You are on page 1of 1

A18

The New York Times

EDITORIALS/LETTERS Tuesday, October 23, 2012

The New York Times

OP-ED Tuesday, October 23, 2012

A19

ARTHUR OCHS SULZBERGER JR., Publisher


Founded in 1851 ADOLPH C. OCHS Publisher 1896-1935 ARTHUR HAYS SULZBERGER Publisher 1935-1961 ORVIL E. DRYFOOS Publisher 1961-1963 ARTHUR HAYS SULZBERGER Publisher 1963-1992 The News Sections JILL ABRAMSON, Executive Editor DEAN BAQUET, Managing Editor JOHN M. GEDDES, Managing Editor TOM BODKIN, Deputy Managing Editor WILLIAM E. SCHMIDT, Deputy Managing Editor Assisting Managing Editors RICHARD L. BERKE MICHELE McNALLY SUSAN CHIRA JIM ROBERTS GLENN KRAMON The Opinion Pages ANDREW ROSENTHAL, Editorial Page Editor TRISH HALL, Deputy Editorial Page Editor The Business Management SCOTT H. HEEKIN-CANEDY, President, General Manager DENISE F. WARREN, Senior V.P., Cheif Advertising Officer, General Manager, NYTimes.com YASMIN NAMINI, Senior V.P., Marketing and Circulation, General Manager, Reader Applications ALEXIS BURYK, Senior V.P., Advertising ROLAND A. CAPUTO, Senior V.P., Cheif Financial Officer THOMAS K. CARLEY, Senior V.P., Planning TERRY L. HAYES, Senior V.P., Operations and Labor The New York Times Company ARTHUR OCHS SULZBERGER JR., Chairman, Cheif Executive Officer MICHAEL GOLDEN, Vice Chairman JAMES M. FOLLO, Cheif Financial Officer R. ANTHONY BENTEN, Senior V.P. ROBERT H. CHRISTIE, Senior V.P. MARC FRONS, Senior V.P., Cheif Information Officer TODD C. McCARTHY, Senior V.P. KENNETH A. RICHIERI, Senior V.P., General Counsel LAURENA L. EMHOFF, V.P., Treasurer DIANE BRAYTON, Secretary

Fear the Spear

HEATHER BITLOC

No Care in Obamacare
With the intention of solving Americas health care problems, the United States Senate and the Obama administration drafted and passed a health reform act that is set to give Americans universal health care. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, was enacted by the 111th United States Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The 2700 page law details exactly what universal health care will mean for the United States. The most important points, and the most controversial are: The individual mandate requires that almost all Americans buy health care. The act adds new taxes and tax hikes to existing taxes, affecting the poor and the rich alike. For those who are unemployed, if they do not have approved health insurance before a deadline. Employer health plans must provide health care coverage for their employees that are comparable to the Health Care for America Plan set by Congress, or they will have to pay a tax to support Obamacare. Only a small group of religious institutions chosen by the IRS are excluded from paying the tax or providing health care coverage with all the provisions set by the act. Though there is a need for health care reform, the provisions of the reform and specifically, the above points are not the way to go about giving Americans an affordable and effective health care system. The problems with Obamacare, specifically in regard to the above points are as follows: Enforcing a requirement to buy something is unconstitutional, as is forcing someone to pay a tax because they didnt buy something. Many people already receive health coverage from their employers or elect to pay privately for their insurance. With Obamacare, choices will become more and more limited, insurance premiums or rates will rise, and we will be required to purchase something whether we want to or not. If the government can essentially force us to buy health coverage, who says they wont expand their power, and force us to buy something else that they deem important. New taxes and tax hikes are not something this country can afford. Amidst an economic crisis, Americans are struggling to afford their current economic situations. Adding taxes to the middle class and lower class will drive families further and further into debt than before the act was in place. If everyone is required to have health care, insurance companies will raise their rates significantly to cover the costs of their many new costumers. Employers will realize that it may be cheaper to layoff employees and more beneficial to them to provide fewer people with health care coverage, or simply pay the tax, thus resulting in unemployment. Unemployment will lead to families privately paying for their health insurance, or paying the aforementioned tax. Though few institutions are excluded from the act, many are not. Some provisions of Obamacare involve providing contraceptives, abortion type drugs, and sterilizations within a health care plan. Contraceptives, abortion type drugs, and sterilizations arent widely believed in and there are employers who have firm beliefs in not using those products. Catholic or Christian run organizations view this requirement as a violation of their religious freedom, as providing their employees with free access to these products directly contradicts their beliefs. The First Amendment clearly protects the right of free exercise of religion. There is no doubt that Americas health care system needs a reform. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, however is not the answer. Obamacare is unconstitutional and unaffordable. Though parts of it are already in effect, it needs to be repealed before any further consequences and burdens are placed upon the American people with the main mandate in January of 2013. A repeal can only be achieved through the election of political officials who believe in allowing America to find another alternative to our health care problems that does not involve an unconstitutional and unaffordable act. In a democrat run government, a shift in power may provide the hope for an effective, constitutional, and affordable health care.

