Cagle World

As my two kids progressed through public high school I launched numerous dinner table discussions with the same six words. Now that it’s graduation time, I’m going take one last crack at starting that way.

If I ran a high school…

Cartoon by Daryl Cagle - msnbc.com (click to reprint)

…I’d make the demands of the school day fewer, and the school year longer. Kids don’t have enough time to think straight let alone juggle classes, clubs, sports, homework and family, and still get 8 to 9 hours of sleep each night, which most experts believe is necessary. At our high school in Carmel, Calif., they’re now considering starting classes an hour later, at 8:45 a.m., based on numerous studies showing teens don’t function best at an earlier hour. Incredibly, there is even research showing that teens have fewer accidents just getting to school if the bell rings later.

Yet, the U.S. is falling behind, and a cue can be taken from nations that have a shorter summer break. More 10-day vacations rather than two or three months off would be better than the current American approach.

…I’d cut down on homework, particularly the busy-work kind, even in AP and honors classes. I’d also command teachers to coordinate tests so they don’t pile up on the same days.

…Speaking of honors classes, I’d fix the problem some schools face with a “weighted” grade-point system that forces high achievers to opt out of electives – such as music or journalism – because even an “A” in those classes would lower their GPA.

…I’d give more time for a healthy lunch (our kids got 35 minutes). And I’d forbid clubs and other school groups from holding meetings at lunch, which serve to reduce meals to a few hasty bites.

…I’d see to it that all students in all grades have organized exercise daily, unless they play a team sport, in which case I’d place them in a special study hall where they can catch up on homework.

…I’d insist that loaded backpacks not be so heavy. The potential back strain won’t necessarily show up for years, when it’s too late. I see that a high school in Clearwater, Fla., is going to distribute Kindle e-readers to its 2,100 students, with all text book content loaded on the single lightweight device.

…However, I’d prohibit cell phones and other personal communication devices in classes. It astonishes me that some teachers allow texting in the classroom.

…I’d stop kids who do poorly in class from “making up” the credits by taking poorly run and virtually useless online courses run by outside companies.

…I’d be more conscientious about controlling the cost to each family for what is presumed to be a “free” public school education. If gym shorts cost $20, a yearbook $75, a field trip $170, an athlete fee $100, etc., then pretty soon free schooling isn’t so free. The school board in Brooksville, Fla., just vetoed a music trip to Scotland for which each student was going to be charged $6,000.

…I’d require students in band and orchestra to wear earplugs. Studies have shown how high volume affects kids’ hearing; one study even revealed that many music teachers suffer serious hearing loss without protection.

…I’d end the practice of allowing seniors to leave school early each day if they have sufficient credits for graduation. High school isn’t college, and 12th graders should have the same length work day as every other student.

…Maybe I have a professional bias, but I’d see to it that every school library carries several daily newspapers. And no matter how much technology the library acquires, I’d insist that for the foreseeable future it also continues to have actual printed books.

…Finally, I’d seek to reduce the stress that comes with college applications and admissions. A four-year college education at an expensive, big-name institution isn’t worth making a student an emotional wreck during four years of high school.

As it happens, I’m not an administrator or teacher or anyone responsible for implementing these changes. In fact, as of next month I’m not even a high school parent. So I’m leaving these notes with you, while I strike up a dinner conversation about what I’d do if I ran a college…

—–

Peter Funt writes about newspapers at: www.FuntonFronts.com.

Peter Funt may be reached at: www.CandidCamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

When we think about addiction, we tend to focus on things like drugs, tobacco, alcohol, even sex. We don’t often worry about addiction to information.

As all addicts know, the difference between moderation and addiction usually correlates directly with ease of access. Drinking, for example, is much easier when there’s a bottle of Jack Daniels in the kitchen cabinet. So what about the ease with which we now obtain information – some of it useful, much of it not?

Cartoon by Cam Cardow - Ottawa Citizen (click to reprint)

Here’s a scenario drawn from my own experience as an info-addicted baseball fan. If baseball isn’t your thing, just substitute the stock market, auctions on eBay, Facebook messages – whatever you love to hate every time you succumb to an information overdose.

