Putin on the Ritz

Well after reading that article, it's not hard to see why US relations with Russia would be so tense - he and Bush are very much alike. Both have a disregard for the constitution , and want to keep their hold on their position. Only difference is that Putin may actually be able to achieve his goal, whereas Jane pointed out earlier, there's no way in hell citizens in the US would stand for it. I could see Bush trying though - barricading himself in the White House, refusing to come out.

But what are we to do about it? The article talked about the US keeping a close eye on the elections to make sure everything was kosher. However, if the Russian people are really that apathetic, why should we do anything about it? Lord knows we don't need to invade another country and try to force it to our system of government.

As far as a one party system goes, well hell, why not let Putin just take over? If you've got only one major party that gets elected, and the people don't care, then how can you really change? I suppose that could be said about the US though. Yes, we have two parties, but most argue that they're not exactly dissimilar. We have other parties that try to run, and the Green party can put up a good showing, but most people don't want to vote Green because then the liberal votes are split, and someone like Bush gets elected. Ideally, we would have a 4 party system, the two moderates - Republican and Democrat, and two extremes (or, well as extreme as we can get) - Green and, I don't know, Crazy Redneck. Is there and extreme conservative party? I guess it might be the Christian Coalition.

Ahh, Putin.

We've been wondering *how* exactly he would do it, and now it seems that we know. No, Putin hasn't ammended the Russian constitution in order to allow himself to run for a third term as President. Instead, he has announced that he may very well run for Prime Minister once he is no longer President. The new President (who will most likely be whomever Putin endorses) will have the ability to allow the Prime Minister to become the de facto ruler of Russia if he so chooses. This does not surprise me in the slightest, really. Back in July, I wrote an exceptionally long piece on my blog regarding Russian political history, showing that throughout the years of its existence as a state, Russia has repeatedly reverted to an authoritarian state every chance it got. My conclusion was that an authoritarian Putin is to be expected. If you're interested, that post is here.

The article in Slate says, It's as if George W. Bush decided to step down from office, run for Congress in 2008, declare himself speaker of the House, and declare that the speaker of the House would, from then on, take over the president's responsibilities, and run the executive branch. We would call that a de facto coup d'etat. In Russia, it's constitutional politics. But Slate (and all other news agencies who have reported on this) doesn't take into account the attitude of the Russian populace. While news agencies love to focus on pro-democracy demonstrations whenever and wherever they happen inside of Russia, the fact of the matter is, they don't happen very often, and when they do, they're pretty small. From what I've experienced during my times in Russia, this isn't because the masses are worried about government retribution, it's because they simply don't care. If George W. Bush decided to pull a de facto coup d'etat, people wouldn't stand for it. We'd protest. We'd rebell. Russians on the other hand would sigh and say, Oh, that's government for you.

Just Putin Around

I'll confess to having very little knowledge of the Russian parliamentary system, but this story in the NY Times caught my eye today.

There are a few things this brings to mind:

1. What a frickin' HUGE loophole for getting around term limits! Not only can Putin retain much of his power and influence as premier, but he can also run for president again as long as someone else holds the post for the next term. And that person, the next president, seems to have been chosen (by Putin!!) simply to broadcast Putin's ideas anyway. I'm a big fan of mandatory roll-overs of power in government, so I'm having trouble seeing the benefits that this sort of set-up provides. Any one have an insight?

2. As Americans, we may be unhappy at times with both the democrats and the republicans, but at least we have (for all practical purposes) a two-party system. While flawed, that's still way more democratic than what the United Russia party's opposition leader is calling the "one-party system in Russia." In practice, how different is this than the current American system? Are there benefits to having one consistently dominant party?

