Season 7, Episode 11 February 18, 2024

On this episode, we take a listen to some early Texas history, the phone book, and admissions testing.  Not the Headlines looks at media manipulation and organized protest.

Transcript

Hello!  Thank you for putting your ear to the Listening Tube!  I’m your host, Bob Woodley.  I, too, refuse to take a mental competency test!  Next thing you know, people will start thinking I’m mentally competent!  On this episode, we’ll hear some early history of Texas, phone books, instant photos, and the return test requirements...but first, (Not the Headlines!)…

Have you ever seen a social media post that looks like it’s a clip from a tv newscast?  It’s got a man or a woman at a desk in what looks like a television studio.  It’s got graphics on the bottom emphasizing the point of the story.  It might even have some news channel looking logo in the corner of the screen and maybe some stock statistics going by at the very bottom.  
No doubt the announcer, or presenter as they are sometimes called, is jawing about some controversial or divisive topic, and odds are you agree with a large part of what’s being said.
Have you ever wondered from what city that channel is broadcasting?  Have you ever noticed if the announcer gave their name?  
There’s a good chance that the clip you’re watching isn’t even from a real newscast.  The guy at the anchor’s desk isn’t a journalist, but an actor.  The stock statistics at the bottom of the screen are fictitious, and the news logo is made up by anybody with a computer and an imagination.
Maybe you’ve already noticed all that, and I’m not telling you anything you didn’t already know.  After all, most Americans and those in other western nations, as well as countries where news is tightly controlled by the government, are very familiar with most of the news sources available to them.  In America we have the major networks, ABC, NBC, CBS, and FOX, plus the well-known cable news channels like CNN, Fox News, MSNBC.  Even most of the lesser-watched are still familiar-sounding, like Newsmax and One America News.  That’s good news for Americans, because Americans are very familiar with news networks, going back to the beginning of CNN in 1980.  America’s news networks are easily recognizable.  If we care to look closely at the impostors, they’ll reveal themselves as what they are:  Well produced, scripted political propaganda.  
Now, let’s say you live in a country that doesn’t have legacy media like the United States or the United Kingdom’s BBC.  Let’s say you live in a country that doesn’t have Russia’s TASS or the media control of the Chinese Communist Party.  You live in a country that has no legacy media at all, regardless if it’s free or government controlled.  And now you have a device in your hand that can deliver news to you 24 hours a day.  News stories pop up on your phone from all the same sources they do in the rest of the world:  The people who have the power to control the distribution.  I don’t know if this is actually the case, but I can imagine a place where the government controls the internet connection, and in order to sign on to facebook, you have to watch a message from your government.  And your government gets to decide what you see.  Of course, because it’s the internet, some people will find ways around such restrictions, but people first have to recognize them as restrictions.  If that’s the only internet you’ve ever known, how could you tell?  The same goes with the news.  It’s no wonder there’s a movement to control the media content of millions of people who have yet to realize the internet is supposed to be free.  Or to make sure that even when they do, the desired result will have already been accomplished.  To that end, a public relations firm in Beijing, or as it used to be called, Peking, has gone on a rampage making fake news sites.  According to a story on semafor dot com, https://www.semafor.com/article/02/13/2024/chinese-propaganda-is-spreading-on-fake-local-news-sites-report?utm_source=postup&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningMediaNewsfeed_Newsletter_240214080229&recip_id=216525&lyt_id=216525  there are hundreds of them in 30 countries. Well, China, I see your 30 countries, and I’ll raise you 9!  Because the Listening Tube has been downloaded in 39 countries, including one download in China!  Was that you, Xi Xin Ping?   But unlike me, China has a cast and crew of however many it takes to create hundreds of fake news organizations and then create content to compliment the communist party.  And it’s well done, mixing local news stories in among the Chinese propaganda, making the communist viewpoint almost a given, as if that’s just the way it’s supposed to be.  They target pockets of the world who don’t have legacy media.  Places like Latin America and parts of Europe were seen as vulnerable.  Where there is no legacy media, it’s cheaper and easier to create a so-called news outlet and start broadcasting whatever you want in such a way that it mimics legitimate news-gathering organizations with legitimate credibility, the measure of which I admit is debatable.  Creating a new source of media in a place where it’s needed is one thing.  Creating hundreds of new sources of media is another.  Clearly, there’s a purpose here other than keeping people up to date on matters of the day.  
Evidence would suggest the barrage of fake news sources is forward-thinking to the not-too-distant future of AI-generated algorithms.  First you tell people what to look for, then you show them what you want them to believe.  If you flood the world’s communication system with your doctrine as if it’s accepted practice, it creates a self-feeding cycle of new believers and spreaders of the message.  And China’s message is getting through already.  The message China is preaching through these hundreds of tailor-made news outlets is a comparison between civil liberties and entrepreneurship in the American style, or the leadership and responsiveness political stability can bring.  There are people all over South American and eastern Europe who have yearned for generations for a stable government.  The China model looks attractive because it puts the responsibility of a successful society on the government instead of on the people themselves.  Let’s face it.  It takes a lot of guts to try to create a country like the United States.  Most people would rather let somebody else be in control for the sake of security or perhaps the freedom to not have to participate in government at all.  When you look at how hard it is to create a constitutional republic or a democracy that will have balance and fairness to all, it’s easy to let somebody else be in charge.  Plus, with a billion people, China has more experience than anybody when it comes to keeping a large number of people in line.  That’s what the fake Chinese news channels are selling, and people are buying it up like Ron Popeil invented it.  

