The iPhone: The latest toy of choice!

Fiona watching the trailer for Despicable Me! on her mom's iPhone.

An article in the New York Times called the iPhone "the most effective tool in human history to mollify a fussy toddler."

Reportedly, one of the first words uttered by many of our youngest generation is "iPhone!" This may be overstating the case. "Da!" and a waving hand with finger pointing at the popular Apple device may be more accurate.

"Play the video again. Please."

For many children, such as my little granddaughter, the iPhone has become the toy of choice. She would sit and watch video trailers on YouTube, such as Despicable Me, for hours if I allowed it; I don't. The screen tapping and finger sliding actions that control an iPhone all mesh perfectly with Fiona's developing motor skills.

The phones have proven to be amazingly rugged --- standing up well to being dropped by enthusiastic little techno geeks. Of course, when one stands only about two feet tall a phone does not have far to fall.

On reading the following, I said "Been there and done that":

One mother recalls the first time her daughter, barely 2 years old, held her husband's iPhone. "She pressed the button and it lit up. I just remember her eyes. It was like 'Whoa!' "

Our daughter Ashley, Fiona's mom, shot a video on her iPhone of Judy and I departing on our recent extended vacation. While we were gone, Ashley played the iPhone video for Fiona who giggled when we waved to her from the screen. Soon the little girl was waving back. Returning, after almost six weeks away, we were greeted with a waving welcome from our laughing granddaughter. There was no playing strange.

Software developers understand the attraction of the iPhone to the very young and have released apps designed for little children but marketed to parents. These "educational" apps may be as simple as electronic flash cards teaching reading and spelling.

Other apps are as new and different as the iPhone itself. Pocket Zoo streams live video of animals from zoos around the world. iGo Potty, sponsored by Huggies Pull-Ups training pants from Kimberly-Clark, rings parents reminding them when it's "Potty Time." The app comes complete with "Fun Stuff" for children.

All this interest in iPhones by young kids is not without detractors. Many pediatricians see the phones as similar to television and suggest the same guidelines. The American Academy of Pediatrics has long advised parents not to allow children to watch any TV until after their second birthday.

Many question whether electronic flash cards are a good way to teach language. Rather than handing a child an iPhone, perhaps it would be better to simply spend more time talking directly to the child.

I don't know. I'll bet after Johannes Gutenberg began pumping out children's books, maybe early versions of The Cat in the Hat, parents of young children were probably warned by psychologists of the time that books were not a good way to teach children anything. It would be better to simply spend more time with your kids, I am sure they were told. So, forget those new fangled book things was the word on the street back in 1440.

But maybe it is not an either/or situation. No one is going to argue that children do not need interaction with the people in their young lives. Of course, they do. But electronic devices are going to play a big part in their futures, possibly a little interaction with an iPhone can be a good thing.

Exciting moment, dull photo

It's estimated 2,000 journalists recorded the rescue of the Chilean miners trapped for many, many weeks underground. 2,000!

Yet, many Internet sites because of copyright laws turned to the official Flickr stream created by the Chilean government for images. My local paper did this. All the B front images were courtesy of the Government of Chile via Reuters.

The Photo Galleries on the paper's Internet site features a number of fine shots taken by Cesar Illiano and Terry Wade of Reuters. Space limitations and time may have been responsible for limiting the play given these pictures to just the paper's Internet site.

Since my local paper had lots of powerful images available, why did they plaster a fuzzy, frame grab, complete with screen scan lines, across their front page? (It is just a guess, but possibly the best images were not available at the time that the front page had to be released to the backshop. This is one of the big weaknesses of the traditional printed daily newspaper.)

A video framegrab fills the front page of The London Free Press, a Sun Media paper.

Credit: Hugo Infante and the Government of Chile

Professionalism, the media and deaf cats

Image by: Marianne Perdomo (Gran Canaria, Spain)

Because this will be read by some of the good folk with whom I once worked, I want to start this post by clearly stating that most reporters and editors are very bright people and excellent at their jobs.

