-
Crafted by the National Beer Wholesalers' Association, H.R. 5034 was introduced April 15th by of representatives from Massachusetts, North Carolina, Illinois and Utah. The law, if passed, would make direct online sales of wine & spirits illegal. Thus, buyers would be limited to whatever wholesalers provide to local wine shops. The justification for the proposed legislation is the idea that the law would make it harder for minors to buy alcohol. (See the bill's text here.)
Please! Anyone who thinks this is an attempt to curb teen drinking needs to be neutered before they lower the average IQ of the gene pool. When alcohol is ordered online, the UPS guy (mail man, FedEx guy, etc…) must take it to the door and hand it to somebody displaying I.D. which proves they are of legal drinking age. These legal safe guards are already in place.
The sole purpose of this bill is to give wholesalers a virtual monopoly on wine sales. That’s it. This means, if a consumer wants a particular wine they’ll have to ask their local retailer to order it through his/her wholesaler. If that wholesaler can’t get the particular wine the consumer will simply be out of luck. Wine clubs, which ship wines of the month to members, will be gone as well.
Personally, I enjoy going to a wine shop, sampling a few selections, and taking my prize home without paying for shipping. While I don’t buy wines online, shoppers such as myself will be hurt by the proposed law as well in two very key ways. First, without having to compete with direct sales, wholesalers, and thus retailers, will be able to raise prices across the board. Secondly, and far more disastrously, this law WILL limit variety in the market place.
Small artisan wineries, make as much as 40% of their income from direct online sales. If that market closes, many wineries will be forced out of business. Buyers will be left with a selection of big name corporate wines to choose from, but many hand crafted mom & pop labels will simply disappear from shelves.
Write your lawmakers and urge them to vote against the wholesalers’ monopoly of wine sales. Concerned citizens can also join the Facebook group "Stop HR5034."
This blog began as a writing and literature blog with the occasional Op-Ed piece on current events & issues. The political writing has, slowly but surely, taken this blog over. Readers will still be treated to some of my thoughts on pop culture and sports, but, for the most part, Blogito Ergo Sum will feature my opinions on the state of our union and world.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
The Internet
-
A few people I know, or know of, have written pieces lately about the internet and internet culture. First, John Green talked about the fact his line, “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” from his novel, “An Abundance Of Katherines,” has been tweeted more than ten thousand times. While tweeters use it as an inspirational idea, in the book it was supposed to be a concept the protagonist learned was flawed over the course of the story. John attributes quotes being taken out of context to a “twittery world.” In other words, Twitter, and other micro-blogs such as Facebook status statements, have lead to readers quoting material in ways it wasn’t intended by the author.
A short time later, my good friend, Colleen Lacey, wrote a blog addressing the fact that people keep blaming the internet for their own stupidity. She wrote, “I hear all the time, ‘Facebook caused this and FB caused that, and Facebook gets people into trouble, etc etc…’ It has nothing to do with the site itself, it is the people who use it, that don't know how to use it properly. If you post pictures of the night before, which you didn't want people to see, then you should not have posted any at all (or mark them private or friends only...sometimes that doesn't help, but still).”
I thought about these two pieces, and I came to a few conclusions of my own. First of all, while I agree with 85% of what John Green says over all, Twitter has nothing to do with the cause of quoting literary material out of context. Twitter may be another forum for such misquotes, but we’ve been doing it for hundreds, even thousands, of years.
When kids are first learning about money and the value of money, parents often site the quote from Hamlet, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be.” They’re using the line as a time honored piece of good advice, warning their kids not to go into debt or loan money to their friends. However, Shakespeare never intended this advice to be taken to heart by the audience/readers. He gave the line to Polonius, who was essentially the first literary version of Cliff Clavin, a guy who spouted half baked advice to make himself feel smart and draw attention to himself.
This brings me back to Colleen’s point. If we can’t blame Twitter for such literary misunderstandings, surely we can’t blame the internet for acts of stupidity or the unfortunate results of those acts. Think of the internet as a single huge city. You have stores, clubs, news outlets, public forums, and even a huge red light district. Now think of social sites as the city’s bars and nightclubs. If a woman enters a bar and leaves with a guy she just met, something bad is probably going to happen. Likewise, if such a lady meets a guy online and agrees to meet him right away, the same bad thing can happen. One can’t blame the site anymore than one can blame the bar.
