Monday, March 21, 2022

It's Way Too Complicated!

“Let me make this simple for you.”

Simple? For me? Does that make me a simpleton? Why do you need to make it simple? What happens when you simplify? Are we losing important information and ideas if a complicated issue is turned from a detailed mosaic into a black and white cartoon? 

Sometimes, people don’t want to think that hard. Sometimes, they don’t want to make difficult choices and decisions. Life is so much easier when the alternatives are straightforward: good or evil, rich or poor, right or wrong. 

That’s why we sometimes tie ourselves into knots finding ways to make tough problems easier. That’s why politicians provide sound bites instead of thoughtful arguments. They believe we don’t have the time, patience, or mental capacity to understand the nuance, see the details, or appreciate the complexity. But we do. We must! 

Sometimes, we’re lazy. We make choices about where to spend our precious energy, especially our brainpower. Running a marathon is grueling, thinking one is even more so. Governments, advertisers, cheaters, and crooks appeal to this laziness hoping that, if they make it simple for us, we will do what they want us to do. They don’t want us to worry our pretty little heads about these grown-up issues. 

Trust me, this is the heart of the matter. This is what is going on underneath all the layers of manipulation, deflection, and denial. I’ll do the thinking for you. I’ll tell you what to think and then I’ll tell you what to do. You’ll do what I say. You’ll believe my interpretation. You’ll just follow along. Trust me. 

No! 

We must confront the complexity. We must take the time to sift through the information. We must examine the shades of gray, uncertainties, and inconsistencies. I’ll trust the expert who has credentials – and I’ll ask them to explain their reasoning. 

I might have a question. I might have many questions. If the issue is so simple that no questions are needed (or desired), then why are we talking about it? Why is there disagreement? If the statement begins with, “Anyone with any common sense would, of course, come to the conclusion that…” it is probably been over-simplified. 

Years ago, students would say to me, “I’m sorry, but I prefer math to English class because math doesn’t make me defend my interpretations and answers. In math class, the answers are just the answers. Everything is clear cut and I know when I am right.” In other words, I don’t want to think that deeply. Wow, were those students in for a surprise when they find themselves in upper-level math classes where content is as nuanced as any literary analysis. 

It is challenging to comb through information in search of patterns. It is hard work to reach decisions based on reams of information. But I would vote for thoughtful leaders who take the time and energy to really figure things out over simpletons who jump to easy decisions quickly because they won’t – or can’t cope with complexities. 

Dealing with COVID is complicated. The war in Ukraine is complicated. Dealing with racism is complicated. Important issues aren’t simple. We wish there were more, but, as the old saying goes, wish in one hand, spit in the other, see which one fills up first. 

Googling the question is not doing research. Reading an article or watching a story on television is not figuring it out. Real reasoning takes time and critical evaluation – and expertise. It is a rigorous process. This is why academic journals only accept peer-reviewed articles. This is why good journalists verify what their sources tell them. It is easier to jump to conclusions. It is faster to only read the headline or listen to the sound bite. It feels better to just decide that the answer you want to be right is correct. 

Unfortunately, I fear the simpletons and lazy thinkers are in the majority. Many people don’t want to think that deeply. They work hard doing many other things. They want the answers to be short, sweet, easy, entertaining, and cheap – and when the shysters claim that it is all really very simple, they are selling exactly what these simpletons desire. 

Thursday, March 3, 2022

1000 Days of Retirement: What Keeps You Busy?

Whatever I want. 

I thought about leaving it at that. Seriously, asking people what they are going to do when they retire or what they are doing in retirement is akin to asking what comes next to high school and college seniors. 

Before I retired, I would tell people that I was going to take a gap year and just figure things out. I would also joke that I was going to become a pirate. It is difficult to plan for retirement when one doesn’t know what it will look like. 

And now, 1000 days later, I am still figuring it out. Of the 1000 days since I retired, 720 of them have been during the COVID pandemic. At least once a week, someone says some variation on, “you retired at the right time.” Yes, I did. I deserve no credit for it. 