That said, give even the best runner only three minutes to run a mile and you have set the runner up for failure.

Real reporters don't just rewrite press releases. Or do they? Sadly, in today's world the answer is, "Yes, they do!" And sometimes word for word.

A recent press release claimed, "Cats are the only animal besides humans that can be born deaf." When I got that press release, alarm bells went off in my head and it wasn't just my tinnitus. 

When I got in touch with the researcher behind the study in question he told me, "Just about any animal could be born deaf. The press release is a bit of an overstatement." Of course, I already knew that; I had googled the statement and discovered lots of animals may be deaf at birth.

Yet, the Irish Examiner and the Irish Independent, reported, ". . . cats – the only animal besides humans that can be born congenitally deaf." Hmmm. Makes you wonder how much they examine and how independent they are.

A lot of papers in Great Britain repeated the error. It looks as if they all simply republished a story supplied by a common source. At no point did a bright, questioning editor check the copy as would have been done in the not-so-distant past.

Science Daily, Science Blog and Science A Gogo all reported "Cats are the only animal besides humans that can be born deaf." Now we know how urban myths take root.

This little error, one easily made by someone charged with writing a lot of press releases, should also have been easily noticed and easily corrected. Instead it has been repeated in the global media without question. 

Global? Yes, global. I found the story on Aaj Ki Khabar and other distant news sites.

All too sad.
__________________________________________________
Oh, if you're interested in my take on the story, it can be found on the Digital Journal. Maybe you can find my errors. Remember, I am not a professional reporter. Cut me a little slack.

Robotic Cars

Highway 1 is a twisting, two lane, Pacific coast road.

I read about this in the New York Times. It was like a story from a silly tabloid, except it was true. Google's sending robotically driven cars down California's fabled Highway 1. Seven cars, six modified Toyota Priuses and one Audi TT, have driven thousands of miles without the direct control of a driver as part of a little known project led by Google.

I posted the story on Digital Journal.

Taken at the DARPA National Qualification Event, October 24 - 31, 2007. Google vehicles do not carry as much hardware on their roofs as this car.

Rick's Gone, Finally

Rick Sanchez always seemed to be a news anchor adrift. He was a light-weight news anchor. He simply should never have had his job on a national (U.S.) cable news network. He was not good enough, not knowledgeable enough.

There are people one meets who have such depth of knowledge that they make you feel that no matter what you ask them, they'll know the answer. Rick Sanchez wasn't one of those people. In fact, Sanchez left you feeling that no matter what you asked him, he'd be stumped.

Do you recall when an earthquake rocked Chile and a Tsunami warning was issued for Hawaii? Sanchez was following the story and used a map to make it all clear. He pointed to a group of islands in the Pacific, below the equator and off Chile, and noted the close proximity of Hawaii to Chile. The islands he pointed to were the Galapagos Islands!

Sanchez made lots of these "oops." And Jon Stewart and Stephen Cobert had fun at the handsome CNN news anchor's expense. Well last Thursday, all the Sanchez pent-up anger burst out during an interview with Pete Dominick on Sirius Radio. "You watch yourself on his show every day," said Sanchez, "and all they ever do is call you stupid."

Sanchez was lashing out:

"I think to some extent Jon Stewart and [Stephen] Colbert are the same way. I think Jon Stewart's a bigot," he said. "I think he looks at the world through, his mom, who was a school teacher, and his dad, who was a physicist or something like that. Great, I'm so happy that he grew up in a suburban middle class New Jersey home with everything you could ever imagine."

Stewart was not the only person whom Sanchez found was insulting him, treating him with condescension. He said a lot of elite Northeast establishment liberals . . . "look at a guy like me" and automatically see a guy "who belongs in the second tier and not the top tier." Sanchez is Cuban-American.

Later, Sanchez retracted the word "bigot" and instead described the Comedy Central fake newsman as "prejudicial."

When confronted with the argument that Stewart with his Jewish heritage was a member of an oppressed minority just like Sanchez with his Latino background, the newscaster would have none of it. He argued that Stewart, as a Jew, was a member of powerful group.