Of course, just as in a physical city, a person can use common sense and still get snake bit. I ordered flowers for my mother for Easter from FTD, normally a reputable site, and got a bunch of wilted flowers and a vase which couldn't possibly hold them. However, people get ripped off in the real world too. In fact, because I spoke up right after they were delivered, I got my money back, just as if I’d caught the problem on the way out of the flower shop’s door. Thus, my point stands. The internet is no more or less safe than the physical world, it’s simply a different medium for us to do what we’ve been doing since time began. The trick is to be as careful online as you would be downtown.
A few people I know, or know of, have written pieces lately about the internet and internet culture. First, John Green talked about the fact his line, “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” from his novel, “An Abundance Of Katherines,” has been tweeted more than ten thousand times. While tweeters use it as an inspirational idea, in the book it was supposed to be a concept the protagonist learned was flawed over the course of the story. John attributes quotes being taken out of context to a “twittery world.” In other words, Twitter, and other micro-blogs such as Facebook status statements, have lead to readers quoting material in ways it wasn’t intended by the author.
A short time later, my good friend, Colleen Lacey, wrote a blog addressing the fact that people keep blaming the internet for their own stupidity. She wrote, “I hear all the time, ‘Facebook caused this and FB caused that, and Facebook gets people into trouble, etc etc…’ It has nothing to do with the site itself, it is the people who use it, that don't know how to use it properly. If you post pictures of the night before, which you didn't want people to see, then you should not have posted any at all (or mark them private or friends only...sometimes that doesn't help, but still).”
I thought about these two pieces, and I came to a few conclusions of my own. First of all, while I agree with 85% of what John Green says over all, Twitter has nothing to do with the cause of quoting literary material out of context. Twitter may be another forum for such misquotes, but we’ve been doing it for hundreds, even thousands, of years.
When kids are first learning about money and the value of money, parents often site the quote from Hamlet, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be.” They’re using the line as a time honored piece of good advice, warning their kids not to go into debt or loan money to their friends. However, Shakespeare never intended this advice to be taken to heart by the audience/readers. He gave the line to Polonius, who was essentially the first literary version of Cliff Clavin, a guy who spouted half baked advice to make himself feel smart and draw attention to himself.
This brings me back to Colleen’s point. If we can’t blame Twitter for such literary misunderstandings, surely we can’t blame the internet for acts of stupidity or the unfortunate results of those acts. Think of the internet as a single huge city. You have stores, clubs, news outlets, public forums, and even a huge red light district. Now think of social sites as the city’s bars and nightclubs. If a woman enters a bar and leaves with a guy she just met, something bad is probably going to happen. Likewise, if such a lady meets a guy online and agrees to meet him right away, the same bad thing can happen. One can’t blame the site anymore than one can blame the bar.
Of course, just as in a physical city, a person can use common sense and still get snake bit. I ordered flowers for my mother for Easter from FTD, normally a reputable site, and got a bunch of wilted flowers and a vase which couldn't possibly hold them. However, people get ripped off in the real world too. In fact, because I spoke up right after they were delivered, I got my money back, just as if I’d caught the problem on the way out of the flower shop’s door. Thus, my point stands. The internet is no more or less safe than the physical world, it’s simply a different medium for us to do what we’ve been doing since time began. The trick is to be as careful online as you would be downtown.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Private Information, Yeah Right, Tell Me Another One Bub
-
Recently, I wrote about the inaccuracy of websites which fail to update outdated data. I found such laziness to be annoying. Little did I realize, just how big, or how frightening, the problem actually was. A few days ago, my friend, Sarah, alerted me to a site called spokeo.com, where surfers can look up stats on other people. For free, users can view a person’s postal address, marital status, hobbies and interests, income level, neighborhood stats, and a picture of their home. Plus, for $2.95 a month, surfers can access even more detailed data about a person including their financial credibility.