What have I been doing in retirement? A great deal! However, the big difference is that I am busy without being frenetic. I call it easy busy. One of the best things about retirement is that I get more control of the pace, and I have been trying to slow things down. When I list what I do on a particular day or week, it is much less than in my life when I was working.  That is one of the best things about retirement: it is reasonable.  

I love my slow mornings. As a high school teacher, I awoke at 5:15, did a half-hour workout, put my lunch together, took care of whatever home tasks had to be done in the morning, and got to school in the 7:15 range. Now, I can sleep a little later, although my body is still trained for early rising. My workout is now about an hour long. I take time making a far more interesting breakfast and read my morning feeds. 

After that, my activities fall into a few categories: 

I am getting to things I did not have time to do while I was working. We cleaned the basement during COVID, redecorated my daughter’s room into a new study and media room (which I call my ready room), and began a project of scanning and organizing old photos and documents. I have some plans to do some learning activities once we are less concerned about COVID. 

One of my worries about retirement was that I would become disconnected from my friends, especially those for whom my main connection was school. So I am very purposeful about sending emails, making lunch dates, and keeping in touch. When we were locked down, this turned into more phone and video calls as well as texts and emails. But with or without the pandemic, socializing has become a far greater part of my day-to-day life than it was while I was teaching. 

I am very active in my congregation. I planned our twentieth-anniversary celebration, run the fundraising, and teach in our Sunday school. I used to coordinate the oneg Shabbat food after Friday night services, but we haven’t done that since the pandemic began. However, I am still in charge of announcements. I am delighted to be singing in our choir again! 

I coordinate two science fiction book clubs. I volunteer with the planning of the World Science Fiction Convention in Chicago, which will be on Labor Day weekend downtown.  The pandemic made conventions more challenging. I attended a few virtual cons and have attended two in-person conventions in the last few months. 

I am spending more time and energy with my family. My children came home during the summer of 2020 and I helped with whatever they needed. I was walking my daughter’s dog, fixing meals, helping with technology, and helping my son move to Detroit and drive my daughter back to DC. Speaking of technology, I am the IT help desk for my folks and a few others. 

My family involvement includes more formal family structures. My wife, cousins and I are forming a family council. I have become the bookkeeper for our family's philanthropic activities. My involvement in our family business has increased far beyond what I anticipated. In fact, being more connected to the family business was a bit of a retirement surprise. 

I really really like to read. I have been reading RSS feeds, books, short stories, articles, non-fiction, and lots of other things. I have to be careful or I might read a day (or more) away! 

Before the pandemic, my wife and I would go to live theatre regularly as well. We love to travel and planning our trips took lots of time and energy. These are slowly returning. We have seen some plays at the high school. We went on a trip to California and I am planning trips to be with our kids. The more time I spend on travel planning, the more traveling we can do! 

Oh, yeah, and I grew a beard. 

Yet, when someone asks, “what keeps you busy,” I am at a loss to provide what I think would be a satisfying answer. Now I can just tell them to read this! 

Tuesday, March 1, 2022

Reading for Treasure: Helping Ukraine

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction

The war in Ukraine is disturbing and frightening. We might feel powerless and angry at events over which we have no control. 

However, there are ways that we can help those affected by Russia’s violence. Here are some resources that will allow us to reach out, show our support for the Ukrainians, and give tangible assistance: 

First, here is an NPR article aptly titled, “Want to support the people in Ukraine? Here's how you can help.” 

LitHub has another list offering, “How you can help Ukraine.” 

A friend posted this Instagram story that tells us, “How to Help Marginalized People in the Ukraine.” 

Charity Navigator also has a list of groups. 

Feel free to list other ways to help in the comments. 