He said sarcastically, ". . . I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart, and a lot of people who run all the other networks are a lot like Stewart, and to imply that somehow they --- the people in this country who are Jewish --- are an oppressed minority . . . "

Friday Sanchez was replaced on air by Brooke Baldwin who has substituted for him in the past. The question, "Would Sanchez be back," was soon answered. CNN issued a statement saying:

"Rick Sanchez is no longer with the company. We thank Rick for his years of service and we wish him well."

What Sanchez and so many others don't understand is that being elite is not a quick, easy insult. Once, it was a compliment. The elite at one time referred to the best members of a larger group or body and not necessarily just the wealthiest, most famous, or most powerful.

What will be his next career move, well he could push his new book — entitled, believe it or not, “Conventional Idiocy.” Even Sanchez isn't always wrong.

Pot can damage young brains

Dr. Elizabeth Osuch asks:Is pot as harmless as we think?"

As a grandfather with a young granddaughter, the talk by Dr. Elizabeth Osuch on the dangers threatening young pot smokers was of great interest to me.

"Is pot really harmless?" This is the question asked by Dr. Elizabeth Osuch. The answer: She doesn't think so, certainly not when it's being smoked by young people. The mix of chemicals, she said in a recent talk, "can disrupt and kill (young) brain cells."

Osuch is the Rea chair of affective and anxiety disorders with the department of psychiatry at the UWO Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry. She is also the founder and executive director of the First Episode Mood and Anxiety Program (FEMAP) at London Health Sciences Centre.

On Wednesday night Dr. Osuch discussed her research with an interested public at a well-attended presentation which almost filled the Wolf Hall in the London Central Library.

Sampling pot second only to alcohol.

Recently the Ottawa Sun reported a Leger Marketing poll commissioned by QMI Agency that found more than half of Canadians believe marijuana possession should be decriminalized.

This acceptance of marijuana by a majority of Canadians may be part of the reason that cannabis is second only to alcohol as the drug of choice among young people in grades seven to 12. Osuch made this point with a graph from the Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey of 2009. Almost 30 percent of students surveyed reported having used pot at some point in their young lives.

Dr. Elizabeth Osuch talks to the media.

The doctor said, "The adolescent brain is a work in progress." It is more vulnerable to substance abuse. And some youths are more at risk than others as vulnerability is mediated by genes.

"The risk for addiction is based on genetic make-up," said Osuch. But, the risk of brain damage is faced by all and is based primarily on two factors: One being age. The younger the brain the more danger of damage.

Osuch said a study by Eric Downer and Veronica Campbell revealed that exposure to marijuana during pregnancy could have damaging effects on the unborn child and " . . . early-onset (before age 17) marijuana use might also have damaging effects on brain composition." In adults the findings were not as clear.

A second major factor is the strength or potency of the marijuana being smoked. The question of whether or not the potency of common pot has increased substantially since the '60s has been an ongoing debate for years. Osuch firmly believes potency of pot has increased dramatically and backs her position with numbers released by the London, Ontario, police department. These figures show the effective THC concentration in 2010 can be from 20 to 30 times greater than that found in marijuana confiscated by the force just 25 years ago.

The scales are tipping for THC.

Decades ago the two main active ingredients in marijuana, THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) and CBD (cannabidiol), were found in almost equal concentrations. This is not true today. THC, which impairs and destabilizes brain function and causes acute psychotic symptoms in some users, is no longer balanced by CBD which does not impair performance or induce psychosis and actual may reduce anxiety and stabilize brain function.

Cutting marijuana with tobacco, a practice of some teenage users, actually enhances THC absorption and increases the dangers posed by the drug. Osuch said rather than diluting the effect of pot, "It is an interesting way of getting more THC." Plus, tobacco smoke adds its own set of dangers to the mix.