As a San Francisco Giants follower, I enjoy watching games on television, which on average takes three hours. With cable-TV, there’s also a half-hour pregame show, and a half-hour of postgame analysis.

Typically, I’ll read about the game in two or three sports sections the next morning. That puts me at roughly 4.5 hours per day which, until the Internet took hold, was still manageable. Nowadays, however, baseball beat writers like Andrew Baggarly, who covers the Giants for the San Jose Mercury News, go online three hours before game time. They Tweet the starting lineup and then blog about the manager’s plans, after which dozens of fans post messages in reply.

To a lurker like me, it’s a serious waste of time, but I can’t turn it off. After the game, Baggarly writes a quick game story for the paper’s early edition, a detailed story for the late edition, a “Notebook” column which is available online, and then he writes a postgame blog for the most addicted among his followers.

As the night wears on, fans post dozens of replies to Baggarly’s notes. A few are insightful, while many are like this from “Poop” after a recent Giants’ loss: “Blah blah hate sabean (the Giants’ GM).blah blah baggs (Baggarly) is a ‘company’ guy blah blah.i hate life blahblah.”

But then there are some like “Shades of 93” who wrote: “thanks Baggs. I can’t sleep at night unless I can read the Post Game Notes. You are awesome.”

So while it’s comforting to know I’m not the only one losing sleep while compulsively hitting the refresh button to see the next post, I feel guilty, and addicted. Back in the days when baseball lineups were not readily available until a few minutes before the first pitch, I got along just fine. Of course, my Mom used to tell me that before television she got along fine listening to radio. Each generation has to adapt – to both the negatives and positives that its technology provides.

But multiply my addiction by not only millions of baseball fans, but by countless others who text, Tweet and blog their way through hour after hour in search of the latest information about, well, pretty much everything.

Jonah Lehrer, author of the book “How We Decide,” points out, “My salient fact is your irrelevant bit; your necessary detail is my triviality. Here’s the paradox of curiosity: I only want to know more about that which I already know about.”

What I resent most about my info addiction is that it doesn’t make me any smarter, even about baseball. And it doesn’t make me happier; just edgy about what I might be missing if I tune out. I also suspect that spending so much time on the digital treadmill doesn’t do Baggerly’s reporting much good either.

Another thing my mother often says is that people who work in candy stores usually eat so much candy during the first few days simply because it’s available, that they get sick and lose their taste for it. I think her point is that I’d be thinner if I ate less candy.

I’m sure I’d be better off if I spent fewer hours fussing about baseball. And I believe we’ll all be better off when, on some occasions, we confront the useless information we crave by just saying no.

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at: www.CandidCamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

Every Saturday morning, just for fun and without spending a dime on gas, I take a trip to roughly 100 American cities and towns.

I do this through a terrific website operated by the Newseum, a facility in Washington, DC, dedicated to preserving and promoting the nation’s news media, particularly its newspapers. At www.newseum.org there is a section called Today’s Front Pages which, without comment or embellishment, lets visitors read newspaper “fronts” from around the nation.

Cartoon by Joe Heller - Green Bay Press-Gazette (click to purchase)

During my tour on May 22 I saw on the front page of The Durango Herald in Colorado that residents are complaining about the city’s 50-foot pile of snow that was collected during winter and is now brown and smelly and won’t seem to melt, global warming and the coming of summer notwithstanding.

The Courier News in New Jersey reported the four millionth fan to attend a Somerset Patriots minor-league baseball game received a year’s supply of Ben & Jerry’s ice cream. The Stamford Advocate in Connecticut ran a photo of a 2000 Jeep Cherokee, bought by a local man for $26,000 because it was once owned by Barack Obama.

In Georgia, The Gainesville Times led with news that Scott Haley, 28, was sentenced to two years in prison for posting YouTube videos in which he claimed, falsely, to have killed 16 people in what the paper notes, “could be the first case of its kind in Georgia.” There was legal news in North Dakota as well where The Bismarck Tribune told about a guy who is protesting because state officials won’t allow his personalized license plate to read ISNOGOD.

In an eye-catching photo on page one of the Herald News in Fall River, Mass., “chain saw artist” Jesse Green is shown making a wooden sculpture of chef Emeril Lagasse, of all people.