The Facebook Addiction


TO THE EDITOR:
I really enjoyed the piece that was published regarding the effects of Facebook on society. The author made great points, and I agree with just about everything that was written. To expand upon the authors point, I believe that children are the ones being harmed the most by our societys addiction to Facebook. Instead of climbing trees, riding bikes, and as the author suggested, throwing around a football, our children are all huddled over their electronic devices waiting for the next status update. Children learn by example, and I believe we all would benefit by following this articles example and stepping away from Facebook. When people talk about how bad Facebook has gotten, we tend to laugh it off, but as the article states, the problem is more serious than that. Thank you for allowing this authors message to be heard. JOSEPH LESHO Florida, September 25, 2012

Gregory Cogan

TO THE EDITOR:
I thoroughly enjoyed reading the OPED about Facebook and how it is slowly destroying our society, our social skills and the way we communicate with one another. This article touched on how it is convenient, and takes less effort to simply log into a website and see what your friends are up to rather than giving them

a call or going over to their house. I agree with the author in the sense that Facebook is a bit too much insight into peoples lives and an invitation for negative habits such as analyzing and criticizing fellow Facebook-ers. I also think Facebook can be an outlet for jealousy. This article made me wonder where Facebook is taking us and how we can prevent it from consuming our lives and causing us to be inferior communicators. I liked the suggestions of how to better spend our time rather than going on Facebook for hours on end and actually pay attention to those around us. It makes me wonder if our society is capable of cutting back on social networking and if this phenomenon could possibly get much worse. BROOKE FARRIOR Florida, September 25, 2012

No Care in Obamacare
With the intention of solving Americas health care problems, the United States Senate and the Obama administration drafted and passed a health reform act that is set to give Americans universal health care. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, was enacted by the 111th United States Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The 2700 page law details exactly what universal health care will mean for the United States. The most important points, and the most controversial are: The individual mandate requires that almost all Americans buy health care. The act adds new taxes and tax hikes to existing taxes, affecting the poor and the rich alike. For those who are unemployed, if they do not have approved health insurance before a deadline. Employer health plans must provide health care coverage for their employees that are comparable to the Health Care for America Plan set by Congress, or they will have to pay a tax to support Obamacare. Only a small group of religious institutions chosen by the IRS are excluded from paying the tax or providing health care coverage with all the provisions set by the act. Though there is a need for health care reform, the provisions of the reform and specifically, the above points are not the way to go about giving Americans an affordable and effective health care system. The problems with Obamacare, specifically in regard to the above points are as follows: Enforcing a requirement to buy something is unconstitutional, as is forcing someone to pay a tax because they didnt buy something. Many people already receive health coverage from their employers or elect to pay privately for their insurance. With Obamacare, choices will become more and more limited, insurance premiums or rates will rise, and we will be required to purchase something whether we want to or not. If