If you want to cut to the chase, here are links to the sources these articles provide: 


NPR: 

UNICEF

Médecins Sans Frontieres/Doctors Without Borders

Voices of Children

Sunflowers of Peace

International Committee of the Red Cross

Save the Children

UN Refugee Agency

CARE

International Medical Corps


Lit Hub List:

Return Alive

Hospitalers 

Ukrainian Women Veterans Movement

United Help Ukraine

Peace Insight

Voices of Children (also above) 

Serhiy Zhadan Charitable Foundation X Razom

Polish Medical Mission



Instagram: 

Donations to @ukraine.Pride:⁠

PAYPAL +14152799995 ⁠

⁠

MONOBANK⁠

4441 1144 5311 1369⁠

IBAN⁠

UA123220010000026205315732562⁠

SOFIIA LAPINA⁠

⁠

Donations to Ukrainian Women's Guard:⁠

@ukrainianwomens_guard⁠

IBAN: ⁠ UA 29 300528 0000026002000008262⁠

Beneficiary: ⁠ UWG⁠

Fight for Right⁠

Everybody Can

Resources for African/Caribbean students in Ukraine

Africans Leaving Ukraine:⁠ @nigeriansleavingukraine

United Help Ukraine:⁠ (also above⁠)

Voices of Children:⁠ (also on the other lists) 

Sunflower of Peace:⁠ (also above) ⁠

Fundraiser to Support Hospitals in Ukraine⁠


I am currently reading Victories Greater Than Death by Charlie Jane Anders.

Saturday, February 26, 2022

The Other Side


I’ve been thinking a great deal about “the other side.” We ask ourselves, “How can people support them? What could they be thinking? What horrible people!” This line of thinking is not helpful or healthy. It just creates distance and distaste. 

No, I am not going to follow that up with an “of course.” Discounting people’s skepticism or distrust of authority does not move any conversation forward. I always want my students to think critically and to analyze information through multiple lenses. Use of those lenses often makes discussion and argument more complex. But our time is one of complexity; simplifying these issues and attitudes got us into this trouble in the first place. 

I keep having an imaginary conversation with someone who sees politics and our country’s current situation very differently than I do. How would such a conversation go? The models online are not helpful. They are entrenchments and trolling. Changing someone’s mind online has become a sour joke. 

So one approach might be: how can we better understand each other? Can we discover places where we are in agreement? Where do we share concerns? 

What if the goal, instead of trying to convince, trap, or trump was to discover, learn, and understand. What if the whole “I am going to get you to join my party and vote differently in the next election” thing was dismissed and, instead, the goal was: can I leave with a more clear understanding of where we agree, where we disagree, and why? 

Would that help make the conversation less shrill? That is another aspect of this division. Defenses and dukes are up, ears are closed, and civility is at a premium. The entire situation reminds me of fights on the middle school playfield. 

How would such a conversation take place? We have divided ourselves into siloed echo chambers, online and off. We “unfriend” people who disagree with us or post things that make us uncomfortable. We socialize with people who either share our views or, if they do not, don’t bring up sensitive topics. We’ll talk sex, money, and religion before we talk politics. 

If such conversations were to happen, how would we keep it polite and focused on understanding? It would have to be small. You don’t have to yell if there is no crowd to yell over. The us vs. them mentality of the sports arena is less likely to develop at a table of four. We do have to keep it from developing. 

There would have to be some simple ground rules that would probably parallel the structure of negotiations or business meetings: no interrupting, use of reflective listening, focus on subjects instead of personal attacks, making sure that each contribution clearly connects to the ones before it, and so on. 

So if we got one or two Democrats and Republicans, supporters of different candidates, and sat down, would we be able to do this with some practice and assistance? 

Yeah, I am thinking that, too: so what? So we sit down and learn more about each other. Might that drive us further apart? Might that horrify us? Might that turn our neighbors into monsters? 

Perhaps. 

But perhaps it might humanize them. Perhaps it might let us understand what others value and how those values translate into political ideas and action. Perhaps it would help us relearn how to civilly disagree and encourage us to build bridges instead of moats. 