According to The Press Journal in Indian River, Fla., an 86-year-old page of math homework was found at the former Fellsmere School building. “So all these years later,” the story said, “Hallie Alcutt could prove that she really did lose her homework.” Unfortunately, Ms. Alcutt died eight years ago at age 91.

In Albany, N.Y., The Times Union reported that a middle school sparked controversy by banning hugging on campus. Meanwhile in Georgia, a front-page story in the Macon Telegraph said several parents were turned away at high school graduation ceremonies for wearing short pants.

It was front-page news in Riverside, California’s Press-Enterprise that Jordan Romero, 13, became the youngest person to climb Mount Everest. Other mountains made news, as The Honolulu Star Bulletin ran a photo of the Kilauea Volcano erupting for the 10,000th straight day.

As different as the nation’s front pages tend to be, it’s clear that all editors love photos of animals. On this single Saturday, moose were fronted on The Anchorage Daily News and bison on The New York Times. There was a goat on The Harrison Daily Times in Arkansas, a horse on The Washington Post, and a giant octopus on The Telegraph Herald in Dubuque, Iowa. The Erie Times-News in Pennsylvania featured a colony of bees, The State in Columbia, S.C. focused on kangaroos, and The Wisconsin State Journal pictured a monkey.

Under the headline “Pooch in the Pokey,” The Union in Grass Valley, Calif., disclosed that a pit bull named Romeo may have been framed for attacks on neighborhood pets. In Iowa, the lead item in the Sioux City Journal was that a cat named Amazing Grace survived surgery to remove a three-inch nail from her head.

In other news of good fortune, The Topeka Capital-Journal in Kansas reported that Donna Nish found 21 four-leaf clovers and three five-leaf clovers growing in her front yard.

The Times Record in Fort Smith, Ark., revealed that a program requiring drunk drivers to tour prisons is running into trouble because many of them are showing up for the tours drunk.

Then there was the story on the front page of the Courier-Times in New Castle, Ind., announcing plans for this year’s Memorial Day celebration. The highlight will be a traveling museum about funerals. Reporter Donna Cronk notes that alongside the caskets “there will be complimentary hot dogs, chips, beverages, and tropical shaved ice.”

It’s apparent that despite the shrinking globe, this remains a remarkably diverse nation. And despite technological changes in the news business, the nation’s front pages still capture it best.

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at www.CandidCamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

When you place Al Gore in a room with several hundred high school and college students for an exchange about global warming, as I observed this week, two factors combine to keep the discussion from bogging down.

Cartoon by Arcadio Esquivel - Cagle Cartoons (click for reprint info)

First, little energy is frittered on the question of whether man-induced warming is a matter of scientific fact; it’s a given. Second, solutions that may take several decades to implement are not dismissed as being so distant that they will be the concern of a future generation; the students seem ready to take ownership of the problem.

These days the former vice president and Nobel Laureate gives speeches, promotes his books and drums relentlessly on the issue of climate change, which is what brought him to Cal State Monterey Bay, as part of a forum run by CIA Director Leon Panetta and his wife Sylvia. Gore’s message resonates particularly well with teens – a group he is fond of calling “Inconvenient Youth.”

Last month Gore’s nonprofit, The Climate Project, began sponsoring the website, Inconvenientyouth.org, to “empower teens to address climate change through engagement and leadership opportunities.” The name is a play on Gore’s 2006 Oscar-winning documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” which served to turn up the heat on the global warming debate – among those energized by Gore’s warning, and those opposed to not only his message but the fact that he has profited handsomely from the crusade.

For all his accomplishments in leading the discussion on environment in the decade since his whisker-close loss to George W. Bush and exit from politics (“You win some, you lose some, and then there’s that little-known third category”), Gore seems tired and frustrated. He believes powerful business interests are supporting pseudo-scientific research that makes climate change seem more debatable than it is, much as tobacco companies continued to drum up favorable research long after the dangers of smoking became clear.

Those same forces, he insists, are behind lobbying efforts in Washington that have effectively blocked legislation to combat global warming. As a result, America has squandered its leadership role among other nations that are reluctant to embark on costly steps to curb their own carbon emissions in the absence of a more vigorous effort by the U.S.

