Social Media: A Blessing and a Curse

Recently I read an article discussing the difficulties of maintaining a marriage. A key issue discussed was the impact of social media on relationships. It struck me as being extremely accurate. But it also made me look beyond relationships, and consider the impact of social media on our lives in general.

Social media is both a wonderful benefit, and an incredible burden. Its removed the humanity, from being human. We can digitally connect with anyone in the world, yet we've stopped personally connecting altogether. Wonder how your old friend from high school is doing? In the past you'd call them up, have lunch, etc. Now, just check Facebook.

We're always accessible anywhere, anytime; especially if you're a small business owner. I LOVE the fact my clients/prospective clients can contact me anywhere, anytime using Facebook. My clients will agree. I'm always accessible through social media, and its often times the most efficient way to communicate. My clients' phone numbers may change, but their Facebook stays the same. However some people really struggle with having to "always be on". While I appreciate the business aspect of it, I somewhat struggle with it in my personal life.

It destroys our self esteem. I've seen a quote floating around that says "don't compare your 'behind the scenes' with other people's 'highlight reel'". Incredible observation. We're all guilty of it; both ways.

If someone looks at my Facebook/Instagram; it probably gives the appearance of a world traveler. While I've certainly traveled, this couldn't be further from the truth. I post pictures of nice meals at nice restaurants; but I leave out pictures of times I've eaten from the dollar menu at McDonald's, or eaten a turkey sandwich at home because I'm short on money. We're all guilty.

The other side of that coin is we're all guilty of comparing everyone's social media highlights to our real lives. We look at pictures others' cars, travels, homes, etc. and think: "boy, I wish I was that financially successful".

We look at marriages/relationships and think: "I wish my marriage/relationship was that perfect". I call that the "Wheel of Fortune relationship". When Pat Sajak asks the contestants about their life, they always say "I have a wonderful wife/husband". We know that's not always true. 

In reality, we're all basically in the same boat. We all have our ups and downs. We all struggle. We've all held our breath, and hoped our debit card wouldn't be rejected at the grocery store.

We've all had rocky times in relationships. But no one posts THOSE pictures or statuses. I'm still waiting on the first contestant to say, "I have a husband; and he's gained alot of weight. But he's still OK; I guess." Or "I have a husband, but he won't work or help me with the kids. He sucks."

We all know these things to be true. So why let it effect us in such a way?

My goal for the past few months has been less social media interaction and more personal interaction. Lets put down our phones, log off Facebook, Twitter, etc; and start paying attention to the person across from us, to the people in the room with us, and to the experience we're having. We don't really need a Snapstory of your entire night out; and neither do you. You don't have to Periscope/Meerkat everything. Just enjoy the moment. The memory is far more valuable than the amount of likes it brings on Instagram.

I've been trying, and truthfully, its not been easy. Anyone who knows me, knows I love Twitter as much as any material possession. So its a work in progress. Still, I'm working to return to the days where human interaction was a major part of being human. Where social media was a great tool, rather than a giant crutch. Where we don't feel the need to portray ourselves as better than we are. Where we aren't always "on". Where we can enjoy an event or experience without making the entire night a Snapstory. Where life isn't reduced to the number of "likes".

The Straight Answer about Gay Marriage

Unless you live under a rock, you know gay marriage is today's hot button issue. A few lawsuits are pending at the US Supreme Court which will decide the issue.

Basically, Plaintiffs allege denial equal protection law because of discrimination based on sexual preference. Meanwhile, states claim they are allowed to enact legislation governing who may marry.

These cases reached the 6th circuit, which upheld the bans on gay marriage. Now it rests in the hands of the US Supreme Court.

That's the current legal situation. You could read that anywhere. I'm interested in the current public opinion.

Most know I drafted the Fairness Ordinance for the City of Vicco, which made national headlines. Most also know I'm a straight man in favor of gay marriage. So people often engage me in debate/discussion about gay marriage. In the end, people almost always find they don't oppose the legal concept of gay marriage.

Almost every objection to gay marriage is based on religious or moral concerns. But really that doesn't matter in terms of equal treatment under the law.

Most everyone agrees throwing someone out of a restaurant based on their sexual orientation, gay or straight, would be wrong. In fact, many people think that's already illegal; although its generally not. People almost always see the issue with this scenario; and why it isn't fair.

Apply that to marriage. Its the same scenario. Certain states, including Kentucky, refuse to issue marriage licenses to certain people; based solely on sexual orientation. This is inherently wrong, just like the restaurant example.

Once opponents realize there is a separation between the religious/moral objection and the legal objection; they gain clarity. Maybe they don't become proponents of gay marriage. But they stop being opponents; which is a huge step.