We desperately need this right now. I don’t think any political leaders have the ability or foresight to make something like this happen. Their thinking is too polar and partisan. 

So it is up to us. Can we learn about each other? Can we reach across the divide, the aisle, the difference? If we insist on playing winner take all, we lose all. If we take another approach, we could increase the odds of all of us winning. 

Do we really want more of this? Are we willing to stop yelling at our televisions and start talking to each other? 

It turns out that there are organizations working to do this! Recently, a friend emailed me about the American Exchange Program, which puts students from different backgrounds, areas of the country, and points of view in touch with each other. This story from the PBS News Hour provides several other groups who connect adults. 

I encourage you to view the news story (it is also embedded on this page). I have read about some of these organizations. It is time to do more than bemoan the divided nature of our country. It is time to reach across the divide, aisle, and mile – and begin to really unify our country again. 

Friday, February 4, 2022

In Search of Media Integrity: What About Openly Affirming It?

We need a news source for everyone! 

Remember when there was a rule that, if a news story quoted one point of view, they had to provide the opposing viewpoint? The Fairness Doctrine was a rule from the Federal Communications Commission that stated that, if an organization is using a publicly held resource, the airwaves, to share news, that news must be “honest, equitable, and balanced.” 

Cable TV and relaxed regulations made the Fairness Doctrine a thing of the past. Suddenly, every point of view had a news source that was the opposite: unbalanced, biased, and sometimes stretching the truth beyond recognition. Spin and news were indistinguishable. 

Newspapers have frequently been allied with specific political points of view, but these leanings were only supposed to be seen in their editorials and opinion sections. The goal for their news stories was to be as factual and unbiased as possible.

We know that there is a limit to news neutrality. Students studying to become journalists learn about the myth of objective journalism. There are too many factors that can taint objectivity and a writer’s choices about which points of view to share may not be complete. 

Add to this the attempt of strong forces to purposely spread disinformation. Beyond advertisement and opinion, our recent elections have been plagued by powerful forces, both inside and outside the United States, creating propaganda that attempted to change people’s voting behavior. 

If voters can’t figure out what is true, how can they make good choices? If voters rely on sources that have specific agendas or points of view, a feedback loop is created that prevents growth, learning, and change. If voters are overwhelmed by so many different versions of the news, they may retreat to a mindset of choosing which is most comforting or consistent with their points of view rather than making a careful evaluation of the facts. 

Facts are the issue here. What are the facts? Over and over, we hear people debating if something is factual and often the response is, “I don’t believe that.” A fact is true regardless of any person’s belief in it. Denial of fact is not debate, but delusion. 

So how do we know what is factual? Therein lies the rub! 

At first, I was going to suggest a Wikipedia style crowd-sourced and checked news source. This way, all the interests would have the ability to both be represented and a reader could look at them side by side. 

Aside from articles becoming too long to digest, this idea also requires the creation of another news source and that news source has to reach people. There might be a way to achieve the same goal with our current media outlets. 

Instead, could we create a clear statement of integrity that news sources could endorse, a kind of pact or promise? A media source that signed on with this promise would be saying that the news they presented followed a set of ethical guidelines; it would be a kind of commandments of fair media. 

One doesn’t have to look far to find such a set of values. The Society of Professional Journalists  (https://www.spj.org/) publishes a code of journalistic ethics (https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp). In it, they state that 

“Journalists should: 

  • Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible.
  • Remember that neither speed nor format excuses inaccuracy.
  • Provide context. Take special care not to misrepresent or oversimplify in promoting, previewing or summarizing a story.
  • Gather, update and correct information throughout the life of a news story.
  • Be cautious when making promises, but keep the promises they make.
  • Identify sources clearly. The public is entitled to as much information as possible to judge the reliability and motivations of sources.
  • Consider sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Reserve anonymity for sources who may face danger, retribution or other harm, and have information that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Explain why anonymity was granted.
  • Diligently seek subjects of news coverage to allow them to respond to criticism or allegations of wrongdoing.
  • Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public.
  • Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable. Give voice to the voiceless.
  • Support the open and civil exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
  • Recognize a special obligation to serve as watchdogs over public affairs and government. Seek to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in the open, and that public records are open to all.
  • Provide access to source material when it is relevant and appropriate.
  • Boldly tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience. Seek sources whose voices we seldom hear.
  • Avoid stereotyping. Journalists should examine the ways their values and experiences may shape their reporting.
  • Label advocacy and commentary.
  • Never deliberately distort facts or context, including visual information. Clearly label illustrations and re-enactments.
  • Never plagiarize. Always attribute.
  • Balance the public’s need for information against potential harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance or undue intrusiveness.
  • Show compassion for those who may be affected by news coverage. Use heightened sensitivity when dealing with juveniles, victims of sex crimes, and sources or subjects who are inexperienced or unable to give consent. Consider cultural differences in approach and treatment.
  • Recognize that legal access to information differs from an ethical justification to publish or broadcast.
  • Realize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than public figures and others who seek power, influence or attention. Weigh the consequences of publishing or broadcasting personal information.
  • Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity, even if others do.
  • Balance a suspect’s right to a fair trial with the public’s right to know. Consider the implications of identifying criminal suspects before they face legal charges.
  • Consider the long-term implications of the extended reach and permanence of publication. Provide updated and more complete information as appropriate.
  • Act Independently
  • Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
  • Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.
  • Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; do not pay for access to news. Identify content provided by outside sources, whether paid or not.
  • Deny favored treatment to advertisers, donors or any other special interests, and resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage.
  • Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two. Prominently label sponsored content.
  • Be Accountable and Transparent
  • Explain ethical choices and processes to audiences. Encourage a civil dialogue with the public about journalistic practices, coverage and news content.
  • Respond quickly to questions about accuracy, clarity and fairness.
  • Acknowledge mistakes and correct them promptly and prominently. Explain corrections and clarifications carefully and clearly.
  • Expose unethical conduct in journalism, including within their organizations.
  • Abide by the same high standards they expect of others.” 

How would voters find out if their news source were trustworthy? The news source would openly state that it agrees to abide by this universal code of journalistic ethics. If a news source did not make this promise, that, too, would be a message. Much like the UL logo on a product says that Underwriters Laboratories’ tests have found it safe to use, we would know we could trust a media outlet’s promise of integrity because we would clearly know what that means. 

And if a media outlet violated this code? Well, that would be a news story for other sources to carry. 

Tuesday, February 1, 2022

Reading For Treasure: I Miss The Good Place

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction!

It’s been a year without The Good Place and I miss it. The finale rightfully won the Hugo award in December and that made me miss it even more. The tone and ideas of this show are a balm for the daily news.  If you haven’t tried it, I hope these articles will persuade you to watch it!  Yes, there are spoilers below, but this show can handle that. Here are some articles, all from a year ago, extolling, examining, and explaining this magnificent series.

The Atlantic wrote many articles about The Good Place. Here are three of the best: 

“The Good Place Was a Metaphor All Along” which discusses the way this show reflected back upon itself and commented on television and even attempted to better its audience. 

The second article, “The Most Optimistic Show on TV is Over” talks about how “The Good Place has spent four seasons asking weighty questions about the vexing condition of being alive: Can human beings become better? If so, how, and what does that even mean?” 

The third article, although titled, “The Good Place Felt Bad in the End”, really delves into the meaning behind the end of the series and wrestles with some wonderful and meaty questions. 

“How the Good Place Redefines Soul Mates” from Syfy Wire is a great description of the power of this series. It spells out some of the wonderful aspects that make this show far more than a simple sitcom. Warning: this article has some serious spoils, so don’t read it until you’ve finished the series.  