The media isn’t the only tool for making an impact on society.  Getting a large group of people to agree to do something together has a lot of sway.  Unions still have a lot of influence.  So, in order to make a point, a story by Kate Gibson for Money watch  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/valentines-day-2024-uber-lyft-doordash-drivers-strike/?utm_source=join1440&utm_medium=email&utm_placement=newsletter describes how thousands of drivers for Uber, Lyft and DoorDash made themselves unavailable to drive during a Valentine’s day blackout.  A similar action was taken by drivers in the United Kingdom.  Seven out of eight delivery drivers were expected to participate in the U.K.  The headline of the story says they were protesting pay by turning off their apps on Valentine’s Day.  Boy, just when I was about to hire a stranger to take my wife and me out to a fancy restaurant.  For lunch.  More on that in a minute. 
I don’t know what happened where you live, but where I live, Uber and Lyft put the local taxi company out of business.  The taxi company would pick you up from a bar at no charge if you had too much to drink.  We don’t have that now.  So, these driving and delivery independent contractor positions have become a fabric of society as we know it.  Surely they deserve to be recognized for their contribution.  You know, replacing taxis and bringing your groceries.  
I’ll admit, I have very little experience with any of it, as I’ve never ordered anything from an app to be delivered by a third party, and I’ve had two rides from Lyft drivers, both in Orlando, Florida a few weeks ago.  I down loaded the app and put in my credit card and all the other stuff they want, and scheduled myself a ride from the airport to the hotel.  Days in advance.  When I landed in Orlando, I got a message that my driver was on the way, and he showed up promptly and put my suitcase in the back of his minivan and drove to the hotel at a reasonable pace and dropped me off at the front door, got my bag out of the back.  I tipped him in cash, as I always do.  Just like Fani Willis pays back her boyfriend for her half of their vacations together.  Only thing could have been better is if he spoke English, if for no other reason than to exchange pleasantries.  I know a little bit of Spanish, but me abla pocito espaniol.  While I was in Orlando, I attempted to use Lyft several times, but always found that it would take at least 40 minutes for somebody to show up.  I learned how to use the bus and bought a five day pass.  Met some interesting people at the bus stop.  But I needed Lyft to get me back to the airport, so I ordered a ride 24 hours in advance.  I was assigned a driver who promised to be there, but never showed up.  Eventually, Lyft sent another driver who got me to the airport in time for me to have to run the last hundred yards to my gate like O.J. Simpson.  For that I got a 20 dollar credit for my next lift ride.  Maybe I’ll hire one for my funeral.  
Anyway, these drivers who went silent at lunchtime in the U.S. and dinner time in the U.K. had such a subtle impact on everyday life that the story ended up here on Not the Headlines!   Even though a coalition of over 100-thousand drivers was calling for the app outage, it only lasted from 11am to 1pm local time in the US, and only at 10 select airports, and 5 to 10pm in the U.K.  One day.  Well, seven hours.  Total.  That’s not much of a statement, is it?  That’s like threatening to go on a 7-hour hunger strike.  So what effect did it have?
The story quotes an Uber statement that says, "Despite the headlines, we've seen no impact to our operations or reliability for riders. In fact, in most markets, there are more drivers on the road today than there were during the same period last week."   
Maybe this is a sign that the service industry of delivering people and goods at a local level is losing it’s panache.  The people simply adjusted to the inconvenience because they knew it was temporary.  Fine, you made your point.  Now do you want to go back to making money or not?
Let’s face it.  It’s hard to garner enough support to cause a legitimate wave in the fabric of our society.  Sure, there are plenty of news stories about the attempts, but rarely a news story about success.  
It seems like collectives have lost their influence.  Only 11 percent of workers are union workers.  Large demonstrations in our nations capitals only seem to fill time on the 24-hour news stations and provide a top story for the networks and newspapers.  They never actually seem to accomplish anything but gathering attention.  The last big gathering of people in the United States over a single issue was the protests and riots in the summer of 2020.  Those events were certainly a catalyst for change.  But the change they created, like defund the police policies, have proven to be a bad idea.  Knee-jerk reactions to mob rule often is.  Protesting of any kind, be it large group or individual persons gluing their hand to a street, seem to be less and less effective in the digital age.  Perhaps it’s harder to do something that gets attention, or perhaps it’s because not enough people can agree on the same thing.  You can gain a following on social media and become a millionaire, but you can’t get legislation passed.  So, maybe the question we need to ask ourselves is, “how does someone make an impact on social and political issues?”  When even the most outrageous forms of protest garner no more than a glance from the general public, what can be done to truly create results that benefit society?  Well, you could start by getting a bunch of people to vote for you to be on your local school board.  Then work your way up from there.        

