WAL-MARTS NOT SO WELCOME

Published Mar. 22, 2006 in "The Oklahoma Daily"
Viewable Online Here

You need to buy milk, paper towels, bananas, socks and blank CDs. Oh, and your car needs an oil change. Where do you go?

For almost all of us, the answer is the same -- Wal-Mart. It's probably the only place where you can get all of those things taken care of under one roof.

For convenience, Wal-Mart cannot be outdone, particularly in supercenter form. Consumers flock to the stores attracted by the one-stop shopping experience.

This has been extremely profitable for Wal-Mart. They each have the giant parking lot, huge white backlit letters, a squadron of carts and septuagenarian greeters. Some call this uniformity a strong business identity, while others disparage it as commercial sprawl that eliminates smaller competitors.

This sort of controversy is more and more prevalent, particularly in recent years. While most municipal governments welcome the commerce and tax revenue that comes with these 24-hour retail juggernauts, the stores have their share of detractors. In addition to allegations of work force exploitation and immigration violations, the chain has been accused of driving down property values and having large negative impacts on surrounding areas.

I always believed that last assertion to be hard to substantiate. It just seems like a far-fetched claim by people intent on keeping blue-vested employees away.

However, a chance look at a Wal-Mart construction site has made a believer of me, at least partially.

The site is located in Edmond, at Interstate 35 and 15th Street. I hadn't been in the area in some time. As I crested a hill, I found myself staring at a number of dirt piles, each several stories high.

To say it ruined the neighborhood view is putting it mildly. What had been old-tree woods sheltering a quiet neighborhood now looked like an open-pit mine from the former Soviet Union.

Everything within a few hundred feet was covered with the red dirt.

The ever-present wind carried it into the streets and neighborhoods unfortunate enough to be located close to the site. Normally immaculate cars would look like they had just run the Baja 1,000 after simply driving by the site on an especially windy day. And the construction has only just begun.

I'm not naive enough to automatically label something bad because of some dirt, but consider the forthcoming traffic issues. The parking lot of this future supercenter, like all such lots, will have spaces enough for several hundred vehicles.

During certain times of the week, that lot will be very close to full. That will likely triple the number of cars present within 1,000 feet of that intersection.

And all those cars will have to leave sometime. When this mass of vehicular insanity pours out of the lot, it'll be lively driving to avoid fender benders on those two roads.

Adding to the plate of problems is the fact that this Wal-Mart will be open 24 hours a day, meaning that nighttime will not bring respite from traffic, noise and the potential crime that exists at any major retail location.

Most of these residents fought (understandably so) for more than a year to prevent the construction of this Wal-Mart. Ultimately, however, the city authorities and Wal-Mart prevailed. Not only do the residents have to live with the store almost literally in their back yard, but they didn't really have much to say in the matter.

As much as we want to believe that democracy exists in all things, Wal-Mart didn't have to convince a majority of residents to let them build. They didn't have to ask anyone but the city council, which numbers about 10.

In the end, the promise of increased revenue and commerce won the day.

Wal-Marts bring a huge number and variety of goods at reasonable prices. However, they radically change the characteristics of the area they occupy simply through excess. The store in question will be no different.

Most shoppers probably won't care about the negatives, though. They'll just be glad it's not their neighborhood that Wal-Mart moved into.

KEY CARDS BAD SOLUTION

Published Mar. 1, 2006 in "The Oklahoma Daily"

Viewable Online Here

--

For most of us, the single most important piece of plastic in our wallets while we're on campus is the ubiquitous Sooner OneCard. Without it, many people can't eat. And now without it, many people can't sleep either; well at least not in their own rooms if they live in Couch Center.

As of late, all the main entry doors and most of the hall doors on each floor have had card readers installed. Those hall doors are also always locked. Obviously, this means that if you don't have your card with you, you're not getting to whatever's on the other side of that door. Furthermore, even if you do have your card, unless you live on the hall that you're trying to get into, you're still out of luck. The reader will decree your card invalid and issue an edict in the form of ominous beeps banning your entry.

So, your girlfriend lives on the eighth floor of Couch, and you wanted to surprise her with a quick visit? Guess what, unless you have a co-conspirator open the door from the inside, she doesn't get to see your lovely face.