"Stingray" devices: Are your rights being violated?

The Washington Post has a very informative article discussing new "stingray" devices used by law enforcement (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/secrecy-around-police-surveillance-equipment-proves-a-cases-undoing/2015/02/22/ce72308a-b7ac-11e4-aa05-1ce812b3fdd2_story.html).

Basically a stingray mimics a cell phone tower. It tricks YOUR cell phone into thinking it's connecting to the tower. Instead, your phone actually connects to a device that can take whatever information from your phone they want. It can also be used to track your location. It all happens without your knowledge.

The picture is from the article,  and is a great illustration of how the stingray works.

To date, Im not aware of any reported rulings one way or the other regarding 4th amendment or other constitutional issues surrounding stingrays. For now, the issue appears to be undecided.

Eastern Kentucky: Modern Day Parable.

Over the past week, life in Kentucky, and most specifically Eastern Kentucky, has been especially difficult. Massive snow, impassable roads (some still impassable, even a week later), water outages, power outages, grocery shortages, floods, ice, etc. It made me recall an article published in June of 2014 by the New York Times which labeled Clay County, Kentucky as the toughest place to live in the US (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/26/upshot/where-are-the-hardest-places-to-live-in-the-us.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0). I still disagree with the article, but it feels awfully accurate at the given moment.

Of course the weather is beyond anyone's control. Yet the secondary effects (ie the water, power, and roads) are within a reasonable amount of control by federal/state/local leaders. The amount of water outages that go on across the region are inexcusable. The 10 years I had my practice in Hazard, seemingly one in every ten days the city was under a "boil water advisory". Not long ago residents of Hindman, Kentucky went an extended period of time without water. Even worse? Parts of Eastern Kentucky still await public water/sewage. It's 2015. This just is not acceptable. 

What can be done? Who can help? Enter: SOAR (Shaping Our Appalachian Region). SOAR is a political creation that burst onto the scene just following the economic collapse of the coal industry in Eastern Kentucky; and was a welcome sign of hope. For reasons described above, one would naturally assume infrastructure would be the primary, and immediate goal. Wrong. Their first announced target was high speed internet, in an attempt to draw companies to the area.

This prompted memories of Sunday school class, and the parable of the wise and foolish builders. Essentially one built on a foundation of rock, so his structure was sturdy. The other built on a foundation of sand, so everything he built thereafter was weak. The gist: one must build on a solid foundation. While some readers may reject biblical concepts, surely this lesson is one we can all accept as logically sound.

Another application is Occam's Razor. A shortened explanation of Occam's Razor states "the simplest answer is often correct". It was conceived sometime between 1287-1347 AD. Both the parable and the Razor are as true today as they were 1000+ years ago.

Then why address internet before infrastructure? So residents of Eastern Kentucky can read online about places with dependable water and electricity?  How can one access the internet during the all too frequent power outages? Sure, companies may be interested in high speed internet. But companies won't relocate to an area lacking dependable water, sewage, and electricity. Furthermore, these infrastructure issues MUST be dealt with soon, especially some of the aging water lines, before they completely collapse. So why not now while grant money flows in? It defies logic.

No need to ignore concepts proven true over the course of 1000+ years. Take the simple answer - re-build the foundation of the region. It isn't as catchy as high speed internet; but its a much bigger need. Otherwise, everything else you build on the current shaky foundation will just come tumbling down.

What Happens with Lloyd Tubman?

There's been much discussion regarding the recent Lloyd Tubman news. There are two related, yet mostly separate issues in regards to Tubman and UK:

1) Legal - Tubman was presented to the grand jury (Id be interested in seeing a transcript, as Im guessing it was a softball presentation) and the grand jury reported No True Bill. This means the grand jury didn't believe probable cause exists to believe the crime was committed. Further, the prosecution stated they would not present this case again. It is not a declaration of innocence; but its the closest thing.

The victim appears to be sticking to her story, which is smart IF she testified at the grand jury; otherwise face perjury if she later changes her story. She can not appeal. However, there is no statute of limitations for felonies; so Tubman could be presented again at any time should a prosecutor so choose. Very unlikely, unless new information surfaces.

Ive tried multiple serious, serious rape cases. The law presumes innocence. However make no mistake - for these types of cases, Defendants are usually viewed as guilty until proven innocent. These are very emotionally and politically charged cases, which make them potential nightmares for any elected prosecutor. Ive seen prosecutors hammered in the press and/or election ads for dismissing rape cases that should have been dismissed.