3. How will Putin's hold on the Russian government affect diplomatic relations with the US? Obviously, things have been pretty tense lately, and the administration wants to blame Putin specifically for that. With him basically staying in power, will the US have to reformulate it's diplomacy strategy (I use those words loosely with this administration)?
3.a. This also brings to mind last week's debacle of miscommunicating the response to Ahmadinejad's request to lay a wreath on Ground Zero in New York. Instead of politely saying "sorry, no visitors allowed at this time," the NYPD first announced that they would have to consider it. Then, completely over-shadowing NYPD's correction, a ton of political candidates and officials condemned his request with words like "unacceptable" and "shockingly audacious." This reeks of diplomatic insensitivity to me. Laying a wreath at the site of a tragic event is exactly the right thing for visiting world leaders to do, just as our leaders should do it in other countries, no matter what these frothing-at-the-mouth media hounds think of the leader's personal values.

Just a few thoughts. And yours?

UPDATE: Here's an idea from Slate about the benefits of the Russian system... at least it's more interesting!

This one's worth ten-thousand words!

Last year, when I was living in Russia, most of my students were adults (as opposed to this year, where all of my students are children). I was frequently asked questions about the US, and in every class, George Bush came up at least once. This is a pretty liberal blog, and you should all realize by now that I too am pretty liberal - I disagree with nearly everything that comes out of the mouth of our current President and I strongly dislike the man. That's not really the point of this post. The point is, when my Russian students would hear my strong, unapologetic expressions of disapproval for the Bush administration, they would grow quiet and exchange furtive glances. Then, inevitably, one would ask me something along the lines of, "Aren't you afraid to say that?" This happened in EVERY adult class that I taught. My students were all concerned that if I voiced my disapproval for Bush - even though I was far from home - something might happen to me. Granted, while some of these adult students were my age, many were far older, and had lived the bulk of their lives under the Soviet regime... but I rather suspect that this built in fear of speaking out against the government has a lot to do with the fact that Putin's popularity remains sky-high. (That and he has a black belt in judo AND looks like Dobby the house elf. Also... damn.) I *love* the fact that I feel perfectly at ease speaking out against the current US administration... and I think that very well may be my favorite thing about the US.

Second favorite? Just take a look at some of the places we own - and these are just from the few I've visited in my short life. It's such a HUGE country... and there's so much more out there for me to photograph - I love it!

Intracoastal Waterway, off the GA coast


Sapelo Island, GA



Satilla River, Ware County, GA



THE Grand Canyon. 'Nuff said.
(Sadly, due to pollution, it's hazy like this most days of the year.)


San Diego, CA



Balboa Park, San Diego, CA



Mt. Rainier, WA



My house!! :-)



Also, we're the land of Jack Daniel's!



Even our scary pollution can sometimes appear picturesque.
Rayonier Paper Mill, Jesup, GA

confessions of a traveling hermit

Wondering how I ended up teaching English in South Korea and owning a home in the Waycross, GA ghetto? Well, it’s definitely a bit of a long story. Some of you know have heard this tale already, but in the hopeful assumption that there are some of you out there reading this blog who *haven’t* heard it, here we go!

I’ve written before about my job working at the Department of Defense. If you missed that journey into my past, you can read about it here. But all you need to know about that job for the purposes of this story is the following:

I left that job because I disliked it intensely. Why? Well, the work was highly repetitive, and essentially simple. I often remarked that a group of blind monkeys could have done what I did, even though the work, in fact, was not all that simple. It was an incredibly high-stress job. I had tension headaches all the time, and spent a fortune on ThermaCare heat wraps for my tense neck and shoulders. I kept a bottle of Pepto-Bismol in the drink holder of my work car at all times. I would swill directly from said bottle several times per day. I held this job for twenty-seven months, during which time I developed my first wrinkles and my first ulcer. Of course, this job did have its pros: it paid well, and was on a set promotion-schedule (the longer you worked there, the more money you made), and I had health insurance and paid sick and vacation days. Those are some good pros, but...

One of my coworkers had worked at that job long enough to retire. He hated it; he was miserable. The month he retired, he was diagnosed with terminal cancer.