If that’s not enough to give somebody the screaming willies, making matters worse is the fact that much of the information is wrong. I looked my name up to find I have “some college,” implying I didn't graduate, I've only lived in my current home for 12 years, and that I play baseball as a hobby. Even if you only count the time I’ve lived in my current home since graduating from Oregon State University, I’ve lived in my current home since 1994. Of course, people who know me, know the idea of me playing baseball is downright laughable.
The site also claims that my brother, Jeff, has kids, and my friend, Sarah, lives at her office. OK, a case can be made for saying Sarah lives in her office. Still, I think Jeff would be dismayed to see offspring being attributed to his loins.
Fortunately, there is a way to delete one’s info, by going to http://www.spokeo.com/privacy and following the directions. The deletion is instantaneous. I was just feeling relieved about having deleted my info, when my friend, Leasa, directed me to a similar site, pipl.com. It was then I realized just how wide spread this thing is.
I went to Google, typed “people search,” and found 370,000,000 results. While many of these sites probably aren’t as detailed as the sites I’ve mentioned, numerous sites boast the ability to list unlisted phone numbers, access court records, and/or run credit checks on anyone. With so many sites offering such services, it’s impossible for a person to remove themselves from every single site, even if said person kept at it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, year ‘round.
Forget Big Brother. Now, any brother, sister, cousin twice removed, or complete stranger with an internet connection can learn practically anything about anyone. I don’t know what’s creepier, the fact that personal information can be accessed with a click of a mouse, or the fact that there seems to be no system in place to fact check said information.
Recently, I wrote about the inaccuracy of websites which fail to update outdated data. I found such laziness to be annoying. Little did I realize, just how big, or how frightening, the problem actually was. A few days ago, my friend, Sarah, alerted me to a site called spokeo.com, where surfers can look up stats on other people. For free, users can view a person’s postal address, marital status, hobbies and interests, income level, neighborhood stats, and a picture of their home. Plus, for $2.95 a month, surfers can access even more detailed data about a person including their financial credibility.
If that’s not enough to give somebody the screaming willies, making matters worse is the fact that much of the information is wrong. I looked my name up to find I have “some college,” implying I didn't graduate, I've only lived in my current home for 12 years, and that I play baseball as a hobby. Even if you only count the time I’ve lived in my current home since graduating from Oregon State University, I’ve lived in my current home since 1994. Of course, people who know me, know the idea of me playing baseball is downright laughable.
The site also claims that my brother, Jeff, has kids, and my friend, Sarah, lives at her office. OK, a case can be made for saying Sarah lives in her office. Still, I think Jeff would be dismayed to see offspring being attributed to his loins.
Fortunately, there is a way to delete one’s info, by going to http://www.spokeo.com/privacy and following the directions. The deletion is instantaneous. I was just feeling relieved about having deleted my info, when my friend, Leasa, directed me to a similar site, pipl.com. It was then I realized just how wide spread this thing is.
I went to Google, typed “people search,” and found 370,000,000 results. While many of these sites probably aren’t as detailed as the sites I’ve mentioned, numerous sites boast the ability to list unlisted phone numbers, access court records, and/or run credit checks on anyone. With so many sites offering such services, it’s impossible for a person to remove themselves from every single site, even if said person kept at it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, year ‘round.
Forget Big Brother. Now, any brother, sister, cousin twice removed, or complete stranger with an internet connection can learn practically anything about anyone. I don’t know what’s creepier, the fact that personal information can be accessed with a click of a mouse, or the fact that there seems to be no system in place to fact check said information.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Not Everything On The Internet Is Accurate
-
Yes, it’s true, not everything on the internet is accurate. I know, I can hear the collective, “WELL DUH,” I just got in response to that statement. However, before you write me off as a John Madden-esc conveyor of the stupidly obvious, I’m not referring to online rumors which question Obama’s citizenship, warn us of death panels, or outline alien conspiracies lead by Hillary Clinton who’s actually an extraterrestrial reptile in disguise. Intelligent people can shrug off such nonsense as being the ravings of lunatics who thought The X-Files was a wonderful series of docudramas. No, I’m talking about businesses/organizations which don’t update their websites.