Let’s Go Back liner

1674
England and the Netherlands sign the Treaty of Westminster, ending the Third Anglo-Dutch War. A provision of the agreement transfers the Dutch colony of New Amsterdam to England, and it is renamed New York.  I’ve been to the original Amsterdam in Holland twice, both times staying at a hotel ironically named Central Park West.  I’ve only been to the city of New York once, as a boy scout on a field trip.  We visited the Statue of Liberty.  The Torch was closed to the public back then, and in the crown, some of the openings had glass, some had screen, and some had nothing at all.  I stuck my head out of one of the windows and looked down.  The wind was blowing waves into the water below which made it seem like the island was moving in the other direction.  It was a long climb up for about 15 seconds at the top, only to start on your way back down again.  We also went up to the observation deck of the Empire State Building.  I thought I was near the top of the world’s tallest building, but as I looked around the skyline, I saw two identical buildings that seemed to be taller than the one I was in.  As it turns out, the World Trade Center had recently been completed, and had surpassed the Empire State Building as the world’s tallest.  The World Trade Center was the last time New York City had the tallest building in the world, a title it held for 65 years beginning with the Singer Building in 1908.
I’ve never been to the original York, but the original Amsterdam was a lot of fun.  That was back when they still had the Guilder as it’s currency, and the exchange rate was more than three guilders for a dollar, which made it easy to have a good time.  What impressed me most about Amsterdam was the rich variety of food.  I actually found an automat with Guamanian food!  Just drop your coins in the slot, pull out your lumpia, toss it in the free microwave oven, and you’re good to go back to the Bulldog Palace.  It made sense, considering you have a whole city full of people with the munchies.  Even back then, you could freely buy and consume marijuana and hashish products without fear of arrest.  Technically, it wasn’t legal, but it was tolerated, and out in the open as long as the use wasn’t part of another crime.  So, like, if you killed somebody with a bag of weed in your pocket, you could get charged with murder and possession of weed.  But as long as you don’t kill anybody, feel free to smoke what God gave you.
Today, New York is less like the original York and more like the original Amsterdam.  Either way, Central Park West was a nice place to stay.   

1685
René-Robert Cavelier establishes Fort St. Louis at Matagorda Bay thus forming the basis for France’s claim to Texas.  Now the first thing I wondered was what Texas might be like today if it was still under french control.  Monsuiour Texan, I mean, Monseeuurrr, If you continue to poke my doggies, you shall feel se back of my hand!  Stop..poking..my doggies...

