This poster was designed for the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. It says in Italian, "Only four percent of women who suffer sexual violence report their assailants."

Politicians in Milan refuse to allow it to be displayed. Not because of the nudity--that is less of a problem in Italy. The politicians think it is blasphemous because of the Christ-like pose and because the poster asks, "Who Pays For Man's Sins?". Do you think it is blasphemous?

In Iran, a politician is facing religious trouble. Esfandiar Rahim Mashaie hosted "a ceremony where women in traditional dress carried in the Koran, Islam's holy book, to music. Media described the ceremony as a 'dance.'" Other politicians say that the dance violated the sanctity of the Koran and that Mashaie should resign for offending Muslims.

Did you have the same reaction to both stories? Even though they are remarkably similar, I think most people have very different reactions.

I have two points here: First, in both incidents, the actions of women were offensive to religious conservatives. (The Italian politicians were not upset by the rape of women--they were upset by the pose of the woman on the poster.) We should speak out against the demonization of women. Second, societies tend to tolerate religious extremism at home while condemning religious extremism abroad. Oppression and hate and not acceptable simply because the speaker claims to be acting in the name of god.

I converted my Excelsior College Ethics Exam Study Guide Home from its old format (a word doc linked from a page) to four blogger posts. Blogger allows posts to be pre-dated, so I set the publish date to 2004--when I originally posted the content. Converting this content has many advantages, including: consistent site design, page views can show ads, potentially convert traffic into users, and better search engine indexing.

On the Truly News article template, I changed "What can you do?" to "How can you get involved?". Some stories, especially articles about scientific research make more sense with the second question.

Proposition 8 has passed and removed the right to marry from hundreds of thousands of people. Gay groups and people that believe this is an injustice have created a blacklist of donors to the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign. Frank Schubert, the campaign manager for Yes on Proposition 8, is horrified: "It strikes me as quite ironic that a group of people who demand tolerance and who claim to be for civil rights are so willing to be intolerant and trample on other people's civil rights." Alison Stateman, writing in Time magazine, published his quote without challenging the absurdity of Mr. Schubert's claim.

His claim is absurd because it has three major errors. First, Mr. Schubert tries to equate status discrimination with a targeted boycott. Proposition 8 discriminates against gays based on their status (they are gay), and status-based discrimination is almost always a bad thing (Think Jim Crow). Boycotting companies for voluntarily donating money is not the same thing as status-based discrimination because it targets companies based on their actions, not their status (e.g., donating money vs. being a corporation).

Second, Mr. Schubert conflates government discrimination with private action. The blacklist was compiled by private people to speak out against hate and discrimination. These private citizens can only do two things: spend money and speak their mind. But when the government discriminates, it has significantly more power. Under the new law, if two gay women have a child together, and the state-recognized mother dies, then the state can take the child away from the other mother--because they are not married. Because the state defines who gets to be a family, then it can take children away from a person that the state does not recognize as a parent. Proposition 8 uses the power of the state to hurt gay people and their families. The blacklist uses the power of private speech and private spending to encourage other people to respect their neighbors.

Third, Mr. Schubert has no understanding of a "right." According to Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld, "When a right is invaded, a duty is violated." If the blacklist really "tramples" on rights, then someone has violated a duty owed to the people on the blacklist. Does Mr. Schubert think that we have a duty to not make lists? Maybe he thinks we have a duty to not criticize other people. Does he think we have a duty to shop at Container Supply Co., and that by boycotting the store, we are violating our duty to shop there? What duty does the blacklist violate? What right is being trampled on? The truth is that the blacklist does not violate any duty and the boycott does not trample on anyone's civil rights. Compare this to Proposition 8. Until Proposition 8 passed, gay people did have the right to marry. Mr. Schubert, through his campaign, destroyed that right for hundreds of thousands of people. It is more accurate to say that Proposition 8 trampled on the civil rights of others.

