From now until the next round of changes in life, software, etc, this blog will contain updates about whatever I’m working on, and possibly links to interesting content around the web. The biggest news to tell about is my essay “Indecision Over Michigan,” an 11,000-word-long monster that I wrote in November of this year. It was inspired by the Generation Y Michigan project that I’m involved with at Michigan Radio. GenYMich (as we refer to it on Facebook and Twitter) is a series of news reports, blog posts, and guest essays, examining why young adults are leaving or staying in Michigan.

I think a lot about that kind of thing — by that I mean, WHY people do the things they do. Plus I have experience in the matter, since I myself left Michigan about four months after graduating from college in May 2005. I came back for grad school and have stayed thus far. But given the overall stifling feel of the state, I often think about leaving again. (Of course, last week the legislature did finally approve a workplace smoking ban, which should become effective on May 1, 2010!!!)

The first version of the essay was published on Supraterranean and Generation Y Michigan on December 2. I also submitted the essay as a creative non-fiction manuscript to the Cooperative Press. It’s a literary press run by the Traverse City group Michigan Writers, that helps new and emerging authors who haven’t had a book published in their genre of choice. I had to trim the essay by almost 2,000 words to stay under their 10,000-word limit. I’m not sure yet which version I prefer — but I’ll make the second version available for reading soon. And I’ll let you know if it goes well with the Coop. Press!

Hello Concentrate Media,

I’m writing with a quick question. Why don’t you allow comments on your stories? As an Ann Arbor resident, I have a lot to say about today’s story “A2D2: Evolution Or Status Quo” — and not just about the subject matter. The article reads like an opinion piece, but it’s presented as a feature. Jon Zemke clearly supports further urbanization in downtown AA, but there’s no substantial evidence that this would equate to “evolution”… except for the opinion of the author and the A2D2 committee. For example, Jon asks:

“How can the city continue to compete with surrounding communities, let alone across the nation, if it has to surrender political and economic clout because of stagnant growth? ”

Ann Arbor can be improved in a multitude of ways, none of which involve increasing the population density downtown. Just off the top of my head…all surrounding highways (I-94, 23, and 14) need to be widened. They are constantly overcrowded, and that would only get worse with more development. Not to mention that the pathways in and out of downtown are already slow and riddled with traffic. (I could talk all day about the trials of driving in AA, from people running red lights in alarming numbers, to the unnecessarily low speed limits on roads.) Or we could focus on development. Except for west of downtown, all other surrounding neighborhoods are dilapidated and revolting. Of course much of this is student housing, but that doesn’t change the basic fact.

I want to know who would benefit from these huge buildings you hope to see go up downtown, because it sure wouldn’t be the residents. I’m under the impression that most residents would favor the height restriction on buildings, or even hope to see it dropped below 180 feet. I visited London last year, where most buildings are less than eight stories tall. It was remarkable to be in one of the world’s epicenters, yet constantly feel like I was in a village. Ann Arbor needs to capitalize on it’s village character, not try to pretend that it’s more of a city than Grand Rapids or Detroit.

Regardless, unless you provide a space for audience response and interaction (one of the primary strengths of online publishing), you’re just doing public relations. And if that’s your goal, you should make that clear instead of giving the audience the impression that you’re doing journalism.

Best wishes,
Nick Meador

Some of you may be asking yourselves, “What’s the big deal?” Well, you may have noticed that I currently self-publish all my writing and creative work. In fact, I plan on self-publishing, promoting, and distributing books in the future. But this depends on my ability to control my online presence. However, a longer explanation will get stale, so let’s leave it at that.

This blog will now be used less often for heated arguments, and more often for news about my activities and whereabouts. (Note: if you still want heated posts, see my Supraterranean Admin Blog). My most recent news item: I was hired as Web Content Administrator at Michigan Radio, the NPR affiliate in Ann Arbor, Michigan. I start on Monday and I’m really excited. I think it will be a chance to combine my interests of journalism, online publishing, and social media/digital marketing.

With that said, I hope the beginning of 2009 has treated you well. I’ll catch you on the flip side.

Apparently Bush is rushing to secure his spot as (possibly) the worst president in American history. As reported in a New York Times article (entitled “Senate Votes to Expand Spy Powers” on 2/13/08) about two weeks ago, the U.S. Senate approved a bill that would drastically and permanently increase our government’s spying abilities. On its front, the bill is designed to help intercept dangerous foreign conversations that come through the U.S. If it were solely intended to prevent terrorists from operating withing our borders, this would be a positive concept. But that’s not the case here.

Currently, the government needs a warrant from a surveillance court to eavesdrop on private conversations. This is an expected check on the federal government’s power in a land that values civil liberties like FREE SPEECH and PRIVACY. The first major change associated with this bill would be to remove the warrant process. In essence, the government would be able to eavesdrop on whomever they choose. Then, if the surveillance court senses a problem afterwards, they can investigate. Words from 1984 are echoing in my head like a stone bouncing down the walls of a deep, dark well. DOES THIS NOT EQUATE TO BIG BROTHER?

This bill would be open to interpretation as to what “terrorist” means, and which foreign correspondence is “dangerous.” Especially because, over the past seven years, “terrorist” has meant anyone that can be targeted to benefit the Bush agenda. (Forgive me for not speculating on issues relating to 9/11. I highly recommend that you watch the many documentaries being created on the subject. Then you, too, may start to question whether those “Islamic Fundamentalists” were really that, or if they were hired and trained by the Bush Administration…).

The second major change created by the bill would be immunity for telecommunications companies. In other words, the ones supplying the phone service will not be liable for cooperating with the government’s spying program. But here arises another gray area. What if a phone company spies on someone in an instance that is not directly tied to federal investigation? Will they still be invincible to lawsuits?

Even worse, what if this type of legislation eventually extends to all communication? Email? USPS? Sparrow messenger? When does it stop? All this really amounts to is executive control over the population. After all, McCain could potentially be filling Bush’s shoes soon. So it’s convenient then that the Republican Senator from Arizona approved this bill…