1846
In Austin, Texas the newly formed Texas state government is officially installed. The Republic of Texas government officially transfers power to the State of Texas government following Texas’ annexation by the United States.  Yes, that’s right!  The U.S. annexed Texas.  It’s trying to do it again, but Governor Abbot is having none of it.  At the current rate of frustration between Texas and the Biden administration, it might not be long before Texas becomes an autonomous country.  Then the United States would have to make Puerto Rico a State so we wouldn’t have to change the number of stars on the flag again.

1878
The first telephone book is issued in New Haven, Connecticut.  Actually a piece of cardboard with a list of names, it had 50 listed, both personal and businesses.  New Haven is where Alexander Bell demonstrated the possibility, and a man named George Coy, according to a story on Smithsonianmag dot com, turned it into the first telephone exchange.  You need not dial a number, as all you had to do was tell the switchboard operator with whom you wanted to speak.  That’s right.  When you picked up your phone, a voice came on and asked, “How may I direct your call?” and you would tell them.  

One ringy-dingy…

For generations, the phone book was indispensable.  Every home had one.  Every phone booth had one.  They eventually evolved into an advertising tool with Yellow Pages for business listings and the regular old white pages for residential listings.  Back when people had home phones.  I know some people still do, but most people have their own personal phone number now, instead of a household sharing a number.  My mom has a land line and a cell phone.  Two different numbers!  She needs two phone lines to handle all her boyfriends, I guess.  Just kidding.  I hope her boyfriend doesn’t get mad I said that.  The phone book even had a page in the back for you to write down your frequently used numbers like your friends or the pizza place or the guy who brings the coal for the furnace.  It had a calendar, or I should say calendars, so that you could look up any date in any year.  It had emergency numbers for your local utilities and fire and ambulance.  Blue pages for government listings, and of course, the white pages had just about everybody in town listed, including their name, address and telephone number!  You had to pay extra if you wanted your number unlisted.  The Yellow pages was full of business listings and businesses could buy a bigger listing to make themselves stand out from their competitors, or you could even add an extra color to your ad for an additional charge.  The phone book was everybody’s go-to guide for just about anything you needed in your town.
Today, the phone book has been replaced by the phone itself.  Our hand-held devices now contain much of the information the phone book once did, but not all of it.

1884
More than sixty tornadoes strike the Southern United States, one of the largest tornado outbreaks in U.S. history.  Climate Change!  Said nobody.

1924
U.S. President Calvin Coolidge becomes the first President to deliver a radio broadcast from the White House.  No, it wasn’t DJ Coolidge layin’ down beats and raisin’ the roof of the executive mansion.  Famous daily dot com says he spoke about foreign affairs and government finances to about 5 million listeners.  He got in the habit of using radio about once a month, and developed a personal bond with many Americans through his use of radio.  Today, radio is still the number one mass-reach medium in the United States.  More people listen to the radio than watch television or listen to streaming music, and if you’re lucky enough to have a radio station in your area that has live, local announcers, you might know what it’s like to have a personal bond with radio.

1942
During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signs executive order 9066, allowing the United States military to relocate Japanese-Americans to Japanese internment camps.  It was a controversial move, and one that is still debated today, if not outright condemned.  Twenty-thousand Chinese men have entered the United States illegally since Joe Biden became president.  What would we do if we went to war with China?  One could argue they have already installed a battery of combatants inside our borders.  Should they be rounded up and watched closely until it’s determined they are no longer a threat?  How long could that last?
In the case of executive order 9066, it lasted 34 years until this week in 1976 when
Executive Order 9066 is rescinded by President Gerald R. Ford’s Proclamation 4417.

1947
In New York City, the first “instant camera”, is demonstrated to a meeting of the Optical Society of America.  This new technology let people take a picture and then watch it develop before their very eyes!  By “instant” it meant that the process took just a minute or two.  It was named after it’s inventor, and became the Polaroid Land Camera.  He knew the camera wouldn’t work underwater, and that’s why Mr. Polaroid gave it that….wait….the camera was named after Mr. Edwin Land!  Not Ed Polaroid!  It still didn’t work underwater, though.  Today, just about all of us carry an instant camera in our pockets or purses, and the term instant has changed from a minute or two to a microsecond.  Unless you want a printed copy.  Then we’re back to what instant meant in 1947.