You ran out to your car at some late hour to get something and only brought your keys? Well, unless someone in the Couch lobby can hear you knocking for dear life, it's time to get comfy in that back seat. That's where you're spending the night.

Joking aside, I understand the premise behind the key locks. They do make the halls more secure and swiping is easier than using a key. Security and convenience are good things, at least in concept. The caveat is you can't do things halfway; that ruins it. Right now, the Couch entry situation is definitely stuck squarely in limbo.

Here's what I mean. You can't get into your hallway or even the building sometimes without your card. But you still need your key to get in your room. So you need both your key and your card to have any hope of making it back to your pillows at night. Granted, it's not that hard to force yourself to carry key and card at all times, but it is still nonsensical in principle. It's all the more so considering the old system worked pretty darn well.

Until February, all the doors had operational key locks. Your room key would also open your hallway door and the entry doors to Couch Tower. There was one key for everything. It was a simple, effective, almost fool-proof setup. The only way you could cause a problem for yourself was to lock your keys in the car.

However, Housing and Food Services is a bureaucracy, and like all bureaucracies, readily fixes things that are not broken. That fix also generally makes things worse, a scenario many feel is descriptive of the key/card fiasco. There's not a clear answer to why this done only at Couch, or really why it was done at all. Perhaps we will never know.

It's unfair to harp on Housing and Food Services without acknowledging that their operations are for the most part logical and problem-free. So maybe this current situation is just a stop-gap, a stepping stone to some grand scheme.

Perhaps in the future, all doors will have card-readers installed. Then keys wouldn't be needed at all. The OneCard really would become what its name claims it is.

However, until that day comes, the residents of Couch are stuck in the current situation of doorway drama. The only way around it is just to make sure you carry both key and card anytime you walk out of your hallway or Couch Center, especially after 10 p.m. or so. This will ensure that you'll be able to get back to your room for the night. Otherwise you just might end up finding out how many real friends you have in Walker Tower.

OLYMPICS, NOT U.N. SHOW GLOBAL DEMOCRACY

Published Feb. 15, 2006 in "The Oklahoma Daily"
Viewable Online Here

Published Online Mar. 8, 2006 by USC Center on Public Diplomacy
Viewable Online Here
(link operational as of Dec. 19, 2007; see bottom of target page)

Last Friday, the world's finest winter sports athletes gathered in northern Italy for a celebration of physical prowess, sportsmanship and global camaraderie.

The 2006 Winter Olympics opened in Turin with a lavish opening ceremony. The next day, the actual sporting events started, and the television smorgasbord of adrenaline, podiums and over-excited announcers began with no delay.

While watching the ceremonies and competitions, I realized something. The Olympics are the ideal that global democracy should aspire to. For those mortified by the thought of distinguished politicians and diplomats trading in pin-striped suits and briefcases for ski poles and bodysuits, let me explain.

According to the official Web site of the XX Olympiad, there are more than 2,500 athletes from 84 countries participating in this year's games. However, the tiny contingents from the unlikeliest of countries are the ones that illustrate my point.

The world's first glimpse of such a team was that of Jamaica's bobsledders in the 1988 Calgary games. While "feel the rhythm, feel the rhyme" was being immortalized by movie cameras, several small nations began forming Winter Olympics teams.

Any athlete who meets the qualification standards can represent his or her nation. Thus, in this year's games, athletes from such unlikely nations as India, Venezuela and even the Saharan nation of Algeria are competing with the rest of the world's best as equals.

If only our diplomatic institutions were as successful. The United Nations is quite similar to the Olympics in its professed spirit of equality. During its heyday in the Cold War, the U.N. was seen as the bastion of diplomatic equality: a global check against the spread of tyranny by any means.

In this function, it performed well. But the U.N. has never given equal representation to all member nations.

This is most glaring in the Security Council, the highest decision-making body. Only five permanent members (China, Russia, France, the U.K. and the United States) have veto power. The rest of the 10 are elected and replaced every two years.

The "Big Five" have the power to block any proposal from passing. This was perhaps necessary when two giant superpowers needed a check against one another, but not anymore. Today's world is much less polarized, with the developing countries in the middle holding most of the world's population and an increasing percentage of its wealth.

Under the present system, almost 180 countries at any one time are without much of a say over U.N. military actions. Unlike in the games, they cannot send their best, no matter how similar in ability, to the same global stage with the powerful nations.

