Print This Post
Dec
31
Pretty colors
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Okay, I don’t really know exactly what this tells anyone, except that the numbers more or less increase as the months pass. I think that’s a good thing, but, not being one of those attention-starved bloggers, I can’t really say.
Hat tip to Adam Harvey of Organic/Mechanic for the idea.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:25 pm December 31st, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
31
Talk about evolution.
My mother married at 19, and had three kids by 1965, just a month after she’d turned 26. My dad was 30. Vietnam and the civil rights movement occupied the news, the first American walked in space and a stamp cost five cents. Books published that year include Malcolm X’s autobiography, and works by Sylvia Plath and Eudora Welty, all three of whom were still alive. The Sound of Music was released.
But my mother’s clothing? I’ve never been able to determine who body snatched her during those years. Her closet contained ponchos and go-go boots, but to me, nothing she wore ever seemed to go-go. Her chosen hues, textures and accessories always clashed.
And I played the role of the perpetually embarrassed daughter. By the age of 11, I became hyper-critical about how well everything matched. My room: flawless pinks. My clothes, blues. Even when I had my first car, a hand-me-down pistachio green Volkswagon Rabbit (burned out a couple of its clutches), I owned jackets and hats that matched the green perfectly.
Then, one school day morning, about a year ago, I looked at myself in the mirror and realized, I’d become my mother.
On my feet: pink mesh slip-on clog-like shoes and ecru-colored cashmere socks (small luxury for a writer who works in a poorly insulated walkout basement)
On my legs: dark olive green yoga-pant shaped polartec pants
On my upper body: lavender-blue sweatshirt from the Mohegan Sun casino in Connecticut
My hair and face: clean but no makeup
I laughed with a snort and immediately knew: this is how my mother ended up looking the way she did every morning when I was growing up. Necessity had body snatched her sense of style.
I know this because it’s robbed me of mine nearly every morning that I don’t have to be in front of or side by side people who are not primary caretakers. Sure, I still have some friends who don’t wear jeans outside the house, but look around in the supermarkets and Starbucks. What are these women wearing? You joke about the tres she-she-poo-poo expensive dressed down outfits of the suburban coffee house woman who has made us believe that there’s an art to mixing and matching.
But style, thy name is necessity. And it looks pretty hilarious on me most weekday mornings. Some days, by the time my husband gets home, I’m still looking pretty hilarious.
So here’s where evolution comes in.
See that picture at the top of this entry? See the candle colors on each menorah? As perfectly monochromatic as a Regis Philbin tie, suit and pocket square?
My nearly nine-year old daughter did that. And she’s been picky about how her clothes match for at least two years now.
Nature or nurture? I’m going with nature on this one because how else can I explain my instinct – against my mother’s style – to anal retentively match everything (to the point where I over-bleached all the walls in my house with off-white paint and wallpaper) or my daughter’s instinct, contrary to what she sees me wear 90% of the time, to match those candles?
Of course, she is the artistic one in the family and she’s a redhead – precisely the same combination as my mother’s mother. Nature, definitely.
Thank God my mother can’t see me in the mornings now.
Me – I no longer discriminate between the matched and unmatched among us. To one and all, have a very chappy sixth (last night) and seventh night (tonight) of Chanuka, and Chappy New Year.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:32 pm December 31st, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
31
Pretty colors
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Okay, I don’t really know exactly what this tells anyone, except that the numbers more or less increase as the months pass. I think that’s a good thing, but, not being one of those attention-starved bloggers, I can’t really say.
Hat tip to Adam Harvey of Organic/Mechanic for the idea.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:25 pm December 31st, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
31
Pretty colors
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Okay, I don’t really know exactly what this tells anyone, except that the numbers more or less increase as the months pass. I think that’s a good thing, but, not being one of those attention-starved bloggers, I can’t really say.
Hat tip to Adam Harvey of Organic/Mechanic for the idea.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:25 am December 31st, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
31
Talk about evolution.
My mother married at 19, and had three kids by 1965, just a month after she’d turned 26. My dad was 30. Vietnam and the civil rights movement occupied the news, the first American walked in space and a stamp cost five cents. Books published that year include Malcolm X’s autobiography, and works by Sylvia Plath and Eudora Welty, all three of whom were still alive. The Sound of Music was released.
But my mother’s clothing? I’ve never been able to determine who body snatched her during those years. Her closet contained ponchos and go-go boots, but to me, nothing she wore ever seemed to go-go. Her chosen hues, textures and accessories always clashed.