1952
The British government, under Winston Churchill, abolishes identity cards in the UK to “set the people free”.  The Adam Smith Institute, a British think tank, tells of how the ID cards came about in 1939 as a way of keeping track of people during war.  Mass mobilization and relocation of people from bombed out neighborhoods were common, and knowing who belonged where was helpful.  After World War II, the Labour government wanted to keep using the ID cards to keep track of a variety of things like rationing and health services.  If the mailman didn’t know who you were, he could ask to see your ID before handing you mail.  But then their use became so common that police began asking to see them at the drop of a hat, so to speak, and this practice was seen as Un-British.  The issue came to head when a guy was pulled over for speeding and refused to show the bobby his ID card.  He was arrested, convicted and fined.  He appealed and lost, but the Judge noted that the ID cards were issued as a tool during an emergency period that no longer existed, that being World War II.  So Winston Churchill did away with them.  Not much changed, though.  The story says police and public officials were instructed to ask instead for passports, driver’s licenses or season tickets. 

1953
The state of Georgia approves the Georgia Literature Commission.  While many called it a censorship commission, the leader of it, a pastor from Atlanta, called it a study committee that helps the enforcement of the state’s obscenity laws.  The Commission didn’t have the power to censor anything.  It took the commission four years before they came down on a book, but there was never any judicial action on it.  Five years after it began, it got more powers, including subpoena powers and the ability to issue injunctions to prevent the sale of some materials.  A story by Wally Loepp says that by 1960, publishers and distributors pulled about 120 publications as a form of self-censorship to avoid any sanctions by the Commissison.
The Georgia Literature Commission would have to fight some battles when it came to the Bill of Rights, and eventually, 20 years after it was begun, the Commission was greatly defunded by Governor Jimmy Carter.  It would rot on the vine until it died.
Today, there are no banned books in America.  There are age restrictions on some publications, as there always have been in modern history.  For example, kids can’t buy pornographic magazines.  But if you’re an adult in America, you’re free to read whatever you want.

1965
Ranger 8 crashes into the moon after a successful mission of photographing possible landing sites for the Apollo astronauts.  They found the right spot in the Sea of Tranquility.

1998
Osama bin Laden publishes a fatwa declaring jihad against all Jews and “Crusaders”; Crusaders is used to refer to the people of Europe and the United States.  Three and a half years later, his plan to use airplanes to attack targets in the United States was put into motion.  I think the lesson here is that if they say they’re going to do it, they’re going to do it.  Hamas, Hezzbolah and Iran all say they want to destroy Israel and the United States.  The question we now have to ask ourselves is when?  Do we wait until we’re attacked again in the U.S.?  Should the attack on Israel by Hamas be a wake-up call?  Could we prevent the killing of perhaps thousands of Americans by taking these terrorist’s word for it when they say they will attack?  Knowing what we know now, knowing that America’s enemies have vowed to attack, why should we wait for it?  They have already demonstrated that they will do what they say.  They have said they will attack.  The Biden administration says they don’t want to “escalate” the current conflict.  But perhaps “nipping it in the bud” isn’t such a bad plan either.

