious in my old age. Or maybe it's like the man said: I might be paranoid, but that don't mean they ain't out to get me.

Take care and check your rear view mirror ;-)
Adrian

IF YOU FOUND THIS BLOG POST INTERESTING you might like to take a look at NET NEUTRALITY -- READY OR NOT, IT'S CRUNCH TIME, FOLKS.

NET NEUTRALITY -- READY OR NOT, IT'S CRUNCH TIME, FOLKS

I'm bloody exhausted so I'm gonna try and do this quickly -- fortunately I'm someone who can do a zero-to-60 on fumes. Besides, this won't wait.

It's coming up to crunch time for "Net Neutrality." This is a huge issue for us all!


What is "Net Neutrality"?

Here's how www.SaveTheInternet.com puts it:

Net Neutrality is the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet.

Net Neutrality means that Internet service providers may not discriminate between different kinds of content and applications online. It guarantees a level playing field for all Web sites and Internet technologies.

Net Neutrality is the reason the Internet has driven economic innovation, democratic participation and free speech online. It protects the consumer's right to use any equipment, content, application or service without interference from the network provider. With Net Neutrality, the network's only job is to move data -- not to choose which data to privilege with higher quality service.


What's That Mean for Us?

The long and short of it is that, once again, big corporations are trying to steal something from us and make a load of money. There are ramifications here for free speech, access to information, democracy... all kinds of very serious issues.

It has happened before! The airwaves are actually public property: just like air itself. Well, at least they were until the corporate media stole them from us and made television and radio into money-making ventures.


A Little More From www.SaveTheInternet.com

The nation's largest telephone and cable companies -- including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time-Warner Cable -- want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won't load at all.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. And they want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services and streaming video -- while slowing down or blocking services offered by their competitors.

These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of a level playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services -- or those of big corporations that can afford the steep tolls -- and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

The big phone and cable companies are spending hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to gut Net Neutrality, putting the future of the Internet at risk.


What You Can Do

This is all coming to a head in less than a week in a vote on December 21 at the diabolical FCC (Federal Communications Commission). There are plenty of ways to make your voice heard. Search the Net while it's still relatively free to do so and find some outlets. Or make some calls.


You could also start with this online petition.


Conclusion

This is a huge deal. The Internet is a place where all voices can be heard with some sort of equality. If Net Neutrality is squashed, you can kiss all that goodbye.

And that will diminish our effectiveness in fighting the good fight on every issue you can name.

Ironically, some corporations that would get pounded in the wallet by the death of Net Neutrality are actually on our side this time. You gotta love that, baby!


Goodnight!
Adrian Zupp

FACEBOOK -- PT. 2

I should put this on Facebook! Mum would be so proud! (No, I don't know how to rotate photos.)

I was thinking of calling this entry "Facebook Sucks."

I have my reasons for a little antipathy. But then I thought about it some more. And Facebook -- and social networking in general -- does have its pros as well as its cons.

So let's look at them. And let's do a little psychosocial study without going into overkill.


SOME PROS AND CONS

PROS:

* It is a way for people to connect, reach out, be cyber social.

* Some people are too ill to leave their house. For them it's a blessing, of sorts.

* You read the occasional interesting post, see the occasional intriguing photo (my friend Pauline takes awesome shots!), and find the occasional interesting group.

* It is a convenient way to share certain things with other people, all in one fell swoop.

* It so easy to use that I can almost work it out. (But not quite.)

* I'm sure there must be other pros but I can't think of them right now.

CONS:

* News flash! Not everyone on the Internet is who they purport to be. Some of these people are not very nice folks. Keep that in mind.

* Privacy. Does it still exist?

* FB doesn't substitute for real-world experiences because... wait for it... IT'S NOT THE REAL FREAKIN' WORLD!!!

* Nearly everybody is super happy and near damn perfect on FB. How do I know? They keep telling me! "I'm having an AWESOME day"; "Life rocks!"; "Check out this Photoshopped pic of me looking more like a supermodel than the werewolf I really am!" (Hey, there's nothing wrong with being a werewolf!)

* Spare me the details: "Just had a great chicken panini sandwich for lunch!" Who gives half a s***. Trivia is only an art form in the hands of the very greatest creative talents. And guess what...

* The words "Facebook" and "privacy" were never meant to be in the same sentence. WHY there's suddenly a big stir about FB dishing off info about its members is a mystery to me. You put your personal info on the Internet and all bets are off. That's called logic. And yet, yes, it's still disturbing and worth a second thought.

* The personal photos. They're a bit much, aren't they? Do we really want to know you that well? Do we have the same high opinion of you that you seem to have of yourself in front of the camera?

* And the Big One: If you're walking down the street of your home town/city, do you pull out a wad of photos of you semi-clad, getting drunk, kissing male strippers etc. and show them to total strangers? Do you regale these same strangers with tales of last night's debauchery or that great panini you just had? I'm thinking no. So why do it where 500 million people can step into your world?

What I really look like. (Prolly not going on Facebook.)

