lsureveille Opinion Blog

Anyone familiar with my work here at The Daily Reveille knows how big of a proponent of Netflix I use to be. I’d tell all my friends, family and anyone who would listen to me they need to sign up for the service — because it was fantastic.

Was being the key word there.

I stuck with them during the initial price hike, but the company completely lost my faith after the whole Qwikster incident last year.

I’m not sure what went through company CEO Reed Hastings’ head, but it was absolutely awful.

With Netflix back on course, they seem to be gaining steam and marketshare back. I decided to keep my service, although all I really use it for lately is to get caught up on episodes of “How I Met Your Mother.”

However, this new Verizon and Redbox (Coinstar) partnership really intrigues me. There isn’t a lot of information about it yet, but considering the market Verizon carries with its phone and Internet, it wouldn’t be difficult to introduce a streaming service for those customers — as well as for those on other carriers.

Plus, if there is the possibility of getting unlimited movies from a Redbox kiosk for a low monthly price? Sign me up.

Netflix used to offer one DVD out at a time and unlimited streaming for about $10 per month. Now, DVD and streaming are separated into two different categories, each costing $8 per month. If this new “VerizonBox” partnership takes off, charge around $12 per month(possible discount for Verizon customers) for unlimted streaming and unlimted (one at a time) movie rentals from a Redbox kiosk and Netflix could be in some serious trouble.

Verizon and Coinstar need to play all of their cards if they want to dethrone Netflix.

But if they do play them right, the final product could be legen — wait for it — dary!

Confession is an integral part of the lives of most Louisianians, but a Michigan criminal court case could change that in the near future. Specifically at issue is the sanctity of the content of communications between the clergy and the laity — the confidentiality of confession, in other words. The long-standing precedent of confessional privilege is under review up North, and the consequences could hold down South, as well.

Confidentiality is overrated, I argue in my column today. Check it out to see for yourself if the “seal of confession” is worth breaking in the name of justice.

— Phil Sweeney

An interesting point I only touched on in my column was the lack of impact an attractive male observer had on women’s choices in the donation experiment.

This suggests women are less concerned than men with impressing the opposite sex at every available opportunity. The different ways men and women approach every day interactions when one finds the other attractive can lead to some unpleasant misunderstandings.

Last week’s episode of the sitcom “New Girl” starring Zooey Deschanel highlighted an example of this misunderstanding. In the episode, Deschanel’s character approached her unpleasant landlord to the chagrin of her male roommates, hoping he could fix a few things around their dilapidated apartment.

Deschanel finally convinced the landlord to fix up the apartment, but in the course of the episode, a male roommate became suspicious of the landlord and tried to convince Deschanel he was flirting with her, but Deschanel insisted he wasn’t. Later the landlord showed just how poorly he and Deschanel were reading each other’s signals when he tried to start a threesome between the two of them and the suspicious male roommate.

This is obviously an extreme example, but at its core their misunderstanding was due to a man trying to impress a girl while she had no idea he was coming onto her. Another man instantly recognized the landlord’s attempts at flirting because he’s likely tried similar moves in the past.

— Andrew Shockey

The column isn’t really about Louisiana getting more than its share of federal tax dollars.

I’m not complaining that Louisiana gets more money than California. Until recently, California had an economy larger than most countries, Louisiana did not.

The extra money comes here because the people and infrastructure of this state show a blatant need for it, which has become apparent to the rest of the country.

What I was really trying to get at in the column was the idea of welfare in general. People are afraid of it. It’s un-American to not fear an overtaxing government because that’s how we came to be.

People are afraid of the government taking their money and giving it to somebody else. It doesn’t matter to these people who the recipient is because that person is a thief in their mind.

We have to get passed this negative image of welfare.

Welfare exists because of the theory that society as a whole will benefit from the bottom class improving. Imagine everyone moving up a step on the ladder to success.

Society’s standard of living increases because less people are burning trash to keep their house warm. These formerly impoverished individuals could maybe afford to get an apartment or buy a suit for a job interview.

A little money goes a long way. Especially if that money was just going to sit in the savings account of some rich geezer, untouched, not stimulating the economy.

As humans beings, we have a moral obligation to care for our own species. It’s an added bonus that it’s good for the economy, too.

So everybody stop being such cold, cheap, heartless bastards and take care of the less fortunate like the preacher man tells us.

— Parker Cramer

When it comes to Middle Eastern opinion on the United States, many Americans find themselves wondering why the region is so hostile toward us.