Several of my coworkers were eligible to retire, yet they kept working. It certainly wasn't because they loved the job; they hated it and bitched about it constantly. Why didn't they retire? Because the longer they worked, the greater their retirement package would be. They wanted all the money they could get. Before I left, there were two heart attacks and one stroke (none of them fatal) among my eligible to retire coworkers... and yet they were all still working there when I left.

I left the Department of Defense because I didn't like my job. It was not personally satisfying in any way, and it was taking a high toll on me physically and mentally. I left the DOD to accept a position as an ESL teacher in Russia, where I received a salary of roughly $200/mo, and I never regretted my decision.

Why did I decide to move to Russia? Well, I double-majored in Russian and Political Science in college, during which time I spent nine (non-consecutive) months in Russia, and I loved every minute of my time there. I had accepted the position at the Department of Defense, thinking it was the sort of position that someone with a PolySci degree *should* accept, although while there, I constantly felt as though I were wasting my education, as I rarely put any facet of my degree to use. Additionally, I often felt as though my job was useless; if you read this post, you'll realize why. I thought that perhaps if I got a job with a non-profit organization, one that works to facilitate international relations between the US and Russia (and there are several), I would feel satisfaction from my work. I would also be both using my degree and accomplishing something.

But, there was a flaw in that plan. See, I graduated from college in 2001. Following graduation, I spent five months in South Korea, two months in Costa Rica, and twenty-seven months within walking distance of Mexico. At the point at which I began to consider changing fields, I hadn't spoken Russian in four years. My Russian skills had degenerated into something that I termed, "spanglorusskikonglish" - not really something to put on my resume. I decided that spending a year in Russia, teaching English and studying Russian, would allow me to rebuild my skills, and would look great on my resume. I had it all planned out: a year in Russia, and then I could apply for a job. I even had a specific employer in mind.

Then fate intervened. Some personal things happened to me while in Russia, which led me to reevaluate the course my life was taking. I'm not going to get into that here, as it's not really something I want to discuss in a public forum. I only bring that up to let you know that in the fall of 2005 I stepped back and looked at what I was doing with my life. I realized that I was in danger of making the same mistakes which landed me in the job at the DOD.

Like I mentioned above, the DOD job was the sort of job that a college grad with a high GPA and a PolySci major is expected to land. And yet there I was in Russia, trying to follow the expected path of a Russian major. While in theory, working for a non-profit that works in and/or with Russia sounds appealing, when I began to examine my job prospects, reality was quite a turn-off. Check out the following, an actual ad for a position at the sort of NGO that interested me. They were searching for someone with my qualifications to:

Assist in conducting research on price and quality comparison for necessary office supplies/equipment. Responsible for inventory of office supplies/equipment and ordering. Responsible for receiving and shipping mail for staff. Organize archives, media hits, vendor files and Staff Meeting Minutes. Update and maintain contact database for mailing. Assemble material for volunteer information and general inquires for mailings. Ensure cleanliness of office areas for visitors. Communicate with vendors for troubleshooting and service orders. Answer reception phone line during business hours. Handle referrals to appropriate staff members and questions from public. Assist Executive Director with administrative tasks. Prepare mailings for staff and distribute mail. Assist in researching items for program development. Assemble presentation materials for special events. Provide assistance in special projects. Update and maintain handouts for social services department, legal program and the reception areas. Responsible for paying monthly bills and vendors on a timely basis including mailing of payments. Ensure signature on checks. Track and reconcile credit card statements and time & attendance. Organize check requests, bank statements and deposits for Bookkeeper. Attend and record minutes for Staff Meetings. Ensure cleanliness of conference room. Provide refreshments for Board Meetings. Assist in preparing Board Packet mailings. Assist with staff and Board member accommodations. Assist with organizational events. Organize state and national organizations information, maintain equipment inventory in the Equipment Inventory Log. Coordinate / schedule technology visits. Maintain administrative office files. Other duties as identified and assigned.

