OUR RIGHTS SHOULD NOT BE WAIVED BY THE REMOVAL OF THE CONFEDERATE FLAG

Posted on by

For the purposes of full disclosure, you may call me a Southern.  I live down the highway that has set up a Confederate Park, complete with a life-detailed statue of a Southern soldier and a cannon that is a remainder of the civil war.  The flag flies on a pole with a flag that flies over the interstate.  There is a banner erected to celebrate Jefferson Davis’s birthday.  I pass by it daily on my working trips, but it does not disturb me.  It is a reminder just as the Confederate Flag is itself.

Now in line with the reality television description of a Southern, I am not a redneck.  I do not have the Confederate flag for living room drapes, and I do not adorn different shades of camo daily as a sip from my moonshine still.  I am an American.  One who is deeply troubled by events that have occurred, and the rapid unthought-out response to the removal of the Confederate flag.   I am NOT a racist.  Everyone is created equal,  and should be treated equally with respect and graciousness.

What I do find alarming as an American is the response that major retailers such as Amazon and Walmart have taken by the removal of the Confederate flag and the memorabilia.  I attempted to do a Google search for confederate flag, and the filters would not allow me to access it.  Some have stated that the flag companies are going to cease to manufacture it.  Where did this originate from, this mass anti-confederate flag hysteria?  There is discussion that although not an Executive Order, it was originated from Washington.

There has even been recommendations from Senator of Kentucky, Mitch McConnell, that a statue of Jefferson Davis be removed from the Kentucky State capitol.  Now that decision is being considered by the Historic Preservation Advisory Commission 401 Wapping Street, Frankfort, Kentucky  40601.  They will be soliciting recommendations on the removal or not on the statute until July 29, 2015, and meeting shortly after that to determine the fate of the historical statute.  What this has done, is that as an American, to preserve this historical thread, you must take precious time to fight just for the maintenance of the status quo.

To me, tolerance is one of the hallmarks of the American backbone.  Our country has been a melting pot of nationalities and beliefs for centuries, that is until now.  We may not believe as one group does, but as long as that belief does not impinge or hurt another unjustly it is tolerated.  The removal of the Confederate flag and the surrounding collectables demonstrates an egregious lack of tolerance.  In fact it impinges on the individual rights of the First Amendment.

I show all due respect and condolences for losses under the Confederate flag.  I do not want one, do not own one, nor do I plans on purchasing one in the future, but there are those that do, and they as Americans should have remaining rights to do so.

Generally, a flag is a symbol of a belief or thought that is waved.  It is a symbolic means of communication.  For example, many, many Americans wear and waive the American flag on patriotic holidays.  We are demonstrating our feelings for America by the gesture of the flag.  As a means of communications, I would present, that it is protected under the First Amendment freedom of speech provisions.  To disallow the presentation and display of the flag, would be an impingement of our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech.  By disallowing the display of the Confederate flag is also impinging and infringing upon our First Amendment rights of freedom of speech.

The interpretation of the Confederate flag, as is the American flag, is in the eyes of the beholder.  One interpretation of the Confederate flag is it is a symbol to stand up for what you believe in.  If we do not do that as an American country, we are not asserting  our  strengths  as a nation.  It tends to give a socialist impression at times.  Although, on some topics we do not need to articulate that.

The Confederate flag is also a historical symbol.  It’s historical significance comes from a time in our nations’s history when we were making decisions that were wrong. It is a symbol of what not to do in the future, it is a reminder of that.  It is important. To suppress the importance of that symbol, deemphasizes the importance of never reaching a similar point in our history again.  By the recent decisions it whitewashes our history and makes our historical heritage untrue.  The flying of that flag may be offensive to some, but to others in the South it memorialize  family lineage that fought and died.  Again, tolerance is requested to those that find it offensive and tolerance is an important American value, one that is in short supply in Washington and our leaders.

Considering the issue of the offensiveness to some of the Confederate flag are we now as a nation going to remove everything that is considered offensive?  I find the issue of hunting for sport offensive.  Are we going to remove camo from online retailers and brick and mortar stores?  I think not.  I also find the idea of killing cows for hamburgers offensive.  Is Washington going to order McDonald and other burger establishments to cease and desist selling hamburgers?  Is Walmart going to stop selling beef?  Will we still be able to buy beef stew?  Personally, I do not want the leaders of our country dictating what I can and cannot purchase as an American.  It cuts into our free choices as Americans and consumers.