And I played the role of the perpetually embarrassed daughter. By the age of 11, I became hyper-critical about how well everything matched. My room: flawless pinks. My clothes, blues. Even when I had my first car, a hand-me-down pistachio green Volkswagon Rabbit (burned out a couple of its clutches), I owned jackets and hats that matched the green perfectly.
Then, one school day morning, about a year ago, I looked at myself in the mirror and realized, I’d become my mother.
On my feet: pink mesh slip-on clog-like shoes and ecru-colored cashmere socks (small luxury for a writer who works in a poorly insulated walkout basement)
On my legs: dark olive green yoga-pant shaped polartec pants
On my upper body: lavender-blue sweatshirt from the Mohegan Sun casino in Connecticut
My hair and face: clean but no makeup
I laughed with a snort and immediately knew: this is how my mother ended up looking the way she did every morning when I was growing up. Necessity had body snatched her sense of style.
I know this because it’s robbed me of mine nearly every morning that I don’t have to be in front of or side by side people who are not primary caretakers. Sure, I still have some friends who don’t wear jeans outside the house, but look around in the supermarkets and Starbucks. What are these women wearing? You joke about the tres she-she-poo-poo expensive dressed down outfits of the suburban coffee house woman who has made us believe that there’s an art to mixing and matching.
But style, thy name is necessity. And it looks pretty hilarious on me most weekday mornings. Some days, by the time my husband gets home, I’m still looking pretty hilarious.
So here’s where evolution comes in.
See that picture at the top of this entry? See the candle colors on each menorah? As perfectly monochromatic as a Regis Philbin tie, suit and pocket square?
My nearly nine-year old daughter did that. And she’s been picky about how her clothes match for at least two years now.
Nature or nurture? I’m going with nature on this one because how else can I explain my instinct – against my mother’s style – to anal retentively match everything (to the point where I over-bleached all the walls in my house with off-white paint and wallpaper) or my daughter’s instinct, contrary to what she sees me wear 90% of the time, to match those candles?
Of course, she is the artistic one in the family and she’s a redhead – precisely the same combination as my mother’s mother. Nature, definitely.
Thank God my mother can’t see me in the mornings now.
Me – I no longer discriminate between the matched and unmatched among us. To one and all, have a very chappy sixth (last night) and seventh night (tonight) of Chanuka, and Chappy New Year.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:32 am December 31st, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
31
Talk about evolution.
My mother married at 19, and had three kids by 1965, just a month after she’d turned 26. My dad was 30. Vietnam and the civil rights movement occupied the news, the first American walked in space and a stamp cost five cents. Books published that year include Malcolm X’s autobiography, and works by Sylvia Plath and Eudora Welty, all three of whom were still alive. The Sound of Music was released.
But my mother’s clothing? I’ve never been able to determine who body snatched her during those years. Her closet contained ponchos and go-go boots, but to me, nothing she wore ever seemed to go-go. Her chosen hues, textures and accessories always clashed.
And I played the role of the perpetually embarrassed daughter. By the age of 11, I became hyper-critical about how well everything matched. My room: flawless pinks. My clothes, blues. Even when I had my first car, a hand-me-down pistachio green Volkswagon Rabbit (burned out a couple of its clutches), I owned jackets and hats that matched the green perfectly.
Then, one school day morning, about a year ago, I looked at myself in the mirror and realized, I’d become my mother.
On my feet: pink mesh slip-on clog-like shoes and ecru-colored cashmere socks (small luxury for a writer who works in a poorly insulated walkout basement)
On my legs: dark olive green yoga-pant shaped polartec pants
On my upper body: lavender-blue sweatshirt from the Mohegan Sun casino in Connecticut
My hair and face: clean but no makeup
I laughed with a snort and immediately knew: this is how my mother ended up looking the way she did every morning when I was growing up. Necessity had body snatched her sense of style.
I know this because it’s robbed me of mine nearly every morning that I don’t have to be in front of or side by side people who are not primary caretakers. Sure, I still have some friends who don’t wear jeans outside the house, but look around in the supermarkets and Starbucks. What are these women wearing? You joke about the tres she-she-poo-poo expensive dressed down outfits of the suburban coffee house woman who has made us believe that there’s an art to mixing and matching.
But style, thy name is necessity. And it looks pretty hilarious on me most weekday mornings. Some days, by the time my husband gets home, I’m still looking pretty hilarious.
So here’s where evolution comes in.