And unlike, say, the environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, whose effects show up dramatically in news pictures of gushing oil, Gore points out that the ongoing release of C02 “pollution” – 90 million tons per day – is invisible. The planet has, according to scientists Gore cites, perhaps two decades remaining to “bend the trend lines” of global warming.

So while Al Gore continues to speak about harnessing solar power and wind power, the real change he seeks may depend upon harnessing youth power. In announcing the Inconvenient Youth initiative, Gore explained, “It will give this generation, which has a unique stake in this issue, a chance to organize and exchange ideas with other young people who want to do their part to address the climate crisis.”

The audience of students at CSUMB seemed particularly moved when the former vice president recounted the challenge issued by President Kennedy, back when Gore was 13, to put a man on the moon within a decade. When the mission was accomplished in under nine years, cheers went up at NASA’s headquarters in Houston.

“The average age of those systems engineers at mission control that day was 26,” says Gore, “which means their average age when they heard that challenge was 18.” That brought the afternoon’s biggest applause.

Say what you will about Al Gore’s climate crusade, but if he can succeed in motivating a generation that has both the time and energy to actually effect change rather than just argue about it, it will, indeed, be a giant leap for mankind.

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at www.CandidCamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

Outside Ohio, the question isn’t so much whether basketball superstar LeBron James will opt to stay with the Cleveland Cavaliers, but whether a shamelessly hokey rendition of “We Are the World,” sung by local politicians and media folk, will have any actual impact on his thinking.

Cartoon by John Cole - Scranton Times-Tribune (click to reprint)

The Ohio version goes: “Please stay, LeBron; We really need you. No bigger market’s gonna love you half as much as we do. It’s a choice you’re making; will you go or will you stay? What will we do with that big sign, if you move away?”

Could a dumb ditty like that sway a major decision? If so, get ready for…

Senator Arlen Specter campaign ad – “Please vote for me; I’m finished changing. It’s the GOP, not my new par-ty, that needs rearranging. If you boot me out, let there be no mys-tery; I’ll just join a group that suits me to a tea…”

Elena Kagan testimony – “Do I look gay? How dare you wonder. Your group’s a joke; the system’s broke, and gone asunder. If I am confirmed, you all know so very well. I’ll sit on the bench and never ask or tell…”

BP commercial – “OK, we goofed, but we’re still tryin’. For 75-mil, our experts shill; you know they’re lyin’. It’ll cost a lot, now that the Gulf’s a dump. But we’ll get even with you, baby, at the pump…”

NBC promo – “We are the net; we do it our way. Prime-time may suck, but that’s bad luck; we’re makin’ Jay pay. We’ve got new shows planned; and we’ll be tops again. You’ll love Al Roker when we put him on at 10….”

Sean Hannity script – “We are the world; we see it our way. We love our views, and don’t confuse, what else the facts say. Balance is our goal, and we strive to keep things fair; but if we are wrong we never seem to care…”

Steve Jobs pitch – “We struck it rich; you love the iPad! You over pay, what can I say? It makes us all glad. Apple’s doin’ great, and we’ve got you all to thank. And we’re laughin’ all the way to the i-Bank…”

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer news conference – “We love our cops; they stop the capers. They’ll let you pass, but first they want to see your papers. We’ve got border guards, ’cause Latinos try to roam. As for tourists, we’ll just let them stay at home…”

President Obama speech – “This job is tough; did I misjudge it? The polls are down, the markets too; I just can’t fudge it. But we’ll muddle through, and I want you all to know: no matter what, the job won’t go to Joe…”

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at www.CandidCamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

PEBBLE BEACH, Calif. – The U.S. Open golf tournament will be played here next month with great fanfare. But looking at the onerous list of regulations for spectators, there is legitimate question about whether this grand event is at all fan fair.

Cartoon by Luojie - China Daily (click to purchase)

Here is partial list of long-standing prohibitions for all paying ticket holders: no cameras; no cell phones; no PDAs or portable email devices; no signs or posters; no food or beverages; no radios; no MP3 players; no folding chairs, no bags larger than eight inches in any dimension.