Needed Technology Updates in Education


TO THE EDITOR:
Mr. Kalickis evaluation and opinion on the education system in America is one that I agree with, and am sure many of the readers of your newspaper would agree with. He sheds light on the fact that reading has become such a chore for students that they have no desire to read outside of class and many have developed a hatred for all kinds of reading. He suggests that electronics take center stage and be the hero of the reading crisis, saying that products like the iPad and the Nook, although not cheap, are good tools to get the kids more interested. While I agree with Mr. Kalickis suggestions, there is a question of funds for this type of endeavor in our school systems. Even Kalicki mentions the fact that he is aware that money is an issue. Usually, if the schools are being encouraged to add something to the school (such as a few hundred iPads) for the students sake, something else will have to be cut. It is the argument of what is not working at all that deserves to be cut from the schools budget that really intrigues me after reading this authors editorial. ANNA CURTIS Florida, September 25, 2012 lated. I agree with his idea that we should encourage children to read what they are interested in, and the idea that as long as they are reading its a good thing, is a valid notion. I had a very similar experience to the one he described. I too would skim through my assigned reading throughout my school days, only searching for the key points, and then go home and read big long novels of my own choosing. I remember thinking how much more I would enjoy school if they only let me read the things I was interested in rather than the dry antiquated books I was being force fed. This left me feeling detached and uninterested during most of my English classes. The only problem I can see with this proposed approach to reading education, is how will it be implemented? I know when I was a kid we had a program called accelerated reader which was a way to read books you were interested in(as long as they were in the program) and take quizzes on them afterwards. At first this appears to be the type of program that Kalicki suggest however, I remember that while I loved this program and consistently ranked in the highest I the class for books read and tests passed many of my classmate found work arounds to get grade without actually reading. And the program was eventually done away with because of this. The article raises great points and I would like to see more ideas on the future implementation of programs to encourage reading. CALEB THOMAS Florida, September 25, 2012

the government can essentially force us to buy health coverage, who says they wont expand their power, and force us to buy something else that they deem important. New taxes and tax hikes are not something this country can afford. Amidst an economic crisis, Americans are struggling to afford their current economic situations. Adding taxes to the middle class and lower class will drive families further and further into debt than before the act was in place. If everyone is required to have health care, insurance companies will raise their rates significantly to cover the costs of their many new costumers. Employers will realize that it may be cheaper to layoff employees and more beneficial to them to provide fewer people with health care coverage, or simply pay the tax, thus resulting in unemployment. Unemployment will lead to families privately paying for their health insurance, or paying the aforementioned tax. Though few institutions are excluded from the act, many are not. Some provisions of Obamacare involve providing contraceptives, abortion type drugs, and sterilizations within a health care plan. Contraceptives, abortion type drugs, and sterilizations arent widely believed in and there are employers who have firm beliefs in not using those products. Catholic or Christian run organizations view this requirement as a violation of their religious freedom, as providing their employees with free access to these products directly contradicts their beliefs. The First Amendment clearly protects the right of free exercise of religion. There is no doubt that Americas health care system needs a reform. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, however is not the answer. Obamacare is unconstitutional and unaffordable. Though parts of it are already in effect, it needs to be repealed before any further consequences and burdens are placed upon the American people with the main mandate in January of 2013. A repeal can only be achieved

For all collegiate football fans, the offseason is team preparation, the season is fan anticipation, and the final bowl game is where you go big or go home. However, it is the Bowl Championship Series that both fans and players will tell you is an annual dream. From the start of the BCS era during the 1998-1999 season, all Division I college football teams had a new win to accomplish in their season: the title of National Champion. Looking at the history of BCS games, typically one can guess which team has the highest chances of being in the series, as only thirteen teams have made an appearance and only ten have of those have won at least one of their appearances. But then again, only four teams have won all of their appearances: Alabama, Florida, Auburn, and Tennessee-- all of which are in the SEC. Fans will always hope that their team is going to make it to the final game and win the title to go down in sports history, but what most fans dont take into consideration is the development a team can have over years of defeat and coming close to the National Champion title. This is the year the team that is always a threat in the start of the season, but falls in the rankings, makes it known that they are back and ready for another three-year appearance streak. This is the year of the Florida State Seminoles. Florida State has appeared in the BCS a total of three times: in 1998, 1999, and 2000. Although having only won the tittle in the 1999 season against Virginia Tech, Florida State remains the only ACC team to attend a championship game. Despite Florida States up and down seasons, they are still a favorite in the minds of ESPN sports reporters and several sports analysts. Seen as possibly the best defense in the nation, both defensive ends, Bjoern Werner and Cornelius Tank Carradine, have set career high records for sacks and tackles for loss in only the first three games of the Seminoles 2012 season. Werner leads the ACC in sacks with a total of 6.5 sacks, and ranks 19th in Florida State history with 17.0 career sacks and 26.0 TFLs. On the other side of the defense, Carradine has been rolling over quarterbacks left and right with a career high for sacks and

adamzyglis.com

The Curse of Reality Television

By Nery Gonzales

Florida State has revenge on their mind.