“The Good Place Became the Last Great Sitcom on Network TV By Daring its Audience to Be Better” in Time Magazine is a wonderful testimonial to the power of this program. 

Finally, Tor.com had a wonderful recap and tribute to the series, “What We Owe to Each Other Is to Talk About The Good Place’s Finale” which quickly summarizes some of the shows best moments and accomplishments. 

I am currently reading A History of What Comes Next By Sylvian Neuvel 

Friday, January 21, 2022

Preparing for COVID

While most of us have been and continue to do our best to prevent becoming ill with COVID-19, more and more of us are catching the disease, sometimes multiple times. Increasingly, we know many who have been exposed, infected, or currently are suffering from it. 


Protecting yourself and your family through social distancing, masking, and good hygiene is the first line of defense. We’ve been inundated with that message. But what happens when, despite your best efforts, COVID visits your home? 


Recently, my family discussed this issue. My daughter, who lives alone in a city far from the family, was concerned about getting COVID and being unable to leave her apartment. Fortunately, she works in public health. She created a list of supplies to have on hand before you or someone you love becomes infected; some of it more specific to COVID, but much of it familiar and generally applicable. With her permission (and collaboration), I am sharing that list and some suggestions here. 


Even if you are sick at home, you will still need the basics: toilet paper, paper towels, garbage bags, laundry supplies, soap, tissues, and other sundries. Make sure you have some extras. No need to hoard, but plan on being unable to get to the store for a week or two. My daughter added white distilled vinegar to this list because it has so many additional uses including things like cleaning your humidifier. You should also have bottled water, ice packs, batteries, and toothpaste for an extra week or two. Consider having a notebook handy so you can record your symptoms and the way you treat them. You may be surprised that you do not recall everything when you are sick or notice trends over time. 


Stock up on simple things like shelf-stable products (such as beans, pasta, peanut butter, and vegetables), broths, teas, and crackers. Consider some easy meals that can be prepared with little to no effort. Sports drinks and ginger ale can also be helpful, look for drinks that provide electrolytes (such as Pedialyte or Gatorade). Have an extra week's supply of shampoo, vitamins, and other products you rely on daily. 


Have plenty of basic at-home medical supplies like gloves, masks, hand sanitizers, and basic over-the-counter medicines (such as Pepto Bismal, Neosporin, aspirin, fever reducers, cough drops, cough suppressant, Vicks, nasal spray, etc.). A thermometer and perhaps an oximeter are good ideas, too. They aren’t worth much if their batteries are dead or you don’t know how to work them.  Of course, you should also have an extra supply of whatever prescriptions you regularly take. 

Testing is important, and if you feel crummy, stay home and treat your symptoms. Make a plan in advance for how you would test for COVID. Can you call your doctor? Can you get a home rapid test? Is there a safe drive-through testing site near you? Know when you should be using a rapid test or when a PCR is more appropriate. 


Make sure that your basic medical information is handy and portable in case you need to scoop it up or share it: have copies of your insurance cards, prescriptions, powers of attorney, and lists of doctors and medicines handy. It is great to have these on your phone, but have paper copies, too. Don’t forget your notebook! 


If there are members of your family who are infected and others who are not, masking at home is critically important. Everyone doesn’t respond to the virus the same way. It may be a minor annoyance to some and a serious health concern to others. Protect uninfected members of your household. Infected people should be isolated. If possible, they should have their own bedrooms and bathrooms and eat separately. If that is not possible, masks should be worn and areas cleaned and ventilated after their use. 


Test grocery delivery services before you are in desperate need. Find out if your pharmacy delivers. Which stores, restaurants, or other services offer no contact delivery? Don’t forget pet food! 


We don’t want to get COVID, and we certainly don’t want to give it to anyone else! But we have to acknowledge reality and prepare - nothing is inevitable. One size plan won’t fit everyone, so consider what is best for your situation and tailor the plan appropriately. Making a plan to safely stay at home while we recover is a critical piece of helping ourselves and protecting our community.