Ahh, the job opportunities for someone with a BA in Russian. Not so appealing. Ensure cleanliness of office areas? Communicate with vendors? Research price and quality comparison for necessary office supplies/equipment? Would I really feel as though I were accomplishing *anything* with my life if those were my duties? True, not all job descriptions sounded quite that bad, but none of them made me feel as though I had found the niche that I was looking to fill. Not to mention that nearly all such positions are located in some of the most expensive cities in the United States, yet pay very little. (Now, I am not all that interested in making tons of money - as I explain further along in this post - but I don't want to run into debt either. I lived like a pauper in San Diego so I could pay off all my debts, and I'd like to remain largely debt-free as long as possible. But we'll talk more about money in a minute.)

Of course the opportunities in the nonprofit sector are slightly broader for someone with a Masters or a Doctorate, and as such, I briefly and seriously considered grad school. But (and I mean no offense to those of my good friends currently in grad school) the more grad school stories I heard (and continue to hear) from my friends, the less excited I became by the prospect of an advanced degree. Honestly, so much of grad school sounds like utter bullshit to me. For example, I know someone (a dear friend, highly intelligent, and whom I greatly respect) who earned his PhD by writing a dissertation on third person impersonal pronouns no longer used in the modern Russian language. What is the point?

Please bear in mind that I am in no way opposed to the pursuit of knowledge, and I truly hope that there never comes a day when I cease to learn new things. But so much of academia just seems so senseless to me, all this specialization to the point of incomprehension. Perhaps one day I will enter a Masters program for teaching ESL, but for now, I have decided that grad school is not the route for me.

So what is the route for me? I thought quite seriously about remaining in Russia for a second year. I loved my job there, my coworkers and my students... but financially, I simply couldn't. As I mentioned above, before moving to Russia, I paid off all of my debts (car, student loans, credit card), and I accrued enough savings to finance my year abroad at a salary of $200/mo without again going into debt, but I simply couldn't afford to do it for a second year. True, I had enough credit that I could have started charging expenses with the plan of paying off my debts when I returned to the US and got a "real job" - but that's one black hole I have no intention of falling down.

Instead, I thought about what it was about my life in Russia that was making me happy. I surprised myself with the answer: for me, the best thing about my situation in Russia was the lack of stress. True, occasionally I would fret about things like what to do about my students who were chronically failing their exams, or how to turn the lyrics of I am a Rock into a ninety minute discussion, but I never suffered a moment of the gut-wrenching stress that I put up with for twenty-seven months in San Diego. Back in 2000, following my seven-month stint in St. Petersburg, I'm sure my answer to what it was about Russia that made me happy would have been different. It would have involved the Russian people, or the Russian culture, or the amazing historical architecture, or even the Russian nightlife... not that I don't still love the Russian people, architecture and culture (I have found that I'm a bit too old for nightclubs), but I've changed. I enjoy spending time in Russia, but I no longer feel as tied to Russia as I once did. I guess that's an odd thing to say, coming from someone who has spent so much time there (and who is planning to return there at the end of August!), but it's true. The best thing about my life in Russia was the lack of stress.

Thus, I arrived at goal number one for my future: Remain in a low-stress situation. But other than low-stress, what else do I want out of life? I made a list of things that I enjoy doing:

• Reading (Self-explanatory, and if you've read any of my blog, you'll have noticed how it often becomes Jane's Book Review)

• Writing (Ever since I was a little kid, I've enjoyed writing, and I do it mostly for my own personal satisfaction. I've written one book. I’m working on another (although I’m going on a year plus of writer’s block). I love blogging; it’s addicting.)

• Taking photographs (again, self-explanatory – but feel free to check out my photos!)

• Traveling (Why am I writing explanations? Again, self-explanatory. I mean, I live in South Korea.)

• Web/Graphics design (There are many people who are far better at this than I am... I'm not really qualified to do this for a career or anything, but it is quite an absorbing hobby. I do all the work on janekeeler.com. It's nothing fancy, but it's definitely something I enjoy playing around with.)