tackles for loss with 2.5 sacks. Werner and Carradine arent the only stars of the defensive line though, sophomore defensive tackle, Timmy Jernigan, has made a name for himself with a career-best six tackles. The defense isnt the only thing to talk about when it comes to the Seminoles, quarterback EJ Manuel is on top of his game with a career completion average of 66.6%, putting him in second place on the ACC career completion percentage list. With an offensive line all weighing in over three hundred pounds and topping out at 67, Manuel is protected in the pocket, giving him time to scan his options and deliver. However, not all credit of the offense goes to Manuel, as running back, Chris Thompson, has been unstoppable by any team so far, proving himself as healthy and ready to make a come back from his previous back injury. Rushing 197 yards in a single game against Wake Forest-- a career-high-- Thompson has other teams weary when he steps on the field. Although Florida State is the only ranked team to not let an opposing team score a touchdown this season, pressure has been building up for the top ten match up on Saturday, September 22, 2012 against Clemson. With a loss to Clemson in 2011, Florida State has revenge on their minds and a desire to redeem themselves. If the Seminoles were to lose to Clemson this early in the season, all hopes of Florida State going to the National Championship would be wiped from the minds of numerous fans. However, the track record of the Clemson-Florida State rivalry shows Florida State having only lost a total of three times at home since 1970, putting the odds in favor of Florida State. But as all sports fans know, it all comes down to the fourth quarter. It is early in the season to be certain as to which teams will be facing off at the 2012 BCS, but it is pretty obvious that with a team so on-track and determined as the Florida State Seminoles are, they are bound to go undefeated. Head coach Jimbo Fisher has his team focused and ready to take down any opposing team, one game at a time. In the words of Jimbo Fisher himself, This is Florida State men. This is what youre supposed to do, this is what you know you can do...Aint nobody pushing us around in our house, I want you to understand that, Nobody! You earned this you deserve this. Its who you are. Its who we are. Come January of 2013, you will see the Seminoles take back the title of National Champions. Fear the Spear. David Brooks and Paul Krugman had the day off. Both Brooks and Krugen will return in one week.

hen did reality shows become so important in our everyday lives? When did we stop paying attention to the world around us and the real-life events that affect it directly? When did we start paying attention to a complete strangers life and the conflicts and struggles they must face? In my 22 years of life, I have seen the evolution of television content and the effects it has had on our society. I have discovered an undeniable truth: reality television has taken over. The concept behind reality television is to document real life people in real life situations. This reality is what makes this kind of television a little tricky; the great majority of reality television is dedicated to famous, rich people, many in which have done absolutely nothing to deserve their success, money, and the admiration of thousands. So why is it that we find reality shows so fascinating, entertaining, and addictive? The answer is pretty simple; these so-called reality show stars have access to things that a regular, non-upper class person, could only dream of. I am not by any means saying that regular people would not have access to private planes or expensive cars or exotic vacations, its just that for people not in the upper class, the matter of obtaining this kind of success is different. Due to this difference, the documentation of the lives of the rich and famous gives us an inside scoop of what happens while wearing the designer clothes or life

behind the mansion walls. Whether or not the image portrayed on these shows is real is a completely different story. We, as fans, want to convince ourselves that our idols are humans, just like we are: they make mistakes, they cry, they argue, and they have conflicts in their lives out of their control-- just like we do! Not every reality show out there is about a celebrity though, there are some that portray the lives of regular people: men who risk their lives every year just to catch some of the most expensive and the most exotic crabmeat in the market, the life of a physically or mentally challenged

Our idols are humans.


person who struggles to make every day look like any other day, the financial and every-day struggles of a family with 19 kids and counting, and the process in which toddlers attempt to win beauty tittles. This second type of reality shows is even worse than those about celebrities, because the creators, producers, and television networks behind the development of these shows see these people as their own private gold mine. The subjects of these shows are exploited for tons and tons of money when people start looking forward to and watching the next episode of the shows. I have come to the conclusion that perhaps one of the reasons for our excitement is that we see reality television as an opportunity to forget about our problems and make our lives a little more valuable. I understand that this statement sounds a little harsh, but I also know that as ugly as it sounds, it is true. If it isnt, I cant find any other explanation for the reality television fanatics.

