Update no.680

Update from the Heartland

No.680

22.12.14 – 28.12.14

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

To all,

Happy New Year to everyone!  May next year be the best ever for each of you.

The follow-up news items:

-- Sony Pictures Entertainment released their controversial movie “The Interview” to 300 independent theater screens and reportedly made a deal to also release the movie to video streaming sites in the wake of the major cyber-attack [679].  Naturally, as is so common in the digital age, the conspiracists have accused Sony of intentionally provoking Kim Jung Un and the DPRK to generate massive ‘news’ publicity and stimulate a patriotic response to the movie.  I am not among that group.  Aaron Sorkin’s admonition of the Press regarding some aspects of the cyber-attack [679] generated alternative opinion (see Comments section below).

At 05:35 [G], Sunday, 28.December.2014, AirAsia Flight 8501 (QZ8501) took off from Surabaya airport Indonesia on a planned two-hour flight to Singapore.  Communications with the aircraft were lost 42 minutes after takeoff.  Towering monsoon cumulonimbus cloud formations were present along their planned route.  The aircraft was an Airbus A320-200 with 162 souls aboard.  Search and rescue operations are underway, although primary search operations have been suspended for local nighttime.  This event comes less than a year after the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 [638; 8.3.2014] in the same region.

OK, my bad!  In Update no.679, I noted the ridiculous number of federal facility naming laws Congress passed and President Obama approved.  Well, apparently, those were the easy ones, and the Library of Congress was struggling to keep up with the clot of new laws the President signed before departing on his winter holiday vacation.  By the end of this week, 61 additional legislative actions became laws.  Sure, there was a passel more facility naming laws and some rather trivial laws, yet there were also a few more substantive and important laws as well.  Congress actually passed two proper appropriations bills – one for the Defense Department and the other for the Intelligence Community – although the latter included a section they felt obligated to add: §302, excluding any intelligence activities “not otherwise authorized by the Constitution or the laws of the United States.”  This group of new laws also included three (3) cybersecurity and information security laws (quite timely given the DPRK’s recent attacks), a law adding more sanctions against Russia for their incursion into the Ukraine as well as other support for the Ukraine, and a law transferring six (6) Perry-class guided missile frigates from U.S. service to other countries – two to Mexico and four to Taiwan – reminiscent of the transfer of 40 destroyers to Great Britain in 1940, except the latter was accomplished by executive order rather than by an act of Congress.

News from the economic front:

-- The Commerce Department reported the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.0% in 3Q2014, up from a growth rate of 4.6% in 2Q2014, and the strongest pace since 3Q2003.  I think it is safe to say the U.S. economic recovery is for real; however, we need the rest of the world well into recovery also.

Comments and contributions from Update no.679:

Comment to the Blog:

“If we must talk in terms of moral outrage, I will first note that moral outrage often disguises a profit motive, a need for attention, or some attempt to control others. Sometimes all three.

“That said, legitimate moral outrage does have its moments. If someone made a movie and publicized it widely, solely for profit, about killing me personally, I would have one of those moments. My initial reaction would be obvious and large, and I would spend a great deal of time and energy bringing the perpetrators their consequences. I would expect no less of any rational human being. While we may not see Kim Jong Un as rational, he has reacted in moral outrage to a movie specifically about killing him. Of course he has. Like it or not, he does not see himself as some sort of arch-villain. Nobody sees himself that way. Expecting him to act within the context of law or middle-class U.S. morality contradicts his history. Being himself, if he has seen spy movies, his response probably makes perfect sense to him.

“I easily disproved your statement that theaters did not refuse to show that movie Interview in large numbers. http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-top-five-movie-theater-chains-in-north-america-wont-screen-the-interview/ (Search terms: movie theater interview) The five largest movie theater chains in North America had withdrawn from showing it before Sony gave up. At least one more in the top ten had joined them. Let us remember that Sony is a Japanese corporation. It would be reasonable for them to withdraw as soon as the movie cost them money. Why would they spend money defending the U.S. concept of freedom of speech? Defending US ideals is a job for the US government.

“Mr Sorkin's denunciation of the media for reporting items that are not illegal or (according to the claim) immoral might ring true if he did not work for an industry that goes to great effort to court media attention. “The press” is a collection of corporations. They are in business to make money. If this one time the attention is unwelcome, so what?

“Normalization of relations with Cuba will probably be President Obama's best achievement in the long view of history. For over 50 years, we have succeeded in damaging Cubans while failing to bend the Cuban government to our will. President Kennedy's mistake has cost us much material effort and international goodwill, and has cost the Cuban people a great deal more. Obama is finally changing that. While not on the scale of Nixon's outreach to China, he still makes a statement that making peace works better than causing conflict. If he could do something that sane in the Middle East, he would be a great man.

“Economic reporting remains confusing as ever.”

My response to the Blog:

            Re: moral outrage.  Interesting perspective.

