Broadcast Television Makes It Clear: It's a Man's World

During this election season, I had the opportunity to listen to 'talking heads' on television outlets talk about what former Secretary Clinton did wrong. Never did we hear about what she has accomplished and how her career has changed lives. When General Collin Powell left his job as the Secretary of State, we heard crickets. Even when Condoleezza Rice left the Secretary of State's Office; there was no scrutiny, no backroom discussions, and no investigations into the torture issue under the Bush Administration.

It just seems that the women really get a kick in the knees when they want to go further in their careers. Former HP (Hewlett-Packard) CEO, Carly Fiorina was highly criticized by her staff, and by folks that wanted to run against her in the 2016 election. One of the men had the audacity to make reference to her looks as a measuring stick in which we should vote for her. It was totally insulting and abusive. In my opinion, her biggest mistake was running as a Republican for President.

The polls that are coming out in favor of former Secretary Hillary Clinton; yet they are skewed and can't be trusted. We don't know if they are trying to give actual numbers, or are they using any scientific data? I never hear who they're collecting the data from, or what demographic are they using to determine if Donald J. Trump is ahead or Clinton is winning. It's a mystery show!

This is the problem that each political party is facing. If they don't support former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, you have elected a man (Trump) who has no experience whatsoever, (except giving money for access) and has no moral compass for human beings or for human rights... and ties to Russian oligarchs.

If Hillary Clinton is elected, you are seemingly supporting someone whose judgment or ethical lines are skewed. The opposition has painted the Clinton Foundation as a money pit. Let's be clear. There has been no investigation into the Clinton Foundation doing anything wrong. There have been no outright criminal investigations that would suggest the need to shut the Clinton Foundation down; as they did the Trump Foundation in New York.

Nonetheless, going back to my original point, the men are not as scrutinized as the women when they aspire to higher offices (like Senator or President) or higher post in the workplace? I see a lot of one-sided reporting on television; especially the early morning shows, who shall remain nameless for now. The saddest phenomenon is: these are television shows that are sponsored by men, coordinated by men, tailored by men, produced by men, and financially subsidized by men. It's sickening.

If women are ever going to have a fair system of reporting; then women have to produce their own television shows during prime time. Women have to become a force to reckon with in the digital broadcast media conglomerate. Furthermore, the world has such an online presence; women need to be as strong on the web as they are anywhere.

Lately, the polls are finally taking notice that women are running for more Senate offices and Congressional seats in Washington D.C., and women may very well take over the Congress and Senate eventually. Three women did win Senatorial Seats on Tuesday night; Kamala Harris of Maryland, Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire. Women do have the momentum. But I want to see women become fairly reported about in the news as well. That has not happened. I want to see women discussing issues about women and discussing the plight of our children on serious news shows.

So, we are not just sitting as a token female that is being disrespected. I'm sick of seeing a woman talking on the show and a male host who continually speaks over her, and drowns her out while she's reading the facts. Nor do I appreciate a woman being called names, while men refer to them as 'obsessed with sex,' just because she is raising the issue of sexual assault. Any assault on women and children is a horrible crime and it needs attention in this election cycle and discussions on-going beyond the election season!

Our current news broadcast formula has to change and change soon. Or else, women, we can just continue to believe and tell our daughters; it's a man's world and nothing will change that perspective. No matter how many cracks in the glass ceiling there are.

Tracy T. Brittain, is a professional commentarial with over thirty-years of experience.
Next, her education includes a Bachelor's Degree in Communications, Master's Degree in Organizational Management, and currently taking coursework toward a second Master's in English with a concentration in Creative Writing/nonfiction. Brittain's knowledge extends into writing essays, opinions, politics, health & fitness, self-improvement, business travel, relationships, news and current events society writer. Furthermore, she loves to comment, and write thought provoking topics about current events, she often writes about lighter subjects for people with open hearts and open minds. In the past, she has appeared in USA Today, Chicago Sun-Times, and other local newspapers and a frequent contributor to Ezine.com. Some of the most read articles are: "The Implosion of the Republican Party," "The Whistleblower Effect On Police Departments," and "Feminist Are People Too, My Friends." In the future, there may be a radio show on YouTube coming before the end of the year... TBD. Thank you for reading.
Email: tbwriter2016@gmail.com

Blogs - Bite ME!

The trouble with the internet is it presents itself wrapped in a cloak of timely-legitimacy regardless of the 'time' in which it is read.

I received an angry email the other day from Peter de Jager. For those who may have forgotten, Peter was [and still is] a respected international Speaker/Author and Computer guru. In the late 1990s, he enlightened the world as to the dangers of Y2K and warned that when the clock struck 12AM 2000, computers better be prepared to adapt to the next millennium. If not, the potential global consequences could be dire.

He was right and although he can't take all the credit, the world listened and the crisis was essentially averted.