• Playing with kitties. Not to try and compete with Linda or anything, but I am totally destined to become a crazy cat lady. (Speaking of, anyone want to adopt a kitten?)

• Spending time ALONE doing the above. (Yes, spending time alone is a very important component of my happiness. Perhaps the most important of all. Don't get me wrong; I enjoy the company of others. I love my friends and family, and I enjoy spending time with them. But not all the time. I enjoy spending substantial quality time alone doing the various things listed above.)

• Teaching ESL (I really enjoy teaching. I have fun in class. I enjoy getting to know my students, and - I know this is going to sound hokey - but it's incredibly rewarding to see my students learn and grow in their use of English. I don't want to teach English for the rest of my life, but I wouldn't mind doing it for the next few years.)

So there you have it: the list of things I like to do. After making my list, I decided to make said list my life goals. Simple as that. You've read the list, so now you know you know what I want to do with my life. But how?

Well first, you might notice that among my list of things that are important to me, I have no desire to accumulate a large amount of wealth, to own an expensive home or a fancy car. I rarely buy new things; I'm perfectly content with clothes and furniture from yardsales and thrift stores. I know how to live frugally. Granted, I can't live completely without funds, but the funds I need don't have to be big. In fact, they can be pretty meager.

The stereotypical "American Dream" that, as an American, one hears about from an early age, is that in America, if a person works hard enough, he can achieve anything. In America, anyone can become whatever he wants to become, so long as he puts his mind to it. In reality, this American dream is simply code for "if you work really hard, then you can make a lot of money." Well, that's great. But do I really want to work myself to death for money? We've already determined that I don't want a lot of money.

How can a person live cheaply? Well, for starters, live somewhere that's inexpensive. As I mentioned above, I lived in San Diego for 27 months. At the time, the average price for a home was $500,000. I was renting a tiny studio apartment for over $700/month, which was located directly under the flight line for the San Diego airport. That’s what kept my rent so cheap. (Sadly, that's true). Nearly all of the Southern Californians whom I met were resigned to the fact that they would *never* be able to pay off their homes. Houses in North Florida (where I grew up) are going for around $150,000 to $200,000 these days (although the housing bubble is bursting). This looks like quite an improvement over SoCal until you learn that my mom got her house in Waycross, GA for under $30,000. And goods (on average) are cheaper there too.

That was how I decided to relocate my base of operations to Waycross. In case you know nothing whatsoever about Waycross, don’t feel bad. It’s pretty tiny. Wikipedia has some stats on it here and you can see some of my photos of the place here. In March 2006, I purchased a house Waycross for $27,500. Granted it’s in the ghetto, but hey – I’ve never been all that into being neighborly. When people find out that I bought a house in Waycross, the general reaction seems to be, "But what will you *do* there?" and "Won't you be bored?" Look back at the list of things I like to do, people. Half of them I can do anywhere, and the other half, by definition, I can't do at home, no matter where "home" is.

I want to relax, to write, to grow some veggies and to sit around my house reading cheesy mysteries and fooling around on the internet.

But how will I pay for this house, you ask? As inexpensive it was, it still has to be paid for. Well, by teaching ESL of course. True, I have already mentioned that my ESL job in Russia, which I loved very much, paid very, very little, but in many places around the world, ESL teachers earn substantially more. I have been teaching English in South Korea since August 2006, and I am making enough to put a sizable dent in my mortgage – and to fund this boondoggle to Siberia and keep me in food and water for four or five months when I return to Waycross. Additionally, my mother agreed to be my lending agent for this venture, which has definitely smoothed the way somewhat (kind of tough to get a mortgage on an income of $200/mo!) My plan is simple: teach English for a year or so somewhere, then hermit for a while in Georgia. Then, when I start to run out of subsistence funds or become stir-crazy, I will teach ESL somewhere else in the world. There are so many countries I would love to visit. I’m actually leaning towards Kuwait as my next destination, although who knows! :-)