According to Osuch, regular marijuana use in adolsecence also increases the risk of schizophrenia but this is not the old Reefer Madness scare story. This is a measured warning. This is a real and reported danger faced by a minority of users. Why a minority? These people have a genetic make-up making them more likely to exhibit psychotic symptoms from marijuana use, especially when using cannabis with high THC potency.

Doing dope when young is playing Russian roulette with a smoking joint. Risky behaviour? Most certainly. But adolescents are more likely than adults to take risks.

The dangers posed by pot smoking are not as clear cut when it comes to adults, but when pressed by a questioner Osuch said firmly, "You don't want to make a habit of it (smoking dope)."

I don't smoke --- not tobacco and not pot. If you have followed my blog you will know that I don't have the brain cells to donate. If marijuana was legal and controlled, maybe I would willing to sample the stuff but I doubt it. Breathing in pollutants is not my idea of a bright way to get a buzz. Smoking junk of unknown composition, unknown potency, unknown origin is not my idea of a wise way to take a drug. And make no mistake about it --- pot is definitely a drug.

As for wondering if young people and pregnant woman should refrain from using pot, why would that even by a question?

Note the short black column far right. This represents pot smokers' performance.

So, what do you know about religion?

the Holy Bible: image by David Ball

The test is a little skewed towards Americans but it is still a neat little quiz. The Pew Research Center's U.S. Religious Knowledge Quiz isn't tricky. The questions are actually quite easy. I took the test and, I am ashamed to admit, I got two answers wrong. Yet, my results put me in the top 7% of those taking the quiz.

I have always thought many religious folk don't know much about their own religion or about the beliefs of others. They are quite in the dark, but won't admit it.

As a boy I had a close friend who was a Christian Missionary Alliance member. At times, I would attend religious functions with him. I think his parents wanted to save me.

Once we went to a big festive meeting in the largest auditorium in town. The night was designed for kids. First, we saw a movie, an Australian film with a Christian theme. Next, we heard a young speaker, just out his teens, confess that before he found Christ he had consumed beer. Now, thanks to having found salvation, no alcohol ever touched his lips. A Christian takes joy in honouring God and to honour God a Christian does not drink.

As the night ended, we were told that the organizers wanted to take a simple hand count. Everyone was asked to bow their heads and those who didn't consider themselves saved, according to stuff they had heard over the course of the night, were asked to raise a hand.  I raised my hand. I saw nothing wrong with drinking a beer or enjoying a glass of wine. Hey, in my Anglican church, those taking communion actually touched their lips to wine right there at church.

It seemed that no sooner did my hand go up than I was asked by a sidesperson to come with them. I wanted to resist but resistance was futile. It would make a fuss and folk would look up and see that I was a sinner. I quietly got up and left with the Brylcreemed young man in the well pressed suit, white shirt and narrow tie.

I found myself with a few dozen other kids and teens at the front of the auditorium. The preacher on stage told everyone to raise their heads and see the sinners, those who by their own admission were in need of salvation.

He pointed at us and bellowed. Oh-so-embarrassed little girls trapped in the gaze of hundreds of damning eye cried and sobbed loudly. We sinners were humiliated. When were were marched out of sight into little discussions groups, we were all relieved.

I was asked why I had raised my hand. I told the group that I saw nothing wrong with drinking wine and by the standards of the night I as a sinner. In my defence I said that even Jesus turned water into wine when supplies ran low.

The discussion group leader quietly corrected me. "Son," he said, "Jesus turned water into grape juice, not wine. It takes time to make wine, wine must ferment. Jesus, our Lord and Saviour, miraculously turned water in grape juice. It was a miracle done by the Son of God."

"What's a miracle," I asked.

"Son, a miracle is when something good happens that is impossible."

"And Jesus could do miracles?"

"Yes son, Jesus could do miracles. He is the Son of God."

"So, Jesus could do the impossible?"

"Yes son, He could. He is our Lord Almighty"

"So, why couldn't He have turned water into wine just like the bible said He did?"

And that a night I saw a miracle. The fellow leading our discussion group was speechless. He didn't have an answer.

Take the test and see how you score.

Cheers!