For retailers, the Confederate flag is a product.  Online if you do not want to see it, click past it  In a bricks and mortar store, move to the other aisle.  There are hundreds of other products.  Just because I do not want to purchase a Confederate flag, does not mean others do not want to do so.  Their right to do so should not be impeded.  It is a personal individual decision.

Finally, I do not want the federal government dictating what I may or may not buy, what I believe and how I believe as long as it is not hurting anyone.  Tolerance is a key that needs to accentuated within our diverse nation.  This reeks of   too much federalism and impinges on individual rights. This is a slippery slope, and our rights should not be waived by the removal of the Confederate flag.  Stand up for what you believe in!

The Implosion of Facebook – My Prediction for 2015

Posted on by

My prediction for 2015 is that Facebook will implode.  I base this on intuition, and a business analysis of recent business decisions by Facebook, that affect usage both for social and business users.  Also, I predict that the stock price will be adversely affected if some of these changes are not renegotiated.  The stock price for Facebook at the close, adjusted on December 8, 2014 was $76.52, on December 23, 2014 was $80.61, and on January 2, 2015 $78.45.  I predict the trend will be downward, with maybe an occasional upward fluctuation.

A month ago I was just another Facebook user, not even a Facebook connoisseur.  I have a profile, but I set it up primarily to interact with social groups and discuss topics of interest.  Then, December arrived and I became  noticeably dissatisfied with changes that were occurring while utilizing Facebook.  When I began research, and looked for help from Facebook and for answers, there were none.  No one was at home to “take it in the Face” as some have described to me.

December 8, 2014, Facebook tweaked their Graph Search that was first distributed in the summer of 2013.  Also, changes were made to provide better mobile functionality.   Originally, Graph Search let users find photos and other bits of information previously shared with friends and family.  You could search throughout Facebook for the information, and was not limited to your specific group of friends.  It was remarked by CEO Mark Zuckerberg earlier this year:  “Over the next few years, as we make progress on building our search. . . .I expect us to deliver even greater utility for people.”

Graph Search has been heralded as an enhanced search for users.  The tweaking of Graph Search has now limited your search to posts within your group of friends.  Photos can also be recalled, but only within your group of friends.  The search is much more restrictive, it is not global.  The tweaking of Graph Search has been described  as “a step toward helping you tap into the experience and perspectives of your friends.”

Also, around December 8, 2014, Facebook quietly dropped Microsoft Bing from Graph Search.  For instance, prior to that if you could not find the person, location, or information within Facebook, you would be directed to Bing where you have web search results to assist you.   This partnership between Microsoft Bing and Facebook, first introduced in January, 2013, and was seen as a potentially important way that Microsoft could compete with Google.  That option is no longer available to Facebook users.  Although Facebook is not a default search engine, that referral to Bing did give you options that you no longer have.

Now, I like having friends on Facebook, but I don’t normally have the desire or need to search through their prior posts.  I do have the need for global searches, and Facebook redirects you to posts like a school marm tells her restless students to return to their seats.  I  do not like Facebook taking my choices from me, and directing me into options I mostly do not want to search for, nor have a need to go back and relive.  I see Facebook becoming authoritarian in the searches and more inner-driven.  Facebook is loosing interaction with the web and is a stand-alone empire.  I do not see this as optimal for users or business social media.

A step further was when I requested help with the search issues.  I got no answer and no responses.  Others who had left similar messages had not gotten answers either.  Some generalized miscellaneous comments, none a direct quote, but consensus were:  (1) “I hate the new search, also.  Give us back the Graph Search.”  (2)  “Now I feel FB has restricted searching abilities, just not everyone’s.  Was I using search too much?  Am I being punished?  I didn’t sign on to FB for these annoyances.” and (3) “I thought changes in FB were supposed to improve things. . you are NOT improving things at all, just making  your users frustrated and angry.”

My business use for Facebook Graph Search was to give parties notice and pendency of court proceedings to protect their rights, as I work with the court system.  When parties are not locatable within Facebook, you would be referred to web searches.  This was tool that used in my service to give parties information so that they might protect their legal rights.  Facebook has severed that option for me.  It would not always be useful, but it was a tool available to me.