Moscow, Daegu and San Diego: Three cities and their public transit networks

Part 1: Moscow

I have made three rather lengthy trips to Russia, and while I certainly did not spend the bulk of any of those trips in Moscow, I still spent a lot of time there. Moscow has an incredibly impressive subway system. It is efficient and it reaches into most corners of the city. The most impressive thing about the Moscow subway system, however, is the stations. They are not simply stops on a public transit line, they are works of art. Below are photographs (not taken by me – you’re not supposed to take pictures in the stations, and I try to avoid rule-breaking in Russia) of some of the most beautiful stations, just to give you a glimpse of what I mean. They truly are “palaces of the people.”

Metro Station Komsomolskaya


Metro Station Kievskaya

In addition to the ever amazing subway system that is the Moscow Metro, Moscow also has an efficient bus and trolley bus system, plus slightly more expensive mini-buses called marshrutki. It’s pretty easy to get around the city without a car, and certainly the masses avail themselves of this opportunity. Just check out this video of the Moscow Metro at rush hour!

However, in cities such as Moscow and St. Petersburg where the “New Russians” are growing richer by the day, the idea that the “better” people own cars is certainly becoming prevalent. Moscow and St. Petersburg roads are frequently jammed with cars – and, of course, the winter weather often exacerbates this situation.

Despite the ever increasing popularity of the automobile, public transportation is still the way the masses travel… HOWEVER: anyone who has ever visited Russia can attest to the fact that pollution is still a serious problem in that country. Certainly the growing number of cars is contributing to an increase in pollution emissions, but in Russia there are certainly far worse polluters in just about every industry.

Part 2: Daegu

I currently live in Daegu, South Korea. Daegu has excellent public transportation. I live close enough to my workplace that I can walk; however, if I wish to go anywhere else in the city, I can easily do so by taking either the subway or a bus (or both). Many, many people avail themselves of the public transportation opportunities in Daegu (and other South Korean cities) on a daily basis, and the subway and busses are frequently packed. That being said, cars are becoming increasingly popular here as well. Perhaps it’s a sign of status? I don’t know. I do know that this is the only country where I’ve been caught in a nine hour traffic jam!

Of course, even if every person in South Korea were to drive an SUV, it wouldn’t have nearly the impact that the US has on pollution emissions, simply due to South Korea’s size – this country is, after all, smaller than Florida.

The Daegu subway stations aren't particularly interesting...
but the cars are incredibly clean!

Part 3: San Diego

I lived in San Diego, CA for a little over two years. The city of San Diego is quite large, and San Diego County is bigger than the state of Rhode Island. The freeways are constantly jammed, and I spent a huge portion of my time sitting in traffic. San Diego does have a trolley and bus system, but they are not very efficient. In good traffic, it would take me approximately 15 minutes to drive from my house to the Mexican border. This same trip would take one hour by trolley, not including the fifteen minutes it took me to walk to the nearest trolley stop. I only ever used the trolley when I went to Mexico, simply because I did not feel that the border was a safe area to park my car. All other times, I drove. Who wants to take triple or quadruple the time to get somewhere?

The San Diego Trolley only had two lines. The bus routes weren’t very convenient. While the local government spoke of plans to add more lines and routes in the future, they weren’t sure if that would be cost effective. Because so few people rode the trolley and buses regularly, the city had to increase fees. The increased fees led to fewer people riding said transport, leading to a decrease in transit authority revenue, leading to another fee hike... and meanwhile, traffic gets worse and worse by the day. That being said, there's a lot less pollution in San Diego than in either Daegu or Moscow!

Waiting for the San Diego Trolley with my mom, 2003
(We were going to Tijuana, Mexico.)

Just what is it that we're discovering here?