MORE FRIENDS THAN YOU CAN POINT A CURSOR AT

I mean, you gotta realize, "friends" in the cyber world is a misleading term. You might have 5,000 cyber friends, but if you break your leg and end up in hospital, don't expect the line of visitors to go round the block. Capiche?

Here's the thing: I'm just concerned that our lives have become too public while, at the same time, our real social skills and face-to-face connecting are spinning their tires.

I believe that when we overdo the social networking thing, we're losing more than we're gaining. And we do overdo it, now don't we? Because, y'know, it's kinda addictive to be "famous" on Facebook, right? Famed pop artist Andy Warhol never lived to see the advent of the Internet but he was totally right when he said (in 1968!!): "In the future everyone will be world famous for 15 minutes." That's Facebook. That's reality TV. That's the "idiot culture."

And 500 million registered users? Holy rollers! Facebook could attack the U.S. and kick its ass! Scary numbers, baby, just scary! (Is there actually anybody walking around outside these days?)

Andy Warhol

UPSIDE, DOWNSIDE

Facebook can be fun. It's when people take it too seriously that their psychoses and insecurities show. Hell, FB is a landfill of insecurities thinly covered by a veneer of hyperbolic happy platitudes: "My life is totally working out now!"

As long as gossip and voyeurism and jealousy and exhibitionism and hooking up are popular, there'll always be a Facebook of one kind or another. People want to know what everyone else is doing... and then outdo them. And FB lets them do it more efficiently than ever. I'd just like to see more inventions that encouraged us to flex the better muscles of our nature rather than stuff that constantly seems to appeal to our egos and apathies.


CONCLUSION

The real significance on the macro level is that this is another distraction that keeps the masses occupied and passive. Fine in small doses but when combined with TV and video games and sports etc etc, it doesn't leave much time for thinking about things like feeding the poor or true democracy or "What the hell are they teaching my kids in school?"

Look, I ain't the Grinch, okay? But Facebook isn't your online lord and savior either. Keep your life in balance and your ego in check.

You're much more lovable that way.

Take care and take a walk outside,
Adrian Zupp

IF YOU FOUND THIS BLOG POST INTERESTING you might like to take a look at FACEBOOK -- PT. 1 or THE IDIOT CULTURE.

TV -- PT. 2: WHY TV MATTERS

In his classic book "1984", George Orwell wrote: He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.

There is, today, a larger truth that Orwell could not have guessed at in the pre-TV days in which he was writing: Those who control the electronic media, control everything.


OWNERS AND LIARS

And that's why I'm blogging about TV. That's where, sadly, most people get their information from: commercial (and even public) stations with owners/advertisers/donors/CEOs determining their agendas.

Information of any real import, that comes from your TV (or newspaper or radio or commercial Internet site), is very rarely pure and objective. There are too many important people with a lot of money at stake who have an interest in what we-the-people do and don't know.

And these people own the media. Or they are in the same class of power elites. And the last thing they need is the truth about corporate welfare or Afghan babies being blown to pieces or how they (i.e. the elites) craft the news stirring up the masses and upsetting the gravy train.

When you think about it, you don't have to be an atom-splitter to see that this all makes perfect sense.


OPTIONS? WHAT OPTIONS?

And ask yourself this: Why, with so many news "options" (CNN, NBC, CBS, Fox, New York Times, Washington Post etc. etc. etc.), do all these outlets run pretty much the same stories in pretty much the same way?

There are a few answers:

1/ The mass media is owned by a relatively small number of corporations.

2/ Many news services feed off the same sources.

3/ All of these outlets make their big money by selling advertising space (profit motive = self-censorship).

4/ And above all, the status quo, the way things ARE, is what makes the elites the elites. So they aren't going to change anything about what kind of stuff they report or how they report it. Apart from the odd story here and there to give them the look of legitimacy or "balance."

So, really, you don't have much in the way of options -- or alternative points of view -- at all.


CHECK OUT CHOMSKY    

The expert in this field is Noam Chomsky. Take a look at his books on the media. And a classic resource is the documentary about Chomsky and his life of analyzing the media "Manufacturing Consent". (You can watch it online here.

Your TV delivers propaganda. Through news, commercials, and subtle messages and stereotypes in virtually every show you watch. And when it isn't doing that, it is dumbing us down and encouraging us to "veg out" and just not think. Again, that's what the folks in control want: If we think, we might start trying to change things.

Technically speaking, the airwaves belong to us -- public property! -- but they have been stolen by corporations. That's a fact. We should send the bastards a bill.

The Internet is an alternative means of mass communication that has great potential: but the corporations are trying to narrow our access there too. I will be writing on that another time.


WHAT CAN WE DO?

The "big idea" behind "House On Fire" is that if we are to make the world a truly better place for everyone, we need to change the structure of society: how things are owned and run, and by whom. We need to change the institutions, including the mass media. Yes, it's a very big notion, but not impossible. First, we all need to get better educated and better motivated.