This is a sporting event? The rules are less draconian at Carnegie Hall. None of these restrictions – with the possible exception of the folding chair rule – applies at a Major League baseball game. Baseball fans, like those attending other pro sports, seem to enjoy taking pictures, texting, and listening to play-by-play on radio. Many even bring their own lunch, due in part to tough economic times.

Fans also like autographs. However, printed on every U.S. Open ticket is this warning: “Approaching a player for an autograph is prohibited.” This remarkably hostile admonition covers not only times when players are competing but also when they are practicing and walking to the tee.

Players in other sports have no problem ignoring autograph requests when they become intrusive, yet willingly sign when it seems appropriate. The truth is many pro golfers would be happy to give autographs, and some will at the U.S. Open despite the prohibition. But players and fans are hostage to the increasingly arrogant demands of a few influential pros and the misguided edicts of management and sponsors.

One thing is certain, the issue is not security. The list of prohibited items appropriately includes “weapons,” and all fans will be made to pass through security checkpoints – just as they are nowadays at most sporting events. But while it’s possible that terrorists could someday invent a ham sandwich bomb, it’s not reasonable to respond to such fears with a total ban.

The real culprits in this case are players and organizers who believe a homemade sign (“We love you, Phil”), or the click of a camera (most digital cameras don’t even make clicking sounds), will distract golfers and disrupt play. Remember, this sport already has uniformed marshals raising their arms and calling for complete silence every time a ball is about to be hit.

Much of what’s good and bad about the modern game can be linked to Tiger Woods. Woods expanded the audience for golf, both in sheer numbers as well as in the type of fan attracted to the sport. And it’s been Tiger and caddie Steve Williams who have been most aggressive in dealing with annoying onlookers. At an event in 2002 Williams tossed a spectator’s camera into a pond; at the ’04 Open Williams kicked a camera belonging to a professional photographer.

But to forbid fans to carry cameras except during pre-tournament practice rounds, at Pebble Beach of all places with its many acres of spectacular scenery, is both unwise and unfair. Many sports fans, myself included, count as valuable souvenirs the snapshots taken at sports venues – with my son at the baseball All-Star game, for example. How sad to spoil the U.S. Open for fans who might hope only to capture an image of the shoreline to show friends and family, or to use a cell phone to call home from the refreshment stand.

Crude treatment of fans, although not new to the Open, becomes less defensible as golf struggles to maintain attendance and sponsor support during a weak economy, and at a time when the game’s best player is under a self-created cloud. It’s time for golf’s hierarchy to revisit spectator policies.

In its literature, the United States Golf Association notes, “Unlike many sports, golf is played, for the most part, without the supervision of a referee or umpire. The game relies on the integrity of the individual to show consideration.”

Clearly that policy doesn’t apply to fans, who travel great distances, pay high ticket prices and have their own integrity, yet must endure the most closely umpired spectator regulations in all of sports.

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at www.candidcamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

Even in times of world peace, economic stability and oil-free coastlines, of which the present is not such a time, it’s uncomfortable to see a U.S. president doing standup comedy.

Example from Saturday’s White House Correspondents Dinner: “Unfortunately, John McCain couldn’t make it. Recently he claimed that he never identified himself as a maverick. And we all know what happens in Arizona when you don’t have ID: Adios, amigo!”

Cartoon by Adam Zyglis - Buffalo News (click to purchase)

It’s not that President Obama, Commander-in-Schtick as The New York Daily News called him, is bad at this sort of thing. With material from ace speechwriters Jon Favreau and Jon Lovett, the president was actually quite good – even if a few quips, like the one about immigration, fell flat. Indeed, the president was far funnier than the night’s hired pro, Jay Leno, whose awkward use of note cards only made his skimpy material worse (“Senator John Edwards…a personal injury attorney who turned out to be a sleazeball. Who coulda seen that coming?”).

Much has been written over the years about whether it’s wise for journalists who cover the White House to rub shoulders with key administration players in this setting. The 96-year-old tradition itself is not problematic, but the president’s role as jokester becomes less appropriate each year in direct proportion to the public’s increased access to what was once an under-publicized event.

