Procrast-Nation

It’s that simple.  Make a request, and I will draw an image of it on MS Paint that will be 6″ by 6″.  Multiple requests are allowed.  There are a couple of rules though:
-Limit requests to one or two words

-Requests may not involve a subject and a predicate.  For example, you could request “dog” or “pee” but you could not request “dog peeing”

-Proper nouns are allowed if they are relatively famous and well known, so “Abraham Lincoln” would be acceptable, but some random person, such as your neighbor, would not be.

-If your request is ambiguous or has multiple meanings, that is fine.  I will just interpret it however I feel like.  So if you request “sex” I could draw an image representing gender, or I could draw the act of intercourse.

-Don’t be annoying and only request things that are very difficult to express.  For every abstract request I’d like five concrete ones.

I’ll post the requests in batches of 5-10.

That’s all.  Post requests in the comment section.

Interpreted on banjo, since I’ve run out of ways to say “We’re pretty well fucked.” in prose.

the-great-british-petroleum-oil-slick-take-2

The assignment was to compare three news sources and how they covered a story over a certain period of time. I’m posting it here for the fatman mostly. If you enjoy, then that’s fine too.

The Oklahoma Abortion Controversy

For my final paper topic I chose to investigate the coverage of the Oklahoma abortion controversy which has recently been stirred up. The story in short, is that of the unsuccessful attempt to pass a law in the state of Oklahoma which forces women, regardless of circumstances, to go through an ultra-sound and other procedures before getting an abortion with the intention of making them reconsider.

The three sources I chose to follow were the local newspaper, the Tulsa World, out of Tulsa, Oklahoma, an independently owned and operated paper which is the second widest circulated in the state, the major regional New York Times, of which I doubt much needs to be said, and the ABC News website.

The coverage in the Tulsa World came first, and as would be expected from a paper which covers local state legislative issues even when they aren’t carried over into national news, they go deep into the nitty gritty of the story. The World always makes sure to name the House Bill by its number (2780) and name which specific state representatives said what in what public hearings regarding the case. The first story, reported shortly after the action was passed, is a detailing of a lawsuit. All players are mentioned, though The Center For Reproductive Rights, who filed the lawsuit, are the only ones quoted at any length in the article. The second story, “Senate Debates, passes five abortion measures” (1) is a classic example of inverted pyramid, no nonsense journalism. The World is clearly speaking to a local readership expected to be aware and concerned about such subject matter. All the quotes in this article are from senators and representatives, each getting space for a short sound-bite. Hard numbers are given on the vote. The third article, “Abortion law isn’t fair, says lawsuit”(2), published a week later, again is very much concerned with specifics. A lawsuit is filed and the article mentions all the players in said lawsuit, the specific charges, and gives them each some sound bite space. Interestingly enough, this article covers an element which went entirely untouched by the other news sources, namely that of an insurance company’s response, an entirely legal and emotionally uncharged one, essentially saying the state is forcing them to spend more money.

In the NY Times, the coverage becomes more vague, and understandably less regionally focused. For the purposes of this paper, this becomes more interesting-there is more independent agency in the framing of the stories and the nature of how national movements can developed from some loose grasp of a local event becomes more clear. In the first story, The New York Times goes over the specifics, quotes a few healthcare professionals, and the burden of evidence as presented goes largely against the law, saying its an unconstitutional violation of privacy and criticizing, as most sources outside Tulsa did, the lack of exemption for rape/incest victims. (1) The second article is a one-paragraph brief. It explains that the abortion law was stalled and doesn’t say much else. No one is quoted and the comments section is bare, a rarity for a Times article. The third article takes an entirely elliptical and more national look at the issue from the perspective of president Obama. (2) Oklahoma isn’t even specifically mentioned, and despite an ideologically charged picture atop the article of abortion protesters and people in Obama shirts blocking people trying to walk through a park, the article mostly serves as a justification for Obama’s nonchalance to the issue. This really shows how little the outside world cares for the inner workings of Oklahoma state politics, and more for what the action signifies on a national scale. The New York Times reports the issue as it relates to concerned citizens across the country, with a less strictly and densely factual style than the Tulsa World, but still with some accuracy and substance. Its a useful supplement to see the bigger picture; to avoid missing the forest for the trees.

The third source is the most distorted and lacking in substance to their content. Unsurprisingly, they’re a television station. ABC News coverage of the event seemed to reflect the subconscious of the uninvolved American, content to simply read the front headlines of other peoples’ newspapers on the subway. The first story is more a bout of histrionics than a carefully considered piece of journalism. They try to go for the human interest (i.e. uninformed emotional outburst) level. The first four paragraphs tell the story of a woman who wasn’t even subject to the Oklahoma law, or who even lived in Oklahoma. She does however have a shocking (if cliche ridden) narrative of sexual trauma which helps to frame the rest of the piece. They even reproduce head shots of this rape victim, who, it must be repeated lives nowhere near Oklahoma, and was raped more than 20 years ago. She has no direct bearing on the case, and one wonders how ABC news even found her (her very professional looking head shots on the article’s second page seem to suggest an answer.) A full page is devoted to explaining the Center for Reproductive Rights position, though the last page does give some time to the senator pitching the bill and to the Oklahoma Medical Association. (1) The next coverage which came soon after, was essentially a video version of this, with even less information, and a ridiculous soundtrack and editing style to boot. (2) The third video was a clip from ABC program The View, which is for some reason accessible and posted to the ABC News website, and therefore constitutes an ABC News Clip. This piece takes the whole thing full circle, where the entire purpose of disseminating information is, as it so often is in visual media, ensuring that the viewer feel the news rather than become informed about what’s going on around them. Various washed up female celebrities sit around a table, sum up the news in two sentences, providing no new information from the previous ABC articles though the show took place 2 1/2 weeks later. They then proceed to ‘debate’ or rather scream at each other with the most basic, uninformed, and inarticulate views possible (this is called “being relatable.”) After watching Whoopi Goldberg and some woman from the show Survivor scream at each other for 5 minutes like this, one feels all hope for American journalism fading from view. (3)