See that picture at the top of this entry? See the candle colors on each menorah? As perfectly monochromatic as a Regis Philbin tie, suit and pocket square?
My nearly nine-year old daughter did that. And she’s been picky about how her clothes match for at least two years now.
Nature or nurture? I’m going with nature on this one because how else can I explain my instinct – against my mother’s style – to anal retentively match everything (to the point where I over-bleached all the walls in my house with off-white paint and wallpaper) or my daughter’s instinct, contrary to what she sees me wear 90% of the time, to match those candles?
Of course, she is the artistic one in the family and she’s a redhead – precisely the same combination as my mother’s mother. Nature, definitely.
Thank God my mother can’t see me in the mornings now.
Me – I no longer discriminate between the matched and unmatched among us. To one and all, have a very chappy sixth (last night) and seventh night (tonight) of Chanuka, and Chappy New Year.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:32 am December 31st, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
30
The Plain Dealer Diaries
Filed Under Politics | 5 Comments
My consumption, investigation and reporting of news is limited to that of a lifelong reader and a relatively new freelance writer. Other than high school journalism class and freshman English, I’ve never formally studied mass communications, media, journalism, or creative writing.
But a few months ago (before I started a blog), I discovered that the Plain Dealer welcomed the public into their editorial meetings, and I knew I wanted to go. I imagined that observing a newspaper’s editorial meeting would give me a crash course in how newspapers choose news.
Then, as my affection for and knowledge about blogging and the blogosphere increased, more questions formed in my mind: How does the immediacy of the Internet factor into what’s news as defined by a print publication? What is the face of Mainstream Media in Cleveland? Is print really dead?
And so I went to three separate Plain Dealer 10:45am editorial meetings to see what I could see. Scott Kovatch and Brian Thornton also attended on 12/14, I went alone on 12/15 and Shannon Okey attended with me on 12/19.
Some formalities:
Margie Frazier, the PD’s head of training and recruitment and down to earth doll, let me ask any question of anyone, if I was willing to think of it. No pretentiousness in this woman.
Ted Diadiun, the reader representative, greeted me with great resonance in his voice each morning but acted very seriously during the meetings. At times, in fact, I perceived him to struggle with making his observations about readers’ opinions stick with the other editors. He’d repeat or restate, but I didn’t sense that he made an impact. I never asked him if he felt shunted, but I’d like to know. His answer would go to whether the PD reader’s representative is a utilitarian funnel for reader input, or is an advocate for the readers and someone allowed to assess when the readers’ opinion has hit critical mass and requires action (which is my opinion of what an ombuds does).
Tom O’Hara and Doug Clifton, the top editors at these meetings, loosened up by the third session. Of course, I went into the meetings knowing that my very presence changed the interactions, whether anyone wanted to admit that or not. A closed-circuit camera behind a one-way mirror almost would have been better for observing, with me being invited to ask questions afterwards.
Even so, “loosened up” is a relative term. Throughout the meetings, O’Hara and Clifton exuded the authority you might expect them to want to impress upon everyone. Through their questions and their conduct – stiff body language, elbows leaning on the table, a shade kinder than glowering, motioning with firm arm gestures toward staff – they moved the meetings along. O’Hara led the first and third meetings, Clifton the second. The staff displayed the most irreverence during the Clifton-led meeting, although when you’re talking about revirgination and the failure of deer sterilization programs, someone’s bound to laugh – Clifton very much included, almost self-consciously so.
I also got to ask questions one on one of Metro editor Jean Dubail on my second day there, after having had some time on the first day, with Scott and Brian, talking to John Kroll.
Impressions:
For me, having only consumed news from a print newspaper and never investigated or reported it for one, attending our metropolitan area’s main paper’s editorial meetings felt like reading shorthand without ever having gone through a stenography class. And I barely passed keyboarding.
So I took a lot of notes, but they only tell a small part of the story: O’Hara and Clifton cycle through the editors, determining which stories each section will proffer and which ones will get a tease on the paper’s main front page. Some discussion about some topics ensued, but not as much as I would have liked. As Scott and Shannon wrote, it was all very business-like.
The real story that I witnessed goes like this:
It’s not a jovial place and the editors are scared. Of course they’re not going to tell you they’re scared and of course a number of people there like it there, love it there even, and love their work. And do good work.
But I sensed that the editors don’t see beyond the horizon, and maybe they’re not even looking in the right direction.
For example, the story’s already been told about how Tom O’Hara wanted to know how bloggers feed themselves. There’s this perception that we sit on our asses all day and blog.