This is not to say a president should have one standard of behavior for high-profile events and a lower standard in private. Jokes like those delivered Saturday night, while relatively harmless, are uncomfortable to watch out of context, worldwide, via the Internet and cable-TV.

It’s probably asking too much for a president to issue heartfelt advice to U. of Michigan grads Saturday morning (“we can’t expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down”), and deliver comedic barbs at the Washington Hilton a few hours later (GOP Chairman Michael Steele is “the Notorious G.O.P.”).

In truth, it’s been a while since Friar’s Club-type comedy was fashionable. When the goal is to make half the room hoot and the other half squirm, it’s not particularly Presidential, which is why Don Rickles never attained office above Roastmaster.

That holds true for vice presidents as well. Joe Biden spoke in March at the Radio and Television Correspondents dinner and strained, painfully, to be one of the boys. (“My job has its perks. Tiger Woods paid me a visit and gave me some tips. Hey, guys! They were golf tips.”)

It was particularly unattractive – at least via clips preserved on the Internet for all time – to hear the vice president say “hell” seven times in a 12 minute speech, in an awkward attempt to be viewed as with it and clever.

Americans enjoy seeing their president in occasional nonpolitical roles: throwing out the first pitch of the baseball season, playing with his kids and dog on the White House lawn, running on the beach in Hawaii, and even making a guest appearance now and then on latenight TV. Insult comedy, however, just like “Dancing with the Stars,” is best left for all the free time that comes with being out of office.

The funny thing about our changing times is that while nowadays almost anything goes, not everything plays well. C-SPAN and the Internet have seen to it that all the world’s a stage, and in many corners there is a pretty tough crowd.

“Today’s 24/7 echo-chamber amplifies the most inflammatory soundbites louder and faster than ever before.It makes it nearly impossible for people who have legitimate but bridgeable differences to sit down at the same table and hash things out.”

That’s what President Obama told the graduates during his standup appearance in Michigan. Appropriately, there were few, if any, laughs.

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at www.candidcamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

The adage at Newsweek magazine must be: a picture is worth a thousand complaints.

Newsweek’s current cover will likely bring that many objections from Hillary Clinton alone. During her lengthy tenure in the public eye, Clinton has been depicted in more than her share of unflattering photos – even without any consideration of the pantsuit thing. But Newsweek’s cover image on the May 3rd issue may be Clinton’s worst yet, and it brings into focus the power of photo editing, even in a medium that supposedly never lies.

The photo in question, credited to Charles Ommanney via Getty Images, was taken at a NATO conference in Estonia, which may explain Clinton’s tense expression and apparent fatigue in the fairly tight close-up. It is used to illustrate Newsweek’s report titled, “Obama’s Bad Cop,” or, as the cover line describes the Secretary of State, “the president’s steely messenger.”

Imagine you’re Newsweek’s photo editor, with dozens, perhaps hundreds of images of Hillary Clinton from which to choose. Is it journalistically proper to hunt for an image that looks particularly “steely”? Would it confuse readers if someone called “Bad Cop” was smiling?

A full-page photo by Alex Wong, used by Newsweek on an inside page, shows Clinton with an equally stern expression, but because of a favorable angle and softer focus it is considerably more flattering than the cover image.

The very act of snapping a photo requires editorial judgment about such things as focus, lighting, exposure, angle and background. The process only gets more complicated when editors must crop, position, and even retouch the image, while deciding if it is appropriate to the accompanying story and also fair to the person depicted.

The unwritten rule among news professionals is that reasonably flattering images are used when available, unless the subject is a hated criminal. It’s too easy to find unflattering photos, if that’s the objective, especially when it comes to politicians and celebrities who are photographed thousands of times.

Newsweek’s editors seem to enjoy challenging this convention. Last November they used a photo of Sarah Palin from Runner’s World magazine on the cover, angering some critics who felt the image of Palin in jogging shorts was presented in a misleading context. During the ’08 campaign Newsweek ran a Palin cover photo that was enlarged so much it seemed to intentionally draw attention to unwanted facial hair, pores and wrinkles.