Anyone who knows me, and even some folks who don’t, knows I’m sending out proposals, hoping to get my book published. It’s, more or less, the defining fact of my existence, other than being a remarkably virile specimen of manhood that is. Anyway, when approaching publishers with new work, writers go to The Writer’s Market online, compile a list of publishers who accept a particular kind of work, visit each publisher’s site to obtain their submission packet guidelines, and begin mailing out packets. So far, I’ve received half my packets back, marked return to sender, from publishers who’ve gone out of business without mentioning it on their sites.
If the waste of postage isn’t irksome enough, my nurse & friend, Dani, just drove downtown to visit an abandoned museum/church. She’s a huge Elvis fan, and I had heard of The 24 Hour Church Of Elvis, so I looked it up and found http://www.24hourchurchofelvis.com/. On the very top of webpage it says, “408 N.W. Couch The new location for the 24 Hour Church of Elvis!!” in big blue letters. The site advertises movies visitors can watch, souvenirs one can buy, etc… So she packed her family in the car, drove downtown, paid six bucks to park, and found a single window displaying a cardboard cutout of Elvis surrounded by Barbie dolls. Next to the window is a coin slot and a hole in the wall, where visitors can watch a minute long movie for $.50. That’s it, no museum of Elvis memorabilia, no experts to answer questions about his life or the church’s defining philosophy, no gift shop, just a window of disturbing imagery and a hole in a wall.
It’s not the wasted postage or the six bucks blown on parking that bothers me most, although those things do irk me. What really bothers me is the laziness and sloppiness which contributes to outdated information being left for people to find and act upon. These are tough economic times, businesses fold, I get it. However, it takes five minutes to update a website to keep people from wasting their time. Get it together people.
Yes, it’s true, not everything on the internet is accurate. I know, I can hear the collective, “WELL DUH,” I just got in response to that statement. However, before you write me off as a John Madden-esc conveyor of the stupidly obvious, I’m not referring to online rumors which question Obama’s citizenship, warn us of death panels, or outline alien conspiracies lead by Hillary Clinton who’s actually an extraterrestrial reptile in disguise. Intelligent people can shrug off such nonsense as being the ravings of lunatics who thought The X-Files was a wonderful series of docudramas. No, I’m talking about businesses/organizations which don’t update their websites.
Anyone who knows me, and even some folks who don’t, knows I’m sending out proposals, hoping to get my book published. It’s, more or less, the defining fact of my existence, other than being a remarkably virile specimen of manhood that is. Anyway, when approaching publishers with new work, writers go to The Writer’s Market online, compile a list of publishers who accept a particular kind of work, visit each publisher’s site to obtain their submission packet guidelines, and begin mailing out packets. So far, I’ve received half my packets back, marked return to sender, from publishers who’ve gone out of business without mentioning it on their sites.
If the waste of postage isn’t irksome enough, my nurse & friend, Dani, just drove downtown to visit an abandoned museum/church. She’s a huge Elvis fan, and I had heard of The 24 Hour Church Of Elvis, so I looked it up and found http://www.24hourchurchofelvis.com/. On the very top of webpage it says, “408 N.W. Couch The new location for the 24 Hour Church of Elvis!!” in big blue letters. The site advertises movies visitors can watch, souvenirs one can buy, etc… So she packed her family in the car, drove downtown, paid six bucks to park, and found a single window displaying a cardboard cutout of Elvis surrounded by Barbie dolls. Next to the window is a coin slot and a hole in the wall, where visitors can watch a minute long movie for $.50. That’s it, no museum of Elvis memorabilia, no experts to answer questions about his life or the church’s defining philosophy, no gift shop, just a window of disturbing imagery and a hole in a wall.
It’s not the wasted postage or the six bucks blown on parking that bothers me most, although those things do irk me. What really bothers me is the laziness and sloppiness which contributes to outdated information being left for people to find and act upon. These are tough economic times, businesses fold, I get it. However, it takes five minutes to update a website to keep people from wasting their time. Get it together people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)