But what this question, and others that the PD editors asked us – as bloggers visiting the paper (as opposed to public readers visiting the paper) – indicate to me is that the editors don’t have a clue about what to do with bloggers, about who might be a blogger and how different blogs are. They may have an idea about the vastness of the blogosphere, but they have no idea about the enormous variation in quality and content throughout its realm.
Jean Dubail actually said as much. He said that he does read blogs but he doesn’t do much with them or know what to do with them vis a vis the newspaper industry. (I’m paraphrasing here.)
The blogosphere is new compared to print news. Blogs don’t fit the model for news gathering. In fact, they mess up the model because they utilize regular citizens as storytellers through comments, and not just through reading. Blogs are forcing shifts and rifts and mutinies. And the plain fact is, not enough people turn toward winds of change when they should. Instead, instinctively, they seek to shield themselves, defend themselves and try to triumph over the power of the wind of change.
Unfortunately, doing so often turns deadly. And, after attending three editorial meetings and not seeing much change in the energy level and enthusiasm (which, I’ll concede, could be the nature of the beast, but if it is the nature of the beast, could be the reason why the beast will become extinct), and not sensing that the editors have an interest in integrating new media in an aggressive, invigorating or cutting edge style, I felt sad. Because I love newspapers. And I desperately want to see them morph into the 21st century. But all the evidence points to them – at least our large local one – twisting in the wind right now, unable or unwilling to take advantage of it.
I would love to be proven wrong.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:49 pm December 30th, 2005 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
30
The Plain Dealer Diaries
Filed Under Politics | 4 Comments
My consumption, investigation and reporting of news is limited to that of a lifelong reader and a relatively new freelance writer. Other than high school journalism class and freshman English, I’ve never formally studied mass communications, media, journalism, or creative writing.
But a few months ago (before I started a blog), I discovered that the Plain Dealer welcomed the public into their editorial meetings, and I knew I wanted to go. I imagined that observing a newspaper’s editorial meeting would give me a crash course in how newspapers choose news.
Then, as my affection for and knowledge about blogging and the blogosphere increased, more questions formed in my mind: How does the immediacy of the Internet factor into what’s news as defined by a print publication? What is the face of Mainstream Media in Cleveland? Is print really dead?
And so I went to three separate Plain Dealer 10:45am editorial meetings to see what I could see. Scott Kovatch and Brian Thornton also attended on 12/14, I went alone on 12/15 and Shannon Okey attended with me on 12/19.
Some formalities:
Margie Frazier, the PD’s head of training and recruitment and down to earth doll, let me ask any question of anyone, if I was willing to think of it. No pretentiousness in this woman.
Ted Diadiun, the reader representative, greeted me with great resonance in his voice each morning but acted very seriously during the meetings. At times, in fact, I perceived him to struggle with making his observations about readers’ opinions stick with the other editors. He’d repeat or restate, but I didn’t sense that he made an impact. I never asked him if he felt shunted, but I’d like to know. His answer would go to whether the PD reader’s representative is a utilitarian funnel for reader input, or is an advocate for the readers and someone allowed to assess when the readers’ opinion has hit critical mass and requires action (which is my opinion of what an ombuds does).
Tom O’Hara and Doug Clifton, the top editors at these meetings, loosened up by the third session. Of course, I went into the meetings knowing that my very presence changed the interactions, whether anyone wanted to admit that or not. A closed-circuit camera behind a one-way mirror almost would have been better for observing, with me being invited to ask questions afterwards.
Even so, “loosened up” is a relative term. Throughout the meetings, O’Hara and Clifton exuded the authority you might expect them to want to impress upon everyone. Through their questions and their conduct – stiff body language, elbows leaning on the table, a shade kinder than glowering, motioning with firm arm gestures toward staff – they moved the meetings along. O’Hara led the first and third meetings, Clifton the second. The staff displayed the most irreverence during the Clifton-led meeting, although when you’re talking about revirgination and the failure of deer sterilization programs, someone’s bound to laugh – Clifton very much included, almost self-consciously so.
I also got to ask questions one on one of Metro editor Jean Dubail on my second day there, after having had some time on the first day, with Scott and Brian, talking to John Kroll.
Impressions:
For me, having only consumed news from a print newspaper and never investigated or reported it for one, attending our metropolitan area’s main paper’s editorial meetings felt like reading shorthand without ever having gone through a stenography class. And I barely passed keyboarding.