2) UK's PR issues - Tubman wasn't fully cleared, but seems he wont be prosecuted. However there are potential PR landmines with this case. In the court of public opinion, anyone accused of rape is considered guilty; period. Don't believe me? Look at Bill Cosby (an example for the media treatment of these cases, not a comparison of facts in the case).

Media comes down so fast and hard on these cases, UK had no choice but to suspend Tubman immediately. No "we'll wait on the investigation", etc. Just an immediate, indefinite suspension. For comparison look at the Barker, Baker, Dubose situation. That's the difference in a rape allegation and an assault allegation.

Where does UK go from here? I think Tubman can come back, if his academics, etc are in order. I think there will be a minor, short term social media outcry. Maybe. But nothing major. I think the real question is: does Tubman want to come back? If so, is there anything else preventing him from re-joining the team (ie academics, out of shape, no longer wants to pursue football, etc)?

US and the solution to the involvement in the Middle East...

Unless you've been living under a rock, you know the US began a bombing campaign against ISIS. History proves this isn't a valid solution. There's been fighting in the middle east since biblical times. This suggests there will always be war in that region.

The US has two options: active involvement or no involvement. Recent history proves active involvement does not work. In fact, it only strengthens radical Islamic factions.

In combating radical Islam, the US is battling an individual or a group of individuals. Its a battle against an ideal itself. That's why killing militant leaders do nothing to stop the movement. In fact, it strengthens the ideal by making the leaders martyrs and kindles more hatred for America. The only REAL way active involvement ends in victory is by completely eradicating every single combatant. We all know this is neither practical nor acceptable, as it amounts to practical genocide.

Withdrawing all involvement seems it would be ineffective. Yet its really the only solution. Firstly active involvement simply doesn't work, as discussed above. There will be fighting whether we're involved or not. Secondly by withdrawing, we stop turning their leaders into martyrs, we stop kindling hate for America, and we stop giving their leaders a platform from which to broadcast their ideals.

Finally, we remove the inevitable collateral damage that occurs in the form of innocent lives and property. This inevitable collateral damage makes it easier for radical leaders to recruit new members to their cause.

Saving Eastern Kentucky.....The End of the Road

Time for the final installment of my series. In previous posts, I've discussed my ideas for re-shaping Eastern Kentucky. In short, they involve embracing our culture, focusing on hospitality industry (food, alcohol, and tourism), and spending our money at home.

It wont be easy. It will take time. There will be growing pains. Its also likely the region will experience a very distinct shift in the population. Some, like me, must leave. Its inevitable based on the shifting economy. People like me need be replaced with artisans, chefs, etc. People like Abigail Tolliver (who co-manages the Letcher County farmers' market); Kim Owsley (a talented Native American artists and musician); and Tim Crager (who operates a unique wood carving business) will thrive in a hospitality based economy.

It won't be easy. Teamwork is a must. There needs to be a regional coalition formed by tiny counties that will give them greater cooperation in pursuing opportunities where they present themselves.

Its the same in the hospitality industry. Although counterintuitive, the type of tourism I outlined in Part 1 works for EKY with a regional, synergistic approach where all counties, provide different yet similar options. This provides a multitude of choices that attract visitors. Tourists will not drive to Eastern Kentucky to visit just one restaurant, or just one attraction. However multiple restaurants, wineries, distilleries in the area become a reason to come spend a weekend (for a good example look at Huber's Orchard/winery just outside of Louisville). Like I mentioned in my last post, this is exactly what cities like Louisville, Chattanooga, and Asheville have used to fuel their resurgence.

If Eastern Kentucky can get through the next 1-3 years using a growing hospitality economy, and buying local; the area can then focus on reversing the population trend.  At the same time, the new hospitality based environment creates a very attractive market for a small/medium sized business to locate.

On December 12, 2013 I had the opportunity to hear Texas Roadhouse CFO Scott Colosi speak. At the end of the impressive discussion, Mr. Colosi took questions. One of the great questions was: why locate a business headquarters in Louisville? Mr. Colosi explained that when examining the options, the company knew it could attract top talent only if the headquarters was in a location that had food, drink, entertainment, and culture. Why? Because these are what makes a desirable place to live; and therefore easier to attract top talent.

This brings us full circle: taking advantage of what the area has and what its residents can do. Food, drink, and tourism will not only keep the area alive - it gives the area a real chance of rebuilding. For decades, outsiders traveled to the mountains to marvel at our way of life: the music, the food, the wine/moonshine, and the craftsmanship brought to life by the hands of its people. They'll come again. Then IF we give them reason; they'll keep coming.

Moving forward doesn't always require becoming more modern. Sometimes it means remembering our history. In the end, the answer was always there; right from the beginning. In order to save ourselves, we just have to be ourselves. Easier said than done.