Phone and email liner

Well, here’s a sign that the apocalypse isn’t right around the corner, or at least that things might be going back to normal post-pandemic.   Dartmouth College is reinstating standardized admission tests beginning with the class of 2029.  It was optional for the classes of 2025 through 2027 and recommended for the class of 2028 as a result of the way the pandemic interrupted so many high schooler’s lives.  It felt like the right thing to do at the time, but not anymore.  So, if you want to get into Dartmouth next year, you’ll have to submit test scores with your application.  For comparison, Dartmouth is the only Ivy League school to change the policy back.  
What inspired the administration at Dartmouth to reinstate the policy?  Research.  Research done by their own faculty.  Three economics professors and a sociology professor, according to a story in the The Dartmouth college newspaper.  The study was concluded in December of last year, and Dartmouth’s president announced the change about a week and a half ago.  Naturally, there are critics of the policy reversal.  The college chapter of the NAACP wants students to continue to have the option of submitting test scores.  They called it “paterenalistic” for Dartmouth to assume disadvantaged students aren’t capable of determining whether or not submitting test scores is a strategic advantage.  But that’s not why Dartmouth changed the policy back.  They didn’t say, “Disadvantaged students aren’t smart enough to decide if they should send us their test scores so we’ll just make them do it.”  What they’re saying is, “Seeing your test scores will help us determine how smart you are.”
Is there a valid argument that testing requirements put low-income students at a disadvantage?  According to the research, no.  The story  www.thedartmouth.com/article/2024/02/college-to-reinstate-standardized-test-requirement-for-class-of-2029  says the research concluded that standardized test scores are an important predictor regardless of a student’s background or family income.  One of the researchers went so far as to say that the analysis shows Dartmouth could miss out on great applicants if they don’t have test scores.  Yet there are some who will still argue that some people just aren’t good at taking tests, and that shouldn’t keep them out of college.  Here’s another way to look at it:
When I was in High School, I was good at taking tests.  It was the rest of the work I hated.  If you want to know if I learned what you taught me, give me a test.  I’d take a test any day of the week instead of completing some time-consuming project that has no other purpose than to prove I did the work.  I wasn’t good at homework, and that kept me out of college.  If you’re not good at taking tests, then life’s a bitch.  No exceptions were made for me because I wasn’t good at homework.  Besides, getting admitted to Dartmouth doesn’t hing entirely on your SAT’s.  Even when they are taken into consideration, you’re still compared with other people in your high school as part of the evaluation, so even if you come from an area that isn’t known for producing Ivy League stock, you might stick out when compared to your local peers.  In that case, submitting test scores as part of your application will be a great benefit, regardless of how you compare on a national level.
When the Supreme Court ruled a couple years ago that race cannot be used as a criteria for college admissions, that took away a tool administrators had to help them make decisions.  Whether or not you agree with it is irrelevant.  But another tool had already been voluntarily abandoned, and that was standardized testing.  So now admissions examiners are down two tools that for decades were heavily in the mix.  It got to the point where college admissions were based on extracurricular activities and letters of recommendation.  While important, the more information colleges have about the applicants, the better, especially when it comes to intelligence.  Testing is a good barometer to use.  Always was, until the pandemic.  It is in the best interest of the college to find the best and brightest students.  Students who they feel are prepared for the rigors and demands of the curriculum.  Colleges need students who are going to stick it out and graduate, not be discouraged when they find out they’re in over their heads.  A test will be a good indicator of how well a student is prepared for advanced studies.  Advanced studies, where you learn at much deeper levels and at a more accelerated pace.  Oh, and probably take tests unlike any you had in high school.  Unless you had my chemistry teacher.  Mr. Williams.  I’ll admit, I was not good at chemistry.  I understood H2O and HCL and CO2 to a degree, but all that stuff with the atoms and molecules was baffling to me.  I tried to get a handle on it, but it was too far over my head.  It seemed like the other kids in the class were getting it, though.  I began to wonder why I wasn’t.  Finally, one day during which Mr. Williams sounded like this…..

Peanuts teacher voice

I raised my hand and asked, “Mr. Williams, when did you learn what you’re teaching us right now?”
He paused and thought for a moment, and said, “I was a Junior in college.”  At the time, I was a junior in high school.  I wasn’t near ready for advanced studies.  And I wouldn’t expect Dartmouth to accept me as a student unless I could prove that I was.  Dartmouth has taken a positive step in the direction of finding students who will excel, thrive and graduate with the opportunity to perhaps do something that will benefit all of society.  They owe that to their students, and they want to make sure they have a good substrate on which to build.  If standardized testing is one more tool colleges can put back to work in order to help them invest in deserving minds, then use it.  Perhaps the other Ivy League colleges will take a hint from Dartmouth and start using a measure of intelligence as a way to improve the quality of their student body.

The Listening Tube is written and produced by yours truly.  Copyright 2024.  Thank you for putting your ear to the Listening Tube.  Subscribe today.  I’m your host, Bob Woodley for thou ad infinitum.