I am not saying that these shows are not entertaining or fun to watch, it just worries me that our children, teenagers, and even adults are more worried about what toddler will win the next beauty pageant on Toddlers and Tiaras, or who Kim Kardashian will marry or divorce next on Keeping up with the Kardashians, than the important political race taking place in our country or the violence developing day by day in middle-eastern countries. It is true that major news networks like FOX News and CNN have lost credibility throughout the years due to sex scandals, racism, or bribes, however, this does not necessarily mean that the interest in the well being of our country or our world must be lost as well. Unfortunately, this new revolution in reality television and the loss of credibility of major news networks, are achieving a shift in our focus. The question still remains: where do we draw the line between quality television and tacky, trashy, and inappropriate content? Unfortunately, we cant anymore. A lot of producers and television networks use the First Amendment as an excuse for everything from inappropriate language or images, to situations that involve sex, drugs, and alcohol. Reality television has influenced our society so deeply and has taken over our networks in such a big way that its impossible not to be a part of this phenomenon. People refer to this type of entertainment as their guilty pleasure, because they realize that these shows or the people on them would contribute absolutely nothing to their lives and because as much as they criticize the Kardashians and the mothers involved in Toddlers and Tiaras, the show is just so good and unpredictable that is impossible not to watch every episode, every reunion, or every season finale.

Escaping the Negative Stigma


f you took a survey asking people which brand their first cell phone was, a large majority would likely say Nokia. If you took a survey asking people what brand their current cell phone is, you would likely hear a much wider variety. Names like Apple, Samsung, LG, HTC, or even Blackberry would be prevalent; Nokia, however, would probably not make the list. The company dominated the market at the start of the cell phone boom in the early 2000s, but the smart phone explosionbeginning with the release of the iPhonehas buried Nokia, leaving many investors wondering if they will ever recover. So what happened, and what can Nokia do to reclaim their throne? In order for Nokia to recover its lost market share, they must first focus on their mind sharefor many, Nokia is nothing more than a distant memory. Love them or hate them, Apple revolutionized the way we look at cell phones, holding the largest sum of mind share in the cell phone industry today. Since the release of the original iPhone in 2007, Nokias stock price has been in free fall. Their highest close for the fiscal year of 2007 came on November 6 at $41.10 per share. On that same day in 2007, Apple closed at $191.79 per share, and since the unveiling of the iPhone 5, the stock has soared to a historical high of over $700 per share-- a 266% growth. Instead of innovating and attempting to keep pace with Apple, Nokia stood pat, hoping that their name alone would carry them into the new era of cellular devices. Consumers responded, and with the release of Android, the hole that Nokia had fallen into became even deeper.

TO THE EDITOR:
I wish to write in response to the recent article written by Joe Kalicki. I feel that his stance on the importance of reading for children in school is a very well articu-

No Care in Obamacare
With the intention of solving Americas health care problems, the United States Senate and the Obama administration drafted and passed a health reform act that is set to give Americans universal health care. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, was enacted by the 111th United States Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The 2700 page law details exactly what universal health care will mean for the United States. The most important points, and the most controversial are: The individual mandate requires that almost all Americans buy health care. The act adds new taxes and tax hikes to existing taxes, affecting the poor and the rich alike. For those who are unemployed, if they do not have approved health insurance before a deadline. Employer health plans must provide health care coverage for their employees that are comparable to the Health Care for America Plan set by Congress, or they will have to pay a tax to support Obamacare. Only a small group of religious institutions chosen by the IRS are excluded from paying the tax or providing health care coverage with all the provisions set by the act. Though there is a need for health care reform, the provisions of the reform and specifically, the above points are not the way to go about giving Americans an affordable and effective health care system. The problems with Obamacare, specifically in regard to the above points are as follows: Enforcing a requirement to buy something is unconstitutional, as is forcing someone to pay a tax because they didnt buy something. Many people already receive health coverage from their employers or elect to pay privately for their insurance. With Obamacare, choices will become more and more limited, insurance premiums or rates will rise, and we will be required to purchase something whether we want to or not. If the government can essentially force us to buy health coverage, who says they wont expand their power, and force us to buy something else that they deem important. New taxes and tax hikes are not something this country can afford. Amidst an economic crisis, Americans are struggling to afford their current economic situations. Adding taxes to the middle class and lower class will drive families further and further into debt than before the act was in place. If everyone is required to have health care, insurance companies will raise their rates significantly to cover the costs of their many new costumers. Employers will realize that it may be cheaper to layoff employees and more beneficial to them to provide fewer people with health care coverage, or simply pay the tax, thus resulting in unemployment. Unemployment will lead to families privately paying for their health insurance, or paying the aforementioned tax. Though few institutions are excluded from the act, many are not. Some provisions of Obamacare involve providing contraceptives, abortion type drugs, and sterilizations within a health care plan. Contraceptives, abortion type drugs, and sterilizations arent widely believed in and there are employers who have firm beliefs in not using those products. Catholic or Christian run organizations view this requirement as a violation of their religious freedom, as providing their employees with free access to these products directly contradicts their beliefs. The First Amendment clearly protects the right of free exercise of religion. There is no doubt that Americas health care system needs a reform. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, however is not the answer. Obamacare is unconstitutional and unaffordable. Though parts of it are already in effect, it needs to be repealed before any further consequences and burdens are placed upon the American people with the main mandate in January of 2013. A repeal can only be achieved through the election of political officials who believe in allowing America to find another alternative to our health care problems that does not involve an unconstitutional and unaffordable act. In a democrat run government, a shift in power may provide the hope for an effective, constitutional, and affordable health care.