So I took a lot of notes, but they only tell a small part of the story: O’Hara and Clifton cycle through the editors, determining which stories each section will proffer and which ones will get a tease on the paper’s main front page. Some discussion about some topics ensued, but not as much as I would have liked. As Scott and Shannon wrote, it was all very business-like.
The real story that I witnessed goes like this:
It’s not a jovial place and the editors are scared. Of course they’re not going to tell you they’re scared and of course a number of people there like it there, love it there even, and love their work. And do good work.
But I sensed that the editors don’t see beyond the horizon, and maybe they’re not even looking in the right direction.
For example, the story’s already been told about how Tom O’Hara wanted to know how bloggers feed themselves. There’s this perception that we sit on our asses all day and blog.
But what this question, and others that the PD editors asked us – as bloggers visiting the paper (as opposed to public readers visiting the paper) – indicate to me is that the editors don’t have a clue about what to do with bloggers, about who might be a blogger and how different blogs are. They may have an idea about the vastness of the blogosphere, but they have no idea about the enormous variation in quality and content throughout its realm.
Jean Dubail actually said as much. He said that he does read blogs but he doesn’t do much with them or know what to do with them vis a vis the newspaper industry. (I’m paraphrasing here.)
The blogosphere is new compared to print news. Blogs don’t fit the model for news gathering. In fact, they mess up the model because they utilize regular citizens as storytellers through comments, and not just through reading. Blogs are forcing shifts and rifts and mutinies. And the plain fact is, not enough people turn toward winds of change when they should. Instead, instinctively, they seek to shield themselves, defend themselves and try to triumph over the power of the wind of change.
Unfortunately, doing so often turns deadly. And, after attending three editorial meetings and not seeing much change in the energy level and enthusiasm (which, I’ll concede, could be the nature of the beast, but if it is the nature of the beast, could be the reason why the beast will become extinct), and not sensing that the editors have an interest in integrating new media in an aggressive, invigorating or cutting edge style, I felt sad. Because I love newspapers. And I desperately want to see them morph into the 21st century. But all the evidence points to them – at least our large local one – twisting in the wind right now, unable or unwilling to take advantage of it.
I would love to be proven wrong.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:49 pm December 30th, 2005 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
30
The Plain Dealer Diaries
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
My consumption, investigation and reporting of news is limited to that of a lifelong reader and a relatively new freelance writer. Other than high school journalism class and freshman English, I’ve never formally studied mass communications, media, journalism, or creative writing.
But a few months ago (before I started a blog), I discovered that the Plain Dealer welcomed the public into their editorial meetings, and I knew I wanted to go. I imagined that observing a newspaper’s editorial meeting would give me a crash course in how newspapers choose news.
Then, as my affection for and knowledge about blogging and the blogosphere increased, more questions formed in my mind: How does the immediacy of the Internet factor into what’s news as defined by a print publication? What is the face of Mainstream Media in Cleveland? Is print really dead?
And so I went to three separate Plain Dealer 10:45am editorial meetings to see what I could see. Scott Kovatch and Brian Thornton also attended on 12/14, I went alone on 12/15 and Shannon Okey attended with me on 12/19.
Some formalities:
Margie Frazier, the PD’s head of training and recruitment and down to earth doll, let me ask any question of anyone, if I was willing to think of it. No pretentiousness in this woman.
Ted Diadiun, the reader representative, greeted me with great resonance in his voice each morning but acted very seriously during the meetings. At times, in fact, I perceived him to struggle with making his observations about readers’ opinions stick with the other editors. He’d repeat or restate, but I didn’t sense that he made an impact. I never asked him if he felt shunted, but I’d like to know. His answer would go to whether the PD reader’s representative is a utilitarian funnel for reader input, or is an advocate for the readers and someone allowed to assess when the readers’ opinion has hit critical mass and requires action (which is my opinion of what an ombuds does).
Tom O’Hara and Doug Clifton, the top editors at these meetings, loosened up by the third session. Of course, I went into the meetings knowing that my very presence changed the interactions, whether anyone wanted to admit that or not. A closed-circuit camera behind a one-way mirror almost would have been better for observing, with me being invited to ask questions afterwards.
Even so, “loosened up” is a relative term. Throughout the meetings, O’Hara and Clifton exuded the authority you might expect them to want to impress upon everyone. Through their questions and their conduct – stiff body language, elbows leaning on the table, a shade kinder than glowering, motioning with firm arm gestures toward staff – they moved the meetings along. O’Hara led the first and third meetings, Clifton the second. The staff displayed the most irreverence during the Clifton-led meeting, although when you’re talking about revirgination and the failure of deer sterilization programs, someone’s bound to laugh – Clifton very much included, almost self-consciously so.