I grew up watching pretty much only PBS and the NBC nightly news, and as such I have a fondness for educational/factual television. Yes, I love to watch plenty of mindless entertainment, but I’m also perfectly willing to kick back and watch something informative. Before moving to Korea last August, I’d never had the opportunity to watch the Discovery Channel. I was excited, thinking I’d be watching it more than anything else. (Little did I know OCN would distract me by showing CSI nearly all the time… And yes, I can sense Caitlin’s disapproval from across the Pacific.) CSI notwithstanding, I do actually watch the Discovery Channel Asia a good bit, although over the past ten months I’ve begun to wonder just how accurate it all is.

My distrust of the Discovery Channel stems from several things. Two of those “things” are actually two episodes that I really enjoy watching: A Haunting and Psychic Detectives. They’re really entertaining, although I don’t take any of it seriously. The thing is, these shows present everything as fact without present any alternate explanations for what’s happened.

For example, in one episode I saw of A Haunting, a woman starts to have incredibly strong, irrational, unexplainable feelings of sadness and despair shortly after moving into a newly purchased old house with her boyfriend. The show explains her feelings by bringing in psychics who sense the negative energy of a malevolent spirit, blah, blah, blah. To me it seemed obvious that the woman was suffering from the classic symptoms of clinical depression; she needed Lexapro and not an exorcism. Additionally, it seems that almost all of the A Haunting episodes involve some sort of Catholic exorcism/cleansing. Do only Catholics see ghosts? The show also presents as fact that if you use a ouija board or dabble in the occult, you will soon be possessed and/or tormented by Demons from Hell. As someone who has done both of those things, I would just like to point out that I haven’t summoned any demons.

I took a class in college called Pseudopsychology. We looked at all sorts of paranormal phenomena, but we looked at them from the point of view of the believer as well as the scientist. Everything we discussed in class was debunked via scientific experimentation. As an educational television station, shouldn’t they add some education of this sort to their shows about ghosts and psychics? Or do they skip over that simply because it’s not as entertaining?

One weekend I stumbled upon a documentary on the Discovery Channel about a British scientist who had discovered the fossilized remains of dragons in Eastern Europe – irrefutable proof that dragons were not mythical beasts after all. It was an incredibly well done documentary, with interviews and footage from the excavations and extensive delving into historical records… except that as I was pretty damn sure none of it was real, I checked online. According to the Discovery Channel’s website, it was a mockumentary showing what would happen *if* someone discovered proof that dragons had existed. Um, ok. Someone please tell me what’s the point here? Confusing small children who might watch and then believe in dragons? Yes, it was entertaining, and yes, I watched the whole thing… but that was hardly educational!

Obviously, not all shows on the Discovery Channel are of that nature. I watched an excellent documentary of the terrorist siege at the school in Beslan, Russia quite recently. I felt that the documentary was quite well done (especially considering that they were able to get Russians willing to go on television and criticize the way the government handled the situation; that kind of open criticism is hard to find over there), and I felt that I learned a lot. Except that afterwards, I found myself wondering if everything I had just watched was presented as accurate. I mean, this was the channel that told me ghosts and dragons were factual!

So what are your feelings on educational television? (And not just the Discovery Channel – you can take on PBS or the History Channel or any other educational station.) How factual should educational television be? Is it acceptable to include shows about dragons and psychics and ghosts without any sort of scientific counter argument? Or should educational TV be like the channels here in Korea: a teacher lecturing at a blackboard, guaranteed to send your children to sleep immediately?

Censorship in Russia

At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russia’s largest independent radio news network, the managers had startling news of their own: from now on, they said, at least 50 percent of the reports about Russia must be “positive.” In addition, opposition leaders could not be mentioned on the air and the United States was to be portrayed as an enemy, journalists employed by the network, Russian News Service, say they were told by the new managers, who are allies of the Kremlin. How would they know what constituted positive news? “When we talk of death, violence or poverty, for example, this is not positive,” said one editor at the station who did not want to be identified for fear of retribution. “If the stock market is up, that is positive. The weather can also be positive.” [full article here]