-- Watch less TV. You'll feel better for it.

-- Make your voice heard about the censorship of the news and the garbage that you are being served up. (Write to the stations, newspaper editors, politicians.)

-- Don't let your kids get indoctrinated by Ronald McDonald or Coca Cola or the idea that "sex sells," or that cute-n-innocent Katie Courac or, for that matter, Rupert bloody Murdoch. Limit their TV time and monitor what they watch and TEACH THEM what you learn about TV.

-- Look for genuine, objective, non-profit sources of news like the excellent DemocracyNow.org (recorded daily in New York City).

-- Comment on Internet message boards.

-- Surf the Net for sites and organizations such as FAIR that are critical of the mass media .

CONCLUSION

Think of it this way: You wouldn't let a stranger -- someone with a sketchy background and questionable motives -- into your house. Well, every time you turn on your TV, that's exactly what you're doing.

And the TV execs know how to get you to smile while they make themselves at home.

If that's not adding insult to injury I don't know what is.

Take care and kill your TV,
Adrian Zupp

IF YOU LIKED THIS POST you might like to read TV -- PT.1: GETTING A GRIP ON REALITY or THE IDIOT CULTURE.

REMEMBERING SIMPLER TIMES

I don't have television, but I like to do a little "time traveling" on YouTube. (All things in moderation.)

Sometimes I'll sit for an hour and look up clips of bands from the 70s, including those I grew up with in Australia. Or old rugby league games. Or the great comedians of my lifetime. It always leaves me feeling good, if not a little wistful.

I'm not one to say that the good old days were always so good. But what I do miss is the simplicity that's lacking in today's world. Everything now is so fast, flashy, extreme-high-tech, replaceable, impersonal. Life has never been easier, nor harder.

I need to use computers and cell phones to some extent but I wouldn't be heartbroken if they all disappeared tomorrow. I preferred typing my work onto paper and having the luxury of being unreachable.

I miss the old ways. And my deceased heroes: Marc Bolan, Richard Pryor, Bill Hicks, Charles Bukowski, Jack Kerouac, George Best... it's a long list. They had character, creativity. There are still such people today but they are not as valued. The trash floats to the top: it's cheaper to churn out, after all.

I miss substance. Ball games over video games. Talking over texting. Great rock bands over phony computer-programmed pop. I liked holding an album cover in my hands (I refuse to get an iPod). And now with these damn Kindle things they're trying to do the same thing with books. Books! Look, let's just get those data chips implanted in our brains now and get the whole rancid process of reductionism over with.

What of art? What of interpersonal interaction? What of doing things in "real time"?

Even TV, which has become the monster mindf*** of our age, used to have some innocence. It used to be, well, fun.

Not only has virtually everything in life become a commodity, we have become a commodity. We are not so much individual human beings anymore. We're mass audiences being sold to advertisers. We're demographics for the latest idiot TV vomit. We're test groups for the new hot product that nobody really actually needs. We're lemmings lining up to buy the same stuff everyone else is buying so we won't feel left out or "different." Sure, we still pay lip service to individualism but very few have the courage to live it.

I remember childhood summers of cricket in the nearby cul-de-sac, riding my bike all over creation, and "hunting" lizards. I remember mighty football fantasies in the backyard where I was the hero of the big game. Teenagers walking around with transistor radios held up near their ear. Riding the old "red rattler" trains into the heart of Sydney to see the latest movie starring Burt Reynolds or Clint Eastwood or Paul Newman. Or taking the train just a few suburbs over to the pool hall to shoot a few games.

There were no marathon cyber escapes or hours of video games. No "reality" TV obsessions or endless "celebrity" scandals filling the news shows and magazine racks.

There was just the world, and my mates and I couldn't wait to be out in it every day. It wasn't a world of air-conditioned everything and disposable this and that. It was a precious, flesh and blood thing.

So what's the moral here? Well, I truly believe that, despite what the technology gurus and corporate ratbags would tell us, we've lost more than we've gained. And that is especially sad for our kids -- which means we have to work harder to bring real substance and humanity to their daily lives.

The Who once sang "I hope I die before I get old." Well, I value life, but I hope I die before this whole anti-culture, mass acceleration thing goes much further. I have seen better days and they live in my memory.

Here are some clips I love that you might also enjoy:

Famous rugby league rivalry of the 70s;

The greatest rock band Australia has produced (in my opinion, the best anyone has produced);

Long before Borat or the stooge reporters of The Daily Show, there was Norman Gunston;

You've heard of AC/DC, well these blokes were just as good. But scarier.

The boys who run the show can keep their uber technology and their digital leisure. Their consumption addictions and gotta-have-it products. Their computerized cars and junk food and personalized plates and plastic surgeries and irrational fears and obsessive-compulsive lives.

I'll just keep my memories.

Take care and be careful what you value,
Adrian Zupp

THINGS TO DO TODAY -- SUGGESTION #8

See if you can go 24 hours without using the Internet for recreation or cyber "socializing."

(Re-connect with the real world in real time.)