However, in the year that followed, there was no shortage of de Jager-detractors who, in light of the calm that Y2K ushered in, were all too eager to publicly vilify him. Why? Because the potential pandemic disaster everybody got ready for never materialized. Instead of receiving thanks for his services, agenda-driven hindsight-specialists castigated him in all medias for causing the world to spend $Billions on what they deemed, unneeded, upgraded, computer systems.

History has vindicated de Jager but to date, he has never received the recognition he so rightly deserves. His service to the world extends far beyond Y2K. For example, on 911 when the towers came down, companies like Cantor Fitzgerald [a large Bond Company], were back in business within 24 hours, despite the total loss of their entire computer network. They can thank, in part, Peter de Jager for the impact he had on the corporate world in his pre-Y2K recommendations that clearly demonstrated the importance of 'backing up all data' at mirror sites: in Cantor Fitzgerald's case, New Jersey.

At the risk of sounding a 'de Jager sycophant' the point of this article is not to aggrandize him but rather to address why I received an angry email from this man whom I respect.

As a matter of reference, in 2001, I wrote an article entitled, Chicken Little and the new Disintermediation Myth! In it, I likened Chicken Little to those at the time, prophesying the belief that thanks to the internet and global fulfillment, the middleman on the streets and channels [resellers] would become extinct. My opinion then was, it wasn't going to happen. So far, nearly a decade later, I have been proven correct.

In the article, I compared this type of thinking to what ultimately led to the many 'Red-Faced' futurists that got Y2K all wrong and the now historic Dot-Com meltdown. The article, mentioned Peter de Jager for the simple fact that in 2001, he was the Y2K icon for the 'time'. He was also a political Y2K lightning rod whether one believed in him or not.

I'll admit my intent was to be provocative with the knowledge that anyone could rightly challenge my views, but with one caveat; legitimate criticisms, must be couched within the framework of the 'time the article was written' - 2001.

In Irving M. Copi, Carl Cohen's book, Introduction to Logic, they posited,"The full force of argument and counterargument can be grasped, in most circumstances, only with the understanding of the context in which those arguments are presented. In real life, context is critical". Going back, minutes after de Jager's angry email arrived, so too did a Google Alert informing me a Spam Blogger had reposted my article from 2001. Since there was no reference to when the piece was written, readers - de Jager in particular - were free to assume that it was current, which of course it was not!

Nearly a decade later, in spite of what we now know, my article appeared to be dragging up the past, shifting the blame for what happened in 2000, resulting in unnecessary discomfort for Peter's feelings and reputation, as well as my own.

Ironically, this, for me, was not an isolated incident.

Several months ago [May 2008], I receive another angry email, not so courteously written as de Jager's. In fact, it was downright vitriolic. It came from an American VP of Sales who had read my article "What Successful Sellers Know - Others Don't ... The Subtle Art of Closing" To say the least, he took unkind exception to it.

The article stated that most sellers think the Close takes place at the End of the sale but in fact, successful sellers know the Close can often start even before a contact with the customer.

I likened this strategy to what was going on in the world at that time. The day before [Wednesday, October 29, 2003] on CNN, the Networks and all the papers, George W Bush stood aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier in front of a sign that read, "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!".

It was thought, the war in Iraq was won and it was won in only days.

I used this example to illustrate that the success of the mission could not be measured in the few days of fighting but rather the many months of preparations by 'Special-Ops' forces that worked behind the lines - ahead of time - ensuring the strategy was victorious. It certainly fit with the core message of my article which was in sales, the success of the sale is often predicated on the quality of the Close which starts with preparation at the beginning of the sales process, not the End.

Fast forward to 2008 keeping in mind that George W was wrong in his Iraqi War estimation and think about a VP of Sales that reads my article for the first time and thinks that its content is Current.

It bears repeating: The trouble with the internet is it presents itself wrapped in a cloak of timely-legitimacy regardless of the time in which it is read. Or to quote Copi again, "In real life, context is critical".

The methodology with regard to when a Close takes place, will stand the test of time. In contrast, the 'Times' themselves, more specifically, their ability to serve as legitimate example-evidence, have a limited shelf life. Clearly, five years of USA/Iraq history, in tandem with the appearance of the current legitimacy of my ancient article, posted on a spammer's Blog... had come back to Bite ME!

The Bottom Line:

The unbridled nature of the internet has its strengths and weaknesses. One being, it exists in an eternal state of recent authenticity. It would bode well for readers and bloggers alike to temper their interpretations until they can time-frame the context or circumstances in which the editorial / blog was written.

________________________________________
Paul Shearstone is an International Keynote Speaker / Author. He specializes in Motivation, Selling and Corporate Resilience Training. For more information on Paul's keynotes and seminars, or to invite him to speak at your next successful event, we invite you to contact him directly: http://www.paulshearstone.com paul@paulshearstone.com 416-728-5556 / 1-866-855-4590.