I also got to ask questions one on one of Metro editor Jean Dubail on my second day there, after having had some time on the first day, with Scott and Brian, talking to John Kroll.
Impressions:
For me, having only consumed news from a print newspaper and never investigated or reported it for one, attending our metropolitan area’s main paper’s editorial meetings felt like reading shorthand without ever having gone through a stenography class. And I barely passed keyboarding.
So I took a lot of notes, but they only tell a small part of the story: O’Hara and Clifton cycle through the editors, determining which stories each section will proffer and which ones will get a tease on the paper’s main front page. Some discussion about some topics ensued, but not as much as I would have liked. As Scott and Shannon wrote, it was all very business-like.
The real story that I witnessed goes like this:
It’s not a jovial place and the editors are scared. Of course they’re not going to tell you they’re scared and of course a number of people there like it there, love it there even, and love their work. And do good work.
But I sensed that the editors don’t see beyond the horizon, and maybe they’re not even looking in the right direction.
For example, the story’s already been told about how Tom O’Hara wanted to know how bloggers feed themselves. There’s this perception that we sit on our asses all day and blog.
But what this question, and others that the PD editors asked us – as bloggers visiting the paper (as opposed to public readers visiting the paper) – indicate to me is that the editors don’t have a clue about what to do with bloggers, about who might be a blogger and how different blogs are. They may have an idea about the vastness of the blogosphere, but they have no idea about the enormous variation in quality and content throughout its realm.
Jean Dubail actually said as much. He said that he does read blogs but he doesn’t do much with them or know what to do with them vis a vis the newspaper industry. (I’m paraphrasing here.)
The blogosphere is new compared to print news. Blogs don’t fit the model for news gathering. In fact, they mess up the model because they utilize regular citizens as storytellers through comments, and not just through reading. Blogs are forcing shifts and rifts and mutinies. And the plain fact is, not enough people turn toward winds of change when they should. Instead, instinctively, they seek to shield themselves, defend themselves and try to triumph over the power of the wind of change.
Unfortunately, doing so often turns deadly. And, after attending three editorial meetings and not seeing much change in the energy level and enthusiasm (which, I’ll concede, could be the nature of the beast, but if it is the nature of the beast, could be the reason why the beast will become extinct), and not sensing that the editors have an interest in integrating new media in an aggressive, invigorating or cutting edge style, I felt sad. Because I love newspapers. And I desperately want to see them morph into the 21st century. But all the evidence points to them – at least our large local one – twisting in the wind right now, unable or unwilling to take advantage of it.
I would love to be proven wrong.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:49 pm December 30th, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
30
I met Joe Wessels in Las Vegas during the Society for Professional Journalists annual convention in October. Great guy. He’s interviewing Paul Hackett on his Cincinnati Advance Radio tomorrow at 8:00am. You can listen over the Internet or via podcast. If you call in, tell Joe I say hi.
To get in on the action, as Joe says, “Call us at (513) 749-1444 or drop us an e-mail at studio@cincinnatiadvanceradio.com.”
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:18 am December 30th, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
30
Just two Lands End Performance Super Ts, a flannel shirt that has to be returned because we don’t like the color, three music CDs (for me, woohoo – The Ramones, new Sheryl Crow and ABBA), a DVD as requested by our daughter, a set of three for our oldest (which will be the second gift that needs to be returned this holiday) and a Magic School Bus DVD that explores inside the human body for our youngest (he already loves the computer game version of it). See how we do a theme each night (clothes, music, books, calendars etc.) Tomorrow night – oh, I can’t say, because my oldest son gets the Feedblitz of this blog in his email. You’ll just have to wait like the rest of them!
Chappy Fifth Night of Chanuka.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:51 am December 30th, 2005 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
29
I met Joe Wessels in Las Vegas during the Society for Professional Journalists annual convention in October. Great guy. He’s interviewing Paul Hackett on his Cincinnati Advance Radio tomorrow at 8:00am. You can listen over the Internet or via podcast. If you call in, tell Joe I say hi.
To get in on the action, as Joe says, “Call us at (513) 749-1444 or drop us an e-mail at studio@cincinnatiadvanceradio.com.”