My strongest criticism, however, is not for Frank Schubert--it is for Alison Stateman (the author of the article), her editor, and Time magazine. Mr. Schubert was the campaign manager for Yes on Proposition 8; I expect him to make ridiculous statements like this one. I expect Time magazine, however, to be staffed with inquisitive and intelligent writers and editors. Ms. Stateman's article ended with Mr. Schubert's quote but she did not challenge the huge errors in his statement. Before publishing his quote, Ms. Stateman and her editor should have asked a simple question: Is Mr. Schubert's assertion true? With only a little intellectual curiosity, any reasonably intelligent person could have exposed at least one of the errors above. Publishing Mr. Schubert's misleading statement without criticizing his errors was irresponsible and lazy.

Is it too much to expect that a venerable magazine such as Time would be skeptical of partisan statements and analyze a potentially-biased statement to make sure that the statement is true?

I have been exploring the idea of turning my website into an income. I have a lot of ideas and a lot of doubts, but I have one idea that I think will be useful: I want to develop my business plan on my website. If I can make money as a "blogger" or "news aggregator", then no one can steal my product because the product is me.

So, this post is my first attempt at publishing my thoughts about my business plan. I am sure many things will change as I get feedback from you.

---

I think many people are hungry for good information about important issues, but the buffet of news choices is overflowing with high-fat, low-information stories. I want to give people nutritious news put into context so they can quickly and efficiently read the stories that are interesting to them and can improve their lives.

Truly News will provide summaries and links to important news, without the noise, and provide context for each story. The context includes:

1. Why the story is important


2. Who are the people and groups in the story


3. Where is it happening


4. If necessary, what is happening (e.g., explain what a mortgage backed security is)


5. What can the reader do?

Multiple channels for delivery increases total audience
Truly News will try to find innovative ways to deliver content to the user. RSS, Facebook applications, and a traditional web site are all easy to achieve. Youtube and cross-posting are other possibilities.

Revenue from click-through ads, branding ads, and affiliate links
Truly News will make money by selling advertising. Branding campaigns for national and international products will be important and click-through ads will be available. Branding and sponsorship on youtube videos will be important also. Many articles are wire-service or covered by multiple outlets and are essentially the same content. I may be able to make money by agreeing to channel traffic to specific websites.

Sharp analysis of intelligent topics without coverage of trivial topics
People will use Truly News because it cuts out the silly news stories about Paris Hilton, it puts stories in context so people can more fully understand the issues affecting us today, and because it will make it convenient for them to read the news. Truly News will not overload the user with too many stories.

Transparency builds loyalty
I will post most of my business plan and changes that I am considering on my website and invite feedback. Someone could copy 95% of my business model, but they cannot copy me. The most important part of the product is my analysis--if my analysis is not original or insightful, then the entire product is valueless. Transparency and dialogue will also create a small sense of community for some users.

My passion
The final prong, and most important aspect, of this business plan is that it should provide me with an emotional outlet. I see anger, I see hate, I see intolerance, and I see ignorance all around the world. This is my way of standing up to mean people and my way of helping to make the world a better place.

Many people are talking about Gov. Sarah Palin's $150,000 shopping spree even though it is completely irrelevant to the serious issues we face today and a sad waste of time. Since people are talking about it anyway, can we at least do something positive?

Sen. John McCain explained the shopping spree by saying, "She needed clothes." While I doubt she "needed" clothes, there are many people in America today that do need help buying clothes. Almost 10% of the American population needed food stamps in July. Sen. McCain, more than 29 million Americans are so poor that they need help buying food.

America can use this silly fascination with Gov. Palin's wardrobe as an opportunity to help some of our neighbors. When George Bush started to attack our freedom to decide what is good for our bodies, Patt Morrison developed an ingenious plan: donate to Planned Parenthood in George Bush's name. So, with a nod to Ms. Morrison, I suggest that everyone immediately donate your extra clothes to charity and ask the charity to send a thank you note to Sen. McCain. Real Simple magazine has a nice list of charities, and you can even donate old bridesmaid dresses.

Sen. McCain, I hope you can find a way to show that you know that Gov. Palin does not "need" more clothes but that millions of working poor Americans do have serious needs. Will you consider matching all of the donations made in your name?