Thursday, June 3, 1999
After reading "Squid" in the May 20 issue, it is clear that it's "politics as usual" in Seaside. You would think that Helen Rucker, having in part caused the election by her abrupt resignation following the election loss of her leader and mentor, Don Jordan, would want to stay out of Seaside politics.
Instead, she and Tim Brown tried to persuade Lance McClair to drop out of the race for her vacant seat and support Luther Hert. Now I'm sure Mr. Hert is a fine person, but why would anyone in Seaside want to vote for someone who is supported by Brown and Jordan? Aren't we trying to unload the mess created by those two? Whether he knew about the subterfuge or not, in my mind, Mr. Hert is now a creature of the former administration.
I have been a member of the Seaside Planning Commission for nearly five years and I watched Brown and Jordan and all the political maneuverings that went on behind the scenes for so long. So I can speak from experience that Steve Bloomer is far and away the best candidate for Seaside. He has no hidden agendas or political baggage which could cloud his thinking or mar his judgment and is committed to unifying the City Council and working with Mayor Smith. That's why I will be voting for Steve in the election.
The Price of Privilege
Michael Kennedy ("Letters" 5/20) doesn't understand or doesn't care about a very important issue in the social justice movement. The power structure of our society is divided along racial lines. Whites do now have and have for hundreds of years dominated the power structure. What do I mean by the power structure?
I mean the division of currencies of power: money, influence, access to information, race, class and people either as individuals or as a collective. Whites have a controlling interest in most of this structure.
How can it be wrong for ethnic groups that have been historically marginalized to come together and seek access to the excessive power held by whites?
CSUMB does not teach racism. It has taught me about the inequalities that exist in our country and who benefits and who suffers as a result.
The Next Voice You Hear...
I completely agree with the sentiment that local radio stations >(CW, 5/13) have lost much of their autonomy, feeling the influence from profit-minded corporate owners. I recall an era not long ago when radio wasn't bland, and personnel weren't required to multi-task their efforts among several different stations.
The issue of corporate takeover is of particular interest to me, since I once lost a radio job to a corporation that chose profit over personnel. The simple logic of creating a product using the least amount of manpower is understandable. I just didn't realize this mentality would impact radio so quickly.
On-air jocks love their job, but with the advent of computer technology, it's becoming increasingly difficult to contend with automation systems. Hard drives today have the capacity to store hours of CD-quality music, then play it back in a preprogrammed sequence. For the listener, radio loses a certain degree of spontaneity when computers start running the show. Forget about requests...studio lines are frequently left unanswered. Listeners may even find themselves hearing the same prerecorded voices announcing songs on several different stations.
This is the reality of radio today. New technology and unabashed lay-offs bring about higher revenues for corporate owners. If this trend is to continue into another century, those corporate pockets can only get deeper. Owners need to start passing some of those profits onto their personnel, and start paying them what they're worth.