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:18 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
29
Just two Lands End Performance Super Ts, a flannel shirt that has to be returned because we don’t like the color, three music CDs (for me, woohoo – The Ramones, new Sheryl Crow and ABBA), a DVD as requested by our daughter, a set of three for our oldest (which will be the second gift that needs to be returned this holiday) and a Magic School Bus DVD that explores inside the human body for our youngest (he already loves the computer game version of it). See how we do a theme each night (clothes, music, books, calendars etc.) Tomorrow night – oh, I can’t say, because my oldest son gets the Feedblitz of this blog in his email. You’ll just have to wait like the rest of them!
Chappy Fifth Night of Chanuka.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:51 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
29
One of these individuals actually commented on my blog a couple of days ago (and not a robo-comment either, first time around anyway) and I know of another one on the list because George at Brewed Fresh Daily is or has interviewed him for Meet the Bloggers (G – got anything up on the chat? I couldn’t find anything on MTB for him). Rupert Murdoch, who hasn’t heard of him?
The remaining seven names? Guess I just wasn’t interested enough to remember them, although I recognize several of the companies. And there’s always the excuse that I didn’t enter the blogosphere until mid-July of this year.
Who do you think makes the Top 10 Interesting People in the NEO Blogosphere?
(Btw, I saw the link to Blogherald’s Top 10 on Blogging Pro, which has an eerily similar appearance to Buckeye Politics. Damn those templates, eh? Had to close, then open my eyes a couple of times to be sure no one had done a switcheroo on me.)
UPDATE: I know folks are checking out this link. So come on, comment on who you would suggest.
I’ll start but be warned: This list is subjective, I’ve only been in the blogosphere since July 2005 and I believe in the March of the Penguins (the folks in the center have an obligation to watch out for the health and inclusion of those on the fringes).
What do I find interesting? The person and what they contribute stick with me, make me think in new ways or teach me about ideas I’ve never before explored.
In no particular order, here are ten interesting individuals from my 2005 blogging year:
Daniella (Lendquist or Lundquist?)
The Three Sometimes Wise though not necessarily all at the same time Meet the Bloggers founders
Valdis doesn’t even have a blog, I think. And I would never make the food on the vegan blog (although I should never say never). But that’s a sampling of what I’ve collided with in the blogosphere that’s impacted me as “interesting.” Corny as it sounds, I don’t think I’ve visited a blog that hasn’t impacted me in some way.
And I will lump all political blogs together: they fascinate, frustrate and confound me more than any other category of blogs because of how they make me feel like I have to restrain myself, lest I get sucked into the black holes of negative commentaries that sometimes open up.
But is the blogosphere the end of the world as we know it? Hardly. It’s just an open window into the microcosm each of us creates for ourselves. I hope that in 2006, my blogging impacts as many people as have impacted me.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:31 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
29
I met Joe Wessels in Las Vegas during the Society for Professional Journalists annual convention in October. Great guy. He’s interviewing Paul Hackett on his Cincinnati Advance Radio tomorrow at 8:00am. You can listen over the Internet or via podcast. If you call in, tell Joe I say hi.
To get in on the action, as Joe says, “Call us at (513) 749-1444 or drop us an e-mail at studio@cincinnatiadvanceradio.com.”
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:18 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
29
Just two Lands End Performance Super Ts, a flannel shirt that has to be returned because we don’t like the color, three music CDs (for me, woohoo – The Ramones, new Sheryl Crow and ABBA), a DVD as requested by our daughter, a set of three for our oldest (which will be the second gift that needs to be returned this holiday) and a Magic School Bus DVD that explores inside the human body for our youngest (he already loves the computer game version of it). See how we do a theme each night (clothes, music, books, calendars etc.) Tomorrow night – oh, I can’t say, because my oldest son gets the Feedblitz of this blog in his email. You’ll just have to wait like the rest of them!
Chappy Fifth Night of Chanuka.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:51 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Dec
29
Definition of family goes sub-atomic
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
A new zoning ordinance in Manassas, Virgina redefines the concept of a nuclear family.
I find it ironic that with all the complaints about sprawl, the family – our main societial unit – keeps shrinking, through behavioral choices and now, by legal definition. The fallout from when laws that try to accomplish one end but fail to be analyzed for possible social consequences before their enactment continues to astonish me.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:49 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
29
One of these individuals actually commented on my blog a couple of days ago (and not a robo-comment either, first time around anyway) and I know of another one on the list because George at Brewed Fresh Daily is or has interviewed him for Meet the Bloggers (G – got anything up on the chat? I couldn’t find anything on MTB for him). Rupert Murdoch, who hasn’t heard of him?