The Shift to Solar Power


TO THE EDITOR:
The paper written by Brooke was especially enjoyable to read. It was very factual and the overall content flowed perfectly and was supported well. I liked the stats and amount of facts used throughout the paper. It really gave the piece a logical appeal and added credibility to the writer. The writer brought up very current data and concerns that most people have regarding solar power and support for every single point as to leave not one hole in the argument. I agree very much with the writers concern with current energy uses and on the importance of solar power. I also think the writer was justified in his stance on an alternative source of energy since, like stated in the article, fossil fuels are slowly depleting. The words in the paper seemed like they almost jumped off the page. The writer seemed very strong in their stance and that really spoke to me when reading it. It also made it more enjoyable and kept me reading and from getting bored. ROXANNE GHEZZI Florida, September 23, 2012

By Joseph Lesho

TO THE EDITOR:
I really enjoyed your piece today about solar energy. You provided many good reasons for us to start using solar energy, and I now consider myself in favor of solar power. Previously I did not know very much about solar energy, just that it was becoming more popular as this whole effort to be green has come about. One thing I enjoyed about the article was how you mentioned that there are some incentives to using solar power. I had no idea that we were able to do things like record how much extra energy is being used, and then get credit for it! I am glad you mentioned that fact and I hope that it will convince others as well. I wish that in your article you would have included the ways that we can help support solar energy. Is there somewhere where we can donate money to a fund that will go towards solar energy? Also, how can we help to tell others about solar energy? Are you going to create a club for people to join who want to keep supporting solar energy? I encourage you to read and respond to these questions since I took the time to read your piece. MARY DEBEVOISE Florida, September 25, 2012

Just one week prior to the iPhone 5 announcement, Nokia revealed their latest phone, the Nokia Lumia 920. Though many in the tech world believe the Lumia 920 to be a superior device, the day of its unveiling saw Nokias stock drop 16%; meanwhile, Apple has seen a recordbreaking amount of pre-orders for the iPhone 5. In the days leading up to the Lumia 920 announcement, critics began to question whether or not Nokia could produce a modern smart phone that could compete with the likes of Apple and Samsung. Nokia succeeded in producing a competitive product, silencing some of the criticism from the tech world; however, the tech world is a very small percentage of the real world. Investors dont care about dual-core processors, HD+ screen resolutions, or

maypalo.com

ONLINE: MORE LETTERS


Another sampling of responses to a column by Catherine Negron.

nytimes.com/opinion

lowlight camera ability. They want to know one thing: how can this device bring longterm growth to their investment? Nokia unveiled a fantastic product but neglected to release any information regarding pricing, carrier partnerships, or even a date of availability. What is the point of showing off this technology when no one knows when, where, or how to get their hands on it? These are the details that matter to both consumers and investors. Nokia has done a bit of work in recent days to repair the damage, but what they

should really do in going forward is take a page out of Apples marketing playbook. The ads for the iPhone are iconic because the clear focus is the phone itself, not the technology. The phone is displayed, seemingly suspended in mid-air, performing everyday tasks with the touch of a finger. Consumers like simplicity. The phrase The Lumia 920 features a 1280X768 resolution display with 332 pixels per inch on a 4.5 inch screen is confusing and meaningless to the average Joe, but the iPhone 5s new Retina Display is perfect for showcasing your favorite photos and apps has a certain appeal to it. The term Retina Display gives Apples fancy technology a relatable name, and the phrase itself highlights not what the technology is, but what it does for the user. Despite all of the missteps, Nokia is still in a position to make a move in the smart phone market. Nokia holds a huge portfolio of patents that are essential to the basics of cell phone development, meaning that even companies like Apple are required to pay royalties for the use of this technology. To put that into terms that an investor would want to hear: Nokia gets a share of every iPhone that Apple sells. On top of that, Nokia received $1 billion from Microsoft to exclusively produce smart phones running only the Windows Phone operating system. Even Amazon has made the decision to forego the more well known Google Maps technology in favor of Nokias mapping solution on their new line of Kindle devices. Clearly all is not lost at this point. Nokia has plenty of positives going for it, but as weve seen its all about the presentation. Their marketing plan for the eventual release of the Lumia 920 will be a make-or-break; figuring out a way to build consumer interest will produce a much more optimistic outlook. A successful campaign will enable them to regain their mind share, and the market share and investor confidence will follow.