There’s been a lot of discussion lately about how celebrities are depicted in magazine photos. Seems politicians hope to look better, while some entertainers are now willing, if not eager, to look worse. In an odd bit of pushback against photo enhancement, Jessica Simpson appears on the May cover of Marie Claire magazine without retouching or makeup; Kim Kardashian is similarly unretouched in the May Harper’s Bazaar.

There’s no evidence to suggest that Newsweek’s editors added wrinkles to the Secretary of State’s face for the current cover, but they didn’t remove any either. Washingtonian magazine was kinder to Clinton’s boss last year, but out of line, when it depicted President Obama in a beach scene, with Photoshop-enhanced skin tone and swim trunks changed from black to a sexier shade of red.

It’s unethical for magazines to alter news images without full disclosure to readers. It’s less clearcut, but nonetheless troubling, if editors intentionally opt for unflattering photos when better alternatives are available.

So what’s fair and balanced when it comes to magazine images? Not much. Photos never lie, but that doesn’t mean they always tell the truth.

Footnote: For illustration purposes, a small version of the Newsweek cover is running with this column. Shrinking a photo tends to remove wrinkles and facial flaws. I’m sure Clinton would love the magazine cover if it were the size of a playing card.

—–

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

Sights and sounds of a glorious new baseball season are all around: the emerald green grass, the crack of the bat, and the endless globs of spit.

If owners really want to clean up the Great American Pastime, they should start by doing something about the spitting epidemic. Spits per inning is the only Major League stat that seems to rise unfailingly each season.

Cartoon by John Cole - Scranton Times-Tribune (click to purchase)

It’s reached the point where any television close-up of a ballplayer lasting more than three seconds is sure to include at least one spit shot. I suppose viewers watching in HD on wide screens should be grateful that TV directors don’t replay this action in super slo-mo.

How it began is no mystery: many ballplayers chewed tobacco, as some still do, and had little choice but to spit the stuff all over the diamond. Terry Francona, the Red Sox manager, has been a poster guy for tobacco spitting – although he insists he’s tried to quit. Tobacco products have been banned in the Minor Leagues since 1993, but that hasn’t reduced spitting one bit.

Funny thing, while pro football and basketball players have their share of gross habits, you rarely see them spitting. Perhaps indoor courts cause NBA players to think twice about expectorating; maybe helmets make it too difficult for NFL players to spit on the field. Pro golfers and tennis players hardly ever spit – at least not on national TV – so what’s with baseball players?

Spitting is so integral to baseball that it used to be part of the skill set. The spitball was a legal pitch prior to 1920, and when it was finally banned, pitchers throwing the spitter were allowed to continue until they retired. The last legal spitballer in the Majors is believed to have been Burleigh Grimes of the Dodgers, who tossed his germ-laden pitch well into the 1930s.

In the modern era, Tim Lincecum of the Giants is one of the game’s bright young stars, and also one of its most frequent spitters. It’s no exaggeration to say that when TV cameras focus on Lincecum in the dugout he spits every three-to-five seconds. Considering that games take roughly three hours, and he pitches once every five games, Lincecum spits in the dugout about 315,360 times per season.

A few years ago management of the Yankees was sufficiently irked about spitting that they allowed me to do a Candid Camera gag in which I posed as an exec from the commissioner’s office, informing players that spitting had gotten out of hand. Nick Johnson sheepishly explained that during games his mouth just, you know, fills up and he’s got no choice but to spit. Jorge Posada seemed genuinely concerned when I told him the commissioner’s office had charted the Yankee catcher spitting several thousand times the previous season.

I came away realizing that: (a) most Major Leaguers are very nice fellows, (b) they don’t realize how frequently they spit during games, and (c) they’ll never stop, whether management likes it or not.

Yet, when the Minnesota Twins opened their new ballpark this season, they were confronted by a petition signed by 74 fans, demanding that beautiful Target Field remain relatively spit-free. “Whereas the habit of spitting is acknowledged to be, along with careless coughing and sneezing, a hazard to good health,” the petition said, “and whereas TV cameras filming Twins games picture dugouts in which spitting is regularly observed; and whereas children are known to admire and imitate managers, coaches and professional athletes such as the Minnesota Twins in their actions both in the dugout and on the playing field…” and, after several more whereases: please stop spitting.

