ON THE RANCH 517 July 27 2007

 

Media Rights and Responsibilities

 

Since purchasing a newspaper in 2006, I have learned a lot about media issues. Philosophies are an important part of what makes a media venture so powerful. From what I can observe, it must be taught in journalism schools everywhere that you must "cover both sides" in every article otherwise an article is assumed to be opinion and not factual. I would suggest that this is a very dangerous approach to take which has led many people to either be misinformed about important subjects or, in the worst scenario, entirely uninformed.

A case in point is the public's perception of the health of the United States economy, which directly affects us here in the Santa Ynez Valley. Did you know that the Dow Jones, an indicator of 30 of the top companies, reached 14,000 last week? Did you know that the unemployment rate is at the lowest rate in many, many years, that the deficit has been reduced by trillions, that job creation is at its highest in many, many years, even better than in the '90's? You certainly wouldn't know this unless you watch one particular station because it apparently doesn't suit the powers that be to tell the truth about how healthy the economy is right now. Governments cannot continue to cry poor and politicians cannot decry their loss of revenue when that's not what's happening.

There are many other cases I could cite demonstrating this serious problem in the media but I think this requires some serious thought and investigation. To require journalists to "cover both sides" makes them report, in many cases, out and out lies. I refuse, as a publisher, to spend ink and paper to repeat information that I know to be untrue. This, I believe, is my right and my responsibility. I am not interested in manipulating the data to provide a particular point of view, as others seem wont to do. It is my intention to print as much of the truth as I can find, whatever it might be. That is my right and my responsibility.

If one side of a discussion lies, it is my right and responsibility to expose it, not "cover both sides."

 

Unintended Consequences

 

In all of the current discussions about alternative fuels and their potential for alleviating our dependence on foreign oil or foreigners in general, ethanol seems to have caught the attention of many planners. As I read all of the positive attributes of this fuel, which we can grow again and again every year, I wonder how many of you are aware of some of the unintended consequences of this focus. I have mentioned a few already but what if ice cream goes up 50 cents per scoop and milk goes to $4.00 (more than the present price of gas)? What about all of the soft drinks that depend on corn sweetener to make them sweet when it becomes too expensive to use? Did you know that ethanol has only 80 percent of the energy of gasoline so you need 120 percent more to accomplish the same thing? What happens, as it often does, that we get weather not conducive to raising corn like too cold, too wet, not wet enough, too hot, etc.? These are all common occurrences in agriculture. We are slaves to Mother

Nature. This is something to think about while we make decisions about our future.

 

Silliness

 

This past Saturday in a local paper there were printed numerous letters to the Editor making fun of the Blue Line that the City of Santa Barbara is planning to spend $11,000 of taxpayer money to indicate where flooding might occur should the Ice Caps melt. Try to get a copy if you haven't seen it yet because it's pretty funny reading. According to some politicians, global warming will have considerable negative impacts on our lives. I believe that, according to prevailing scientific data, global warming and cooling have been occurring cyclically for eons. In other words, this is a natural phenomenon.  According to a recent movie on the topic, catastrophic events are predicted to occur which would change the face of the earth. In this movie it is erroneously reported that the water level will increase 24 feet rather than the actual

24inches. I think it is intended, (1) to scare people into certain secular progressive behaviors and (2) to make people want to support a whole new industry and group of elites who support the theory that the warming is all due to mankind's bad behavior. So, where's the proof?

They won't tell you but, as they fly around in their private jets buying and selling carbon credits to each other, they intend for you to walk, buy their environmentally-friendly" cars, light bulbs, refrigerators, and whatever else they can control. As this particular community preyed on people's sympathies and empathies for animals, so too they intend to change your behavior to their advantage. Be prepared for the next onslaught of what is the "politically correct" thing to do.

 

County Plans

 

Today the County plans for the Uniform Rules EIR update has been published. Because of some erroneous information given to some local activists, some were led to believe that the Uniform Rules were just a development plan for agriculture. Nothing could be further from the truth but these unfortunately ignorant folks were convinced and that is why we are where we are today. These rules should have been finished a long time ago to protect agriculture from development but since a certain segment of the population made a lot of noise, we will now go through the entire process which, hopefully, will make people realize that it is this precise program that keeps development off ag lands, not the other way around. To view the plans please go to: http://countyofsb.org/plandev/comp/programs/UniformRules/default.asp.

David Matson is the planner and his phone is 568-2076. There will be a meeting August 15 from 6:30 to 9 pm at the Vets Hall in Solvang. Comments are due by 5pm on September 4, 2007. The staff expects to present the EIR to the Board of Supervisors on September 18. Also it has been announced that the Santa Ynez Valley Community Plan EIR has been released. Comments on the project must be received no later than 5pm on Tuesday, September 4, 2007. There will be a Public Scoping

Meeting on Wed., Aug 8, 6pm at the Veteran's Memorial Building in Solvang. To view the plan online, go to: http://www.countyofsb.org/plandev/comp/planareas/santaynez/default.asp.

You may contact the planner Derek Johnson at 568-2072. Whichever way you choose to voice your opinion on this plan, please be assured that it is important. This is your community so please participate in its future vision.

 

Gangs

 

There has been considerable concern about gangs in Santa Barbara County. Until recently, the majority of the Santa Ynez Valley has been spared from this problem. Now we find the telltale signatures on our buildings, bridges and even on the highway. Current theory tells us that gangs are all about power, control and "doing what you want." Gangs become defacto families to the individuals who perhaps don't have much of that sense of belonging at home.

I know the sheriff's department has been wrestling with the problem in certain areas of the county for years with not a whole lot of success as far as I am aware. I would suggest that whatever we can do to eliminate this issue before it becomes widespread here is desirable. Perhaps there are some in our community who can make educated suggestions on how to do that. We would appreciate hearing from you. I think that we have an incredible number of knowledgeable people who live here who can help us to present a life with values that make all of us worthy of a happy, healthy life.

Speaking of values, I saw an ad the other day that epitomizes at least one of the wrong values I see being taught to our children today. On a Progressive Insurance ad a father is cleaning up a mess of what looks like some cheese puffs which leave an orange messy residue everywhere. The family dog helps him or herself to a few pieces while the dad is explaining how great it is that Progressive Insurance gives you comparison figures for other insurance companies and how honest it is of them to do so. Several kids come running through the room, the last one clearly being the one who was into the cheese puffs as the orange is all over his face and shirt. Dad asks the child if he was responsible for the mess, the child, with a straight face, says no and continues out of the room. Dad, who clearly does not believe that the child is telling the truth, lets him go without comment. So what has happened to the George Washington chopping down the cherry tree story we all were told emphasizing the importance of honesty? I guess I was raised differently as lying was one of the worst things one could do. I know there are cultures where lying is applauded if it is particularly clever but that is not the case here. It seems that it is ok for some government officials to lie and not others. Does that seem strange to you?