Since the beginning of the War on Terror, we’ve been bombarded with divisive and propagandistic language extolling the virtues of our democracy and condemning all who do not agree with our agenda.

We’re the good guys. We’re the beacon of democracy and freedom in the world. If someone doesn’t like us, then they must be against freedom.

Yet, history reveals that our actions have probably been the number one factor in shaping Middle East public opinion against us.

In 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower asked the National Security Council in internal discussions to investigate a “campaign of hatred” that had risen against us in the Arab world.

The NSC responded by saying there is a perception in the Middle East that the United States prevents democracy and development by supporting corrupt, yet friendly governments. They then concluded that this perception was true and that it was exactly what the United States should be doing to preserve power in the region.

Polls taken since then, including one published by Pew Research Center in May 2011, have come up with similar results.

The conclusions that these results raise are opposed to the notion that they “hate us for our freedom” and demonstrate that if they hate us for anything, it’s for our policies.

We like to believe that our government acts in support of democracy and that we really are a force for good in the world, but the world isn’t divided by such stark, black and white lines.

Once we get over that, we can hold our government accountable for the actions it commits in our name.

— David Scheuermann

Shortly after putting down in Casablanca I met Soaud, my wife, and we boarded a train to Marrakesh. About an hour into our trip we were joined by an exhausted looking Arab man.

Even in a country as European as Morocco, a white dude and a Berber girl holding hands isn’t always kosher. The man nodded at me, and said something in Arabic. Soaud explained that I was her husband — an American Muslim.

He smiled, and produced a large box of cookies. For our marriage, he said, from his family in Libya. His name was Saied and he was a refugee from Sirte, Colonel Gadaffi’s hometown and the site of his frantic and unsuccessful last stand.

Saied said I was a pretty cool guy, but the rest of America could go to hell for having a hand in the murder of Moammar. He then proceeded to expound greatly upon the wickedness of the west.

The rest of the train ride was pretty awkward.

After two days with Souad’s sister in Marrakesh we set out bound for Beni Mellal, a small town in the foothills of the Atlas Mountains.

My encounter with Saied had brought the Arab Spring to the forefront of my thoughts. When we got off the bus the first thing I noticed was the hard look I was catching. Not everyone was glaring; it just seemed to be the young men.

They stood around in knots, gathered behind fruit stands and little makeshift stalls where you can buy a pair of Italian silk socks for fifty cents or a knock off Rolex.

Beni Mellal alternated between rich looking villas and abject poverty. We passed hovels and ancient, crumbling, tenement apartments being bulldozed for another set of unaffordable summer homes for the Moroccan jetset North African yuppies.

As we drew close to the town center, I could make out the sound of Arabic coming from a megaphone. They were the February 20th movement, Morocco’s Arab Spring franchise. There wasn’t much of a crowd, but a counter protest seemed to be growing up around them. I noticed folks didn’t seem to be taking them too seriously — but a core of people had coalesced around the man and his banner. They hefted placards and took up a chant.

“They’re saying the gap between rich and poor is too great — that and they want better pay.” Souad translated.

I couldn’t quite get a feel for the protest; it didn’t seem to be gaining much momentum. I learned why a few weeks later in a coffee shop in the sea side city of Agadir.

I interviewed a young grad student named Yusuf. He told me, through my wife, that after the Kings referendum the February 20th movement had lost a lot of its support. He said that a lot of people felt that there was disunity in the group-and that while there were still pressing issues that needed to be addressed the sort of rallying that had led to Muhammad VI’s move towards more democracy was not being repeated.

Yusuf’s views were not universal. There were many folks I spoke with who felt Muhammad VI was taking the country to far too fast. A lot of folks seemed worried about instability. I suppose that’s reasonable when your county has been basically the same for six centuries.

Towards the end of my visit I fell into the company of Dr. Abdulraheem Khalladi. We rode around the country side and discussed politics and the fate of his country. As we passed through a small town we came across another crowd with a black banner.

“In Morocco we have freedom of speech. We can assemble. Now we are electing our own leaders.”

His tone carried more worry than hope. I asked him if he felt like his country was ready for this sort of change.

“I’m not sure. Too much democracy could be a bad thing. We need to grow…but slowly. Either way we have it now. I pray we use it correctly.”

Nicholas Pierce

Opinion Columnist

Black History Month is more than Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr. and Harriet Tubman. We have prominent figures within this decade and the previous one continuing to make history in our lives.