Christians can be pretty lame. Everyone has seen the guy on the corner of the street yelling at the heathen sinners from his megaphone, or the syrupy sweet girl who seems oblivious to the entire world around her. When I see these people I instinctively want to roll my eyes, maybe you do the same, or maybe you fill with rage or even pity. Let me back up and tell you that I am, in fact, a Christian. I believe Jesus was and is who he claimed to be, and it is a fact that has radically changed who I am as a person. The truth is, though, that most of the time I get uneasy when identifying myself as a Christian. In our society selfidentifying as a Christian carries a stigma. The reason this stigma exists is because a majority of believers in Christianity have cloistered themselves off from the rest of the world, rendering themselves irrelevant to the world around them. I must make a distinction between two classes of Christians: professing and practicing. According to most polls, at least 75% of Americans identify themselves as Christian; however, far fewer that 75% practice that faith in any genuine way. Professing Christians commonly view their Christianity as something inherited; while practicing Christians view their Christianity as more than a title, but the driving force of their life. Its the practicing Christians that I will be discussing, because I feel that these Christians are whom society views as lame and the primary cause for the stigma on Christianity. The reason I write is not to say that these lame Christians are bad people; they are simply culturally insignificant. Ive attended just about every denomination of church all over this country and the world, so I feel that I can speak from, while not necessarily unique, an informed perspective. I have seen and interacted with believers in multitudes of settings. While each church you go to and each group of Christians that you meet definitely has qualities that separate them from the next church, one trait continually asserts itself: the tendency, whether intentional or not, to separate from secular culture. This tendency to pull away from the culture of the non-Christian world often comes accidentally. Its within human nature to want to associate with people of like beliefs and ideals. No matter who you are and what beliefs you hold, I would wager that those you consider yourself closest to view the world fairly similarly to the way you yourself do. Many devout Christians do the same, as seen by their attendance to church services and Christian functions; for some every day of the week involves a different church related function. These functions range from traditional Sunday morning and Wednesday night services, to other distinctly Christian activities: midweek prayer or worship nights, coffee shop Bible studies, and Community groups, where people come together at a home and discuss their lives in relation to the Bible. However, not all church functions, when viewed from an outside perspective, would be identifiable as such: such as church planned bowling trips, beach retreats, and golf tournaments. These church are not functions bad, but the tendency to pack ones schedule full of these causes Christians to become disconnected with the culture outside of their church group. For some Christians, the decision to separate from secular culture is completely deliberate. These Christians view secular society as a constant source of temptation and danger, usually holding fast to verses in the Bible like Romans 12:2, which exhorts believers to not be conformed by the world. After graduating high school, I attended a private Christian college that held this belief. Students were severely restricted as to when they could and could not leave campus and where they went upon leaving, i.e. no bars, clubs, churches of other faiths and denominations, and even no movie theaters. This may seem extreme, but it was done with the intention of keeping the student body an example of the believers, in word...in faith, in purity (1 Timothy 4:12). What was largely accomplished was the creation of a safe and completely sterile Christian bubble in which the campus and students were trapped, unable to interact with the world around them. To these Christians that I have written about, I would like to say one thing: do not worry yourself with purity while secluding yourself from society. Focus on embracing and showing love to the world around you. Jesus himself is quoted in Mathew 22: 37-40 saying, Love the Lord your God with all your heart...this is the first and greatest commandment and the second is like it, love your neighbor as yourself. By interacting with society as a whole, Christians can become culturally relevant. When Christians are a part of the culture of the world, they are able to love and influence the world more effectively. I leave you with the words of the Apostle Paul, I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some (1 Corinthians 9:22).

Pop the Christian Bubble

CALEB THOMAS

You might also like