Facebook business decisions are also having an effect on e-commerce, that will shift the emphasis away from Facebook as a marketing tool.  Beginning this month January, 2015, Facebook is bringing new volume and content controls for promotional posts.  The News Feed will have controls for the number of ads a person sees and the quality of those ads.  This could affect marketers in limiting their  ability to promote their marketing campaigns.  Marketers are looking for other ways to interact with their online audience, without Facebook.  This could lead to a lessened reliance on Facebook ads, and thus a decrease in revenue to Facebook.

These five factors, the limitation on Graph Search, the dismissal of the Web search through Bing or other search engines, the lack of response to user inquiries, volume and content controls for promotional posts, and a general inward perspective of Facebook being a world into itself, will have a negative decline on the stock price of Facebook.  Users, both social users and e-commerce users, will be moving away from Facebook and into other venues of social media for their needs.  Newer does not always mean a better way is accomplished.  I am open to change, but I want it better, not frustrating and limiting and non-responsive.  I predict that unless business decisions are not reevaluated by Facebook, 2015 may indeed be the year of the of the goat.  The propensity for good fortune will not be very good for those born in a year of the Goat, and they will easily become involved in financial difficulties. Therefore, they should adopt conservative strategies.

Bye Bye Baby Bye Bye And I Am Definately Not In The In Crowd

Posted on by

I am a published country-music song writer, and have followed Taylor Swift’s career with a special interest since she has the ability to cast her own personal experiences into her songs, writing many herself.  As has been voiced, many a heartbreak and lost relationship has been portrayed through her lyrics winning many awards, including the prestigious Pinnacle Award.  This was presented to Ms. Swift in November 2013 by The Country Music Association .  For reference and comparison purposes, Garth Brooks was the only other performer to win this award.  Winning this award in the country music genre definitely makes you one of the in crowd.  Alas, I have not so I am an outsider looking in.

Sociologically, the country music genre is a nurturing and supportive association.  The fans are for the most part loyal to their favorites and support their songs and concerts. Ballads are timeless and careers are born and cowboys sing until they ride off into the concert sunset, thinking about George Strait here. Although new variations are tried, the twang and the honky-tonks are the DNA of many a song and career.  The superstars such as Garth Brooks, even with immense crossover success remain true to their country roots, and they tend not to come out of the gate abuckin’ the Country Music Association.  For instance, Garth Brooks, although globally successful, when you relate to the foundation, it is country music through and through.

Having been inspired by recent events to go outside the country music genre with a hip-hot/ballad/duet that would be genre hopping.  Sometimes you don’t choose what you write, it writes itself and this is what is being synchronized in the inner workings of my writing world.  Because of this I was again linked to and became interested in Taylor Swift’s business model as she steps outside of the Nashville nest into the vast world of pop/dance/hip-hop with her new release 1989.  “Shake It Off” is extremely catching  and moving, but the business muse in me whispers, “Should she be so direct and succinct in shaking the country music genre off?”

There is crossing over and then there is crossing off.  The pop world can be endearing but fleeting, unlike those traditional county roots On her album 1989, it has been stated that this is her “first documented official pop album.”  The Country Music Association tweeted “Good luck on your new venture, We’ve LOVED watching your grow!”, as if the country chic has left the nest to roost in the pop world.

Although I am a writer and composer and my career is only a microcosm of hers, still I am personally confronting some of the same issues, that is crossing genres and how to handle it.  Personally, I take the stance that crossing over and embracing all genres without slighting one or the other might, prove to be the most rewarding and career-satisfying.  Why can you not be a country girl and move to the big city and invite all of your fan family for the ride.  I would not want to burn any bridges or give even the slightest hint of that spark.  In some ways, the interaction of Taylor Swift and the Country Music Association give me that impression, the parting of the ways.  As George Strait wrote, “Baby’s Has Gotten Good At Goodbye.”

I am a Taylor Swift fan, and have listened to and enjoyed songs from the recently released 1989.  I just question the business model of the transition from country to pop and the handling of it. The sales will tell, especially album five compared to album six.  There is that highway bridge over Nashville,  and last time I viewed it, it was not up in smoke.