            Re: Supreme Dear Leader Umpa-Lumpa.  You are a private citizen.  Kim is the leader of the DPRK and has the instruments of State under his control.  There is a monumental difference.  As with all positions of power, they are no longer private citizens, they represent the organizations they lead.  Plus, it’s a freakin’ comedic parody, not a special operations plan.  If he wants to protest as a human being, then fine; do so . . . but he does not get to use the instruments of State to action his tantrums.

            Re: disproved theaters.  Wow, that is quite a stretch.  Five theater chains hardly represent all theaters nationwide.  I believe I did say a handful of theater chains in the Northeast.  Let us not forget, the cinematic showing is the very tail end of the complete creative process; thus, the vast majority of investment costs have been spent.  Any income would be better than none.

            Re: Sorkin.  We are all entitled to our opinions.  I think he is the perfect voice for this issue.  To your point, that is precisely why I said Sorkin did not go far enough . . . as We, the People, read, listen to, and demand the drivel the Press feeds us.

            Re: Cuba.  You may well be correct on that one.  Normalization with the PRC was one of President Nixon’s major achievements.

            Re: Middle East.  Indeed!

            Re: economic reporting.  Quite so!  An imprecise process!

 . . . follow-up comment:

“My opinion of moral outrage is not new or original. Whether we call it moral outrage, rabble rousing, or some other name, one of the earlier stages of intellectual growth is recognizing that people often use their and others' emotions, especially anger and fear, for material gain and personal satisfaction. The next stage is recognizing when those emotions are in play and ignoring or discounting them unless they have very sound factual and moral underpinnings.

“I rarely engage in name calling, and it bothers me when you do. I see name calling as the province of bullies and drunks, not of intellectual leaders. See also “rabble rousing” above.

“I think we may safely assume that Kim Jung Un feels human emotions. Essentially all leaders have done the same. The idea that a person “represents the nation” (or corporation or agency) at all times in all circumstances fails the reality test. It is an ideal at best. Nixon returns to mind in this circumstance. He supervised the crimes of Watergate and attempted to add the FBI and CIA to them despite having every chance of being re-elected without that. That Kim represents a sovereign nation is an interesting circumstance, the result of North Korea having achieved dynastic succession despite calling itself a Communist nation. Cuba apparently has done the same, albeit with less disastrous results.

“The flaw in my argument was that it was premature. Doubt has been raised by credible sources about whether the North Korean government actually committed the hacking. If not, the situation probably calls for criminal law. I suppose that we must admit that Sony Pictures and to some degree the United States government are not ready for the 21st Century. Criminal law enforcement and the courts are not prepared to deal with this.

“Your statement about a “handful of theaters” is indeed disproven. My information concerned the five largest theater chains in North America, and more beyond them. That is at least 20,000 screens. That level of logistical changes alone would at least delay an opening.

“This too has since changed. Sony has now released the movie to 300 screens in the United States and to any number of online viewers, for a nice fee of course. The events of the past week have led me to think that Sony intended to provoke North Korea into a response simply for profit. That in itself is not illegal, and trying to impose our moral values on a Japanese corporation is an exercise in futility. It seems likely that further releases may follow the usual course.  The deeper underlying goal may have been to get intense marketing for the online release via news reports. That has certainly succeeded. The advantages of getting the product without going to a theater threatened with terrorist attack may make this the first successful/profitable direct-to-Internet movie. Follow the money. Early opinion via salon.com is that the movie is not really worth watching anyhow.

“Mr. Sorkin is a hypocrite. He complains about media attention as part of an industry that demands constant media attention. The entertainment industry also has interlocking ownership with the traditional news media, so that adds a layer of corruption to the whole picture.

“The reporting is not the only confusing part of economics. The entire field is pretty messy.”

 . . . my follow-up response:

            Re: emotions.  Well said, actually.  I will add reason must exceed emotion.

            Re: name-calling.  Well said, again.  Sometimes, the object is just too easy.  I shall endeavor to be worthy.

            Re: greater representation.  Many people have failed to recognize or accept their obligations above self to the organizations they represent, but that does not alter the simple fact when you wear a uniform, or hold a position within a company or any organization, you represent that entity, not yourself.  Kim Jung Un appears to care less what happens to his country, to the people of his country, as long as his ego is fed amply; he was not the first and he certainly will not be the last to fail that test.

            Re: DPRK.  The art of aggressive acts against others is to make it look like someone else did it for you, e.g., Russia vs. Ukraine, DPRK vs. everyone else.

            Re: screens.  OK, perhaps so, whether 1% or 60% of the screens, the question is rate of return.  It does not alter the imbedded costs already sunk.

            Re: conspiracy.  Perhaps so; if true, they did a masterful job, and Kim played directly to Sony’s profit.  Also, if true, they played directly to the patriotism of Americans.

            Re: The Interview.  I said at the outset the movie is not worth my time or money, and it still isn’t.

            Re: Sorkin.  Listen to and read his words.  He speaks directly to that very dilemma, but it does not alter his message . . . in my humble opinion.

            Re: economics.  Again, well said!

My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)