In conclusion, the news game seems to work like a big game of telephone. The further removed from the actual time and immediate location of a given story one is, the more the initial sensible and thought out information becomes vague impressions and button pushing.
ABC News
1) http://abcnews.go.com/Health/okla-abortion-law-exceptions-rape/story?id=10507849
2)http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/abortion-law-hurt-patients-10509374
3)http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/video/the-view-fights-over-oklahoma-abortion-law-10551301

Tulsa World
1)http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20100420_16_A1_OKLAHO444183
2)http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20100503_16_A1_OKLAHO270166
3)http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=16&articleid=20100428_16_A1_OKLAHO381450

NY Times

1)http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/us/28abortion.html
2)http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15abortion.html?_r=1&fta=y
3) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/us/04brfs-ABORTIONLAWD_BRF.html?scp=1&sq=oklahoma%20abortion%20law&st=cse

This is a creative project I did in a math class for non-majors (the same class I wrote this article for  http://procrast-nation.com/?p=3578  ).

The project was to take one of the concepts or topics we learned about in class and to describe it metaphorically through art.  The project was very open ended, and the art could be anything from a painting, to a song, to whatever you wanted.  The medium I chose for my art was power-point.  I made a slide show that told a science fiction story about a future breakthrough that allows humans to “phase” into other “channels”.  The implications of this breakthrough are revealed as the slide show progresses.  The breakthroughs and important events are listed chronologically.  Pay particular attention to how the slides’ color changes as the slide show progresses.

The topic I was describing metaphorically was the idea of spacial dimensions beyond the third.  For example, I explain how if there was a fourth spatial dimension, surgery would be possible without ever cutting anyone open and how storage space would be virtually unlimited.

Obviously, you need the ability to watch microsoft power-point presentations in order to view this project.  Enjoy.

phasing-technology-timeline

Edit: For those of you who really want to see the text of the slide-show but don’t have the ability to view it, I have included the text below.  I will warn you though, it really should be viewed in its original medium, otherwise you will miss out on all the awesome illustrations and animations created by yours truly.

(more…)

THIS IS PART III OF MY ILLUSTRATED MEMOIR (illustrations Monday).

Part one is here.
Part two is here.

His gums. Such gums. Vast, prodigious. His teeth never stood a chance. His frame gaunt, face narrow, posture hunched, eyes ever so slightly crazed. When he spoke he gesticulated wildly, jerky and erratic. Like a marionette puppet.

Over the years we spent a lot of time, talking, scheming, making up backgrounds for the numerous town characters. He had a knack for nick-names, and it seemed like he had one for everyone he knew except me. Probably the best one he ever came up with was Hearing Aid Adam. Hearing Aid Adam was a short latino man who would show up to every teen punk show in his trademark Slayer hat covered in promotional patches and air drum with his eyes squinting intensely. Craig loved to tell one story especially. (more…)

Just got back from yet another awful concert.  I’ve begun to notice a trend in the low-mid range bands (if you can call them that) that play at the smaller sized colleges.  They get paid 5-50k to play to a group of 300-3000 intoxicated 18-22 year-olds.  They generally play in a gymnasium or some sort of event space poorly designed for musical performances and are complimented by aging sound systems that periodically emit feedback or simply cut out all together.  What this all boils down to is that these groups need absolutely no talent.  Essentially they need an arsenal of sound-clips, the ability to mumble vaguely coherent things into the microphone while occasionally referencing whatever location they are performing in, and a whole lot of bass.  It seems that if they can blast enough rhythmic noise, while occasionally saying, ” college X is da bomb” and “college X is tearing up the house” or similar things and “free-styling” in between, they are a huge success.  The sad truth is most of the people attending these events are simply to drunk to be able to distinguish a jumble of sound clips, noise and distortion from music.

I use to believe that maybe if I drank enough, I could enjoy these performances to, but I’ve learned that all drinking more does is make me feel physically nauseated whilst I am disappointed by the musical act.   It seems if you want to make decent money, the formula is simple, develop a reputation via the internet, get some really loud sound equipment and steal some sound clips form other popular forms of music, and say things that may or may not rhyme into the microphone.   Anyway, the title of this post… basically it seems that a large drunken crowd doesn’t care about the quality of what they hear, they just want it to be loud and rhythmic.  Sorta like that scene from the second Matrix.
Oh and the band I saw live that inspired this rant was Chiddy Bang.

It’s been a really long time since I did one of these, so yeah. Here we go.

(more…)