The remaining seven names? Guess I just wasn’t interested enough to remember them, although I recognize several of the companies. And there’s always the excuse that I didn’t enter the blogosphere until mid-July of this year.
Who do you think makes the Top 10 Interesting People in the NEO Blogosphere?
(Btw, I saw the link to Blogherald’s Top 10 on Blogging Pro, which has an eerily similar appearance to Buckeye Politics. Damn those templates, eh? Had to close, then open my eyes a couple of times to be sure no one had done a switcheroo on me.)
UPDATE: I know folks are checking out this link. So come on, comment on who you would suggest.
I’ll start but be warned: This list is subjective, I’ve only been in the blogosphere since July 2005 and I believe in the March of the Penguins (the folks in the center have an obligation to watch out for the health and inclusion of those on the fringes).
What do I find interesting? The person and what they contribute stick with me, make me think in new ways or teach me about ideas I’ve never before explored.
In no particular order, here are ten interesting individuals from my 2005 blogging year:
Daniella (Lendquist or Lundquist?)
The Three Sometimes Wise though not necessarily all at the same time Meet the Bloggers founders
Valdis doesn’t even have a blog, I think. And I would never make the food on the vegan blog (although I should never say never). But that’s a sampling of what I’ve collided with in the blogosphere that’s impacted me as “interesting.” Corny as it sounds, I don’t think I’ve visited a blog that hasn’t impacted me in some way.
And I will lump all political blogs together: they fascinate, frustrate and confound me more than any other category of blogs because of how they make me feel like I have to restrain myself, lest I get sucked into the black holes of negative commentaries that sometimes open up.
But is the blogosphere the end of the world as we know it? Hardly. It’s just an open window into the microcosm each of us creates for ourselves. I hope that in 2006, my blogging impacts as many people as have impacted me.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:31 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
29
Definition of family goes sub-atomic
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
A new zoning ordinance in Manassas, Virgina redefines the concept of a nuclear family.
I find it ironic that with all the complaints about sprawl, the family – our main societial unit – keeps shrinking, through behavioral choices and now, by legal definition. The fallout from when laws that try to accomplish one end but fail to be analyzed for possible social consequences before their enactment continues to astonish me.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:49 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
29
One of these individuals actually commented on my blog a couple of days ago (and not a robo-comment either, first time around anyway) and I know of another one on the list because George at Brewed Fresh Daily is or has interviewed him for Meet the Bloggers (G – got anything up on the chat? I couldn’t find anything on MTB for him). Rupert Murdoch, who hasn’t heard of him?
The remaining seven names? Guess I just wasn’t interested enough to remember them, although I recognize several of the companies. And there’s always the excuse that I didn’t enter the blogosphere until mid-July of this year.
Who do you think makes the Top 10 Interesting People in the NEO Blogosphere?
(Btw, I saw the link to Blogherald’s Top 10 on Blogging Pro, which has an eerily similar appearance to Buckeye Politics. Damn those templates, eh? Had to close, then open my eyes a couple of times to be sure no one had done a switcheroo on me.)
UPDATE: I know folks are checking out this link. So come on, comment on who you would suggest.
I’ll start but be warned: This list is subjective, I’ve only been in the blogosphere since July 2005 and I believe in the March of the Penguins (the folks in the center have an obligation to watch out for the health and inclusion of those on the fringes).
What do I find interesting? The person and what they contribute stick with me, make me think in new ways or teach me about ideas I’ve never before explored.
In no particular order, here are ten interesting individuals from my 2005 blogging year:
Daniella (Lendquist or Lundquist?)
The Three Sometimes Wise though not necessarily all at the same time Meet the Bloggers founders
Valdis doesn’t even have a blog, I think. And I would never make the food on the vegan blog (although I should never say never). But that’s a sampling of what I’ve collided with in the blogosphere that’s impacted me as “interesting.” Corny as it sounds, I don’t think I’ve visited a blog that hasn’t impacted me in some way.
And I will lump all political blogs together: they fascinate, frustrate and confound me more than any other category of blogs because of how they make me feel like I have to restrain myself, lest I get sucked into the black holes of negative commentaries that sometimes open up.
But is the blogosphere the end of the world as we know it? Hardly. It’s just an open window into the microcosm each of us creates for ourselves. I hope that in 2006, my blogging impacts as many people as have impacted me.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:31 pm December 29th, 2005 in Politics | Please comment
2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
by Tips and TricksNews Now