There’s no evidence that players on the Twins or any other teams are expectorating less this season.

Maybe that’s just as well. If there’s one good thing about the constant spitting in baseball, it’s that it helps keep our minds off all the televised crotch grabbing.

—–

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.

Rhetorical spinning used to be good sport. Think back on the scenes following Presidential debates, when high-powered advocates for each candidate pounced on reporters to spin every syllable so it seemed to favor their team’s point of view. It was unabashedly biased, and usually entertaining.

Cartoon by Daryl Cagle - msnbc.com (click to purchase)

Nowadays, though, we’re stuck in a constant spin cycle, and it’s enough to make most of us dizzy.

The Internet, cable-TV, talk radio, all provide forums for differing voices to publish and be heard. In theory, this broadened exposure to wide ranging perspectives makes us better informed and more receptive to opposing points of view. Yet, just the opposite is happening. In many respects, what’s referred to as the digital information explosion has proved to be a time bomb.

Say you favor lower taxes for people driving red convertibles. Then you undoubtedly bookmark the Lower Taxes for People Driving Red Convertibles blog. There, every news report, every quote, every snippet of polling data is spun to reinforce your views. Those with opposing beliefs, folks who happen to support higher taxes for people driving red convertibles, are demonized and mocked. Of course, they’re too busy to notice, since the spin is quite different on their favorite site: Higher Taxes for People Driving Red Convertibles.

During the hostile health care debate, if you watched Fox News Channel and MSNBC side by side, you’d have thought they were covering entirely different stories. One camp calls the other “socialists”; the other refers to its philosophical opponents as “wackos.” Token appearances by weak-kneed guests, who dare spin in the opposite direction, rarely put dents in the dialogue.

It’s even worse on radio. Advo-casters, some of whom host both radio and TV shows, tend to spin more recklessly when it’s audio only. Radio rants are frequently more outrageous and blatantly biased, yet, despite vast audiences, go largely unheard by those with opposing views.

Rather than stretching our minds with new media, we spend an inordinate amount of time these days doing what is indelicately referred to as drinking our own bath water.

Occasionally the process is thrown a curve – a pitch that is hard to hit precisely because of its spin. Such was the case when the Obama Administration announced a revamped policy to allow some exploration for offshore oil. Anti-Obama spinmeisters, who tend to favor offshore drilling, deemed it too little too late, and probably some sort of socialist ploy. Pro-Obama spinsters proclaimed the move shrewd politics aimed at winning conservative support for more important environmental issues.

The most popular guy on cable-TV, Fox’s Bill O’Reilly, decided early on to spin the entire spin situation to his advantage by labeling his show a “No Spin Zone.” That’s quite clever because it acknowledges the spin problem without actually doing anything about it – much as Fox proclaims itself “Fair and Balanced,” while striving for little of either.

When you freeze the frames on our media and our politics, it’s difficult to tell which is currently exerting the greatest spin on the other. Media have become more fractionalized and focused on singular points of view. Politicians and their supporters have grown intolerant and less inclined to compromise.

Conventional media whose goals, at least in theory, are to provide generally spin-free perspectives, are suffering. The evening newscasts on ABC, CBS and NBC; the entire CNN cable network; magazines such as Time and Newsweek, and most general-interest newspapers, are losing out to competitors who specialize in spin.

Today, the hottest blogs, radio shows, and cable-TV channels are those for which fact is merely a starting point.

It’s worth noting that mainstream news distribution remains huge in the U.S., with as many as 25 million viewers for the three network newscasts; over 40 million newspapers printed each day. And opinion pages, like this one, continue to provide a healthy range of views.

But the nation’s spin cycle is gaining speed.

Spinning too fast makes you dizzy, and being dizzy causes you to lose your balance.

—–

Peter Funt may be reached at www.candidcamera.com.

©2010 Peter Funt. This column is distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons, Inc. newspaper syndicate. For info call Cari Dawson Bartley at 800 696 7561 or e-mail [email protected].

Peter Funt is a writer and public speaker. He’s also the long-time host of “Candid Camera.” A collection of his DVDs is available at www.candidcamera.com.