We have actors like Halle Berry and Denzel Washington, athletes like Serena William and Tiger Woods and moguls like Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey. And of course, the first African-America President of the United States, Barrack Obama.

We tend to celebrate African-American culture through the struggles endured, as we should, but honoring our current history-makers should never be forgotten. Those before us made the way, but it’s spirit and encouragement that fuels drive.

Let’s make this February the year to recognize and praise local African-Americans making the effort.

— Marie-Therese Yokum

I can still remember the big, family man who spoke to me, an atheist, a year ago when the Pentecostal preachers came to campus.

I couldn’t help myself. I hated the screaming and mockery flung from both ends, and I missed my high school days (Catholic high school) when I could actually sit down with my religion teacher and discuss theology rationally. It’s a hard thing to find: a person confident enough in his convictions to bring them to a debate.

But the bigots ruin it every time. There’s always the barbarous blockade of shouts and avoidance which comes so often with the zealous.

The big man, head of a large family, had a gray beard and was plus-sized, if you will. He walked over with big steps after his son, who I was chatting with about the troupe’s works, had cast him a few uneasy glares.

First things first: Are you religious? No sir, I’m an atheist. The discussion progressed in the direction it should have: Why? What drove the decision? These questions were reflected back to the man as we separated ourselves from the ruckus.

He had been converted as a college student at LSU when the same group came by to spread the word. Since, he’s had numerous children and a life of dedicated evangelism.

We progressed to science, the antagonist of their movement.

When I told him I believed in objectivity, perceiving the world precisely as it is and taking it for precisely what it’s worth, he used the typical reduction in religious arguments: But how can you trust your senses? How can you have faith in your senses?

This point underscores the difference between the logical deductions of the religious and the not. I have little room for faith, and I prefer to trust my perception and work from there rather than create something brighter to cover the grimy parts.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of Wikimedia and Orange telecom’s donation to the people of Africa and the Middle is whether or not this could be seen as direct endorsement of the Arab Spring, if not the general movement to freedom in the region.

With information and the access to it always seems to come discontent, and donating directly to the people of these nations could certainly be interpreted as support for the cause.

Some 2,000 pro-democracy protesters march through a lower income neighborhood in Casablanca on Sunday, Jan. 22, 2012 denouncing the newly elected government and the king. Like the rest of the region, Morocco was once shaken by pro-democracy protests but the king has succeeded in blunting them by holding early elections and amending the constitution and the numbers of protesters have dwindled. (AP Photo/Abdeljalil Bounhar)

As much as I hope this to be the case, the beauty of the act is that the distinction hardly matters.

Essentially, the donation is entirely neutral — nothing but raw information. The list of nations which will be receiving free mobile access to Wikipedia is in the twenties, but like access to the internet itself, the most interesting progression will be to see which African nations abide by the program.

Why would a corrupt nation like Uganda want it’s people to have access to its past? The intellectuals already have it, and they’re the ones who protested Tahrir Square in Egypt — the youth and the connected. It’s the older generation, non-computer literate and old-fashioned, who dearly cling to the dictatorial leaders.

So why risk spreading the word?

Crooked countries will do almost anything to prevent such access from occurring. Iran is developing its own nationally controlled version of the internet, and one cannot pass a month without stories of China’s hefty online censorship and government-led hacking schemes.

As Wikimedia’s noble gesture washes across the Cradle this year, I’ll be far more interested to see the governments’ reactions than the people’s.

Any leader looking to appease the people could not decline, but he very well may seal his fate by accepting. It’s a dictatorial tightrope, but perhaps if your Kenya with a majority of your citizens living on $1 a day, those yeoman won’t know anyway, right?

— Clayton Thomas Crockett

Gone are the days of shame around sex. If you are of legal age to make decisions regarding your body, those decisions should be respected, not questioned and criticized.

If you are old enough to give your informed consent, no one should make you feel subhuman for following your desires.

Learning to see sex positively doesn’t mean that you will jump into every situation without looking first. It doesn’t mean that you have to be willing to do every taboo, crazy, or insane sexual act you see and hear about. What it does mean, is that you learn to keep an open mind to the possibilities in your life for interesting experiences.

The hope is that as you allow yourself freedom to explore your sexuality, and that you allow and respect the choices made by those around you who are doing the same thing.

When you open your mind to the possibilities of sexuality, you find they are awesomely infinite.

— Kristi Carnahan