So, what should be done? There is no simple answer. The U.N. was born at a time when a small group of superpowers had aligned themselves into two very clear alliances. However, the world has changed since then, and a body as large as the U.N. simply can't be expected to change more than 50 years of practice in less than a decade.

To put it in perspective, it took the International Skating Federation almost four years just to put a new scoring system in place after the vote-trading debacle at the Salt Lake City games. Here, we're talking about completely restructuring how 192 countries work and debate about almost every issue there is. That's hard to do.

The easy way out isn't really an option either. The U.N. can't simply dissolve. It is too embroiled in peace-keeping the world over. If the U.N. were to cease its existence, most of the resolved conflicts of the past half-century would flare back up. This is especially dangerous given more countries than ever are now nuclear-capable.

The most desirable option, in the best of diplomatic traditions, is one of methodical compromise. Proposals to extend permanent membership status to more countries have been hinted at, but never officially put on the agenda. It's time to speed that up.

Granted, the issue of skewed representation will remain, but it will be a step in the right direction. Based on the success of that, more equalizing steps should be explored.

The problem will not solve itself; it needs the continued attention of the world's nations.

Surely a body that has produced such successful programs as UNICEF, WHO and the WFP can solve this problem concerning its own makeup. It must do so, no matter how difficult. Otherwise it will lose all credibility as an organ of global diplomacy.

The world is only getting more belligerent, and the U.N. will continue to be needed for many decades to come. The Cold War-era hegemony that is the current system is an anachronism that must be done away with. The U.N. was once beyond reproach as a representative body. Due to massive changes in the global political landscape, that is not the case. However, it is not beyond repair.

Allow me one last Olympics analogy. The U.N. right now is like a veteran athlete from a small nation with a legacy of strong performances. The competition is getting tough, and it is starting to falter.

It cannot retire quietly, as it has created too big a following. The only way for it to remain effective is through focused, grueling work to bring it back into the shape that made it so celebrated.

A day will come when there is a new benchmark for global equality. It may not come in time for the next Olympics, but make no mistake, that day will come. It has to come; the very future of human diplomacy depends on it.

'DIGITAL DIVIDE' WIDENING

Published Feb. 1, 2006 in "The Oklahoma Daily"
Available Online Here

A steely, straight-ahead gaze. A little swing in the steps. Occasional head-bobbing and (thankfully) silent lip-synching. These are the telltale signs of a personal concert in progress. Look a little closer and you'll
almost certainly see earphones in the music enthusiast's ears, usually of the white plastic variety.

What was once the sole province of techno-gurus and audio geeks has become an almost ubiquitous sighting in the last year or so, stemming from an explosion in the sale of MP3 players.

The aforementioned earphones and the players attached to them are probably a more common sight on college campuses than in any other specific environment.

OU is no exception. Take a look around the South Oval next time you walk to class and count how many you see. You'll run out of fingers and toes before you run out of earphones to count.

Owners and proud users of MP3 players can likely rattle off at least five reasons they never leave home without their prize devices. I should know; I'm one of them.

They're indispensable on long trips and in the gym, for blocking out construction and loud neighbors, too. And they certainly help make that long walk up to Catlett more entertaining.

However, I believe that this practice is contributing to the erasure of important things from our college experience. A good portion of chance run-ins and good conversations with friends simply don't happen because of our personal music bubble.

When rocking out to Green Day, the ears are busy processing music and will likely miss the greeting of a buddy you haven't seen for weeks.

In all likelihood, your buddy probably wouldn't even bother yelling your name if he gets a glimpse of the headphone cords. Would you want to yell after someone who doesn't even hear you?

While this is a minor issue, it merits discussion, if as nothing more than a preamble to what I feel to be a more serious issue.

OU has a huge student body, with an equally large number of personal causes and convictions. This turns the South Oval into a hotbed of student activism, with a plethora of groups striving to be heard.

These demonstrations are meant to pique student interest and motivate action. The crucial factor is actually getting the students to hear the message. Here is where musical ignorance manifests itself more significantly. While some of the more spectacular demonstrations certainly compel passers-by to stop and listen, the more plebeian protests usually aren't that lucky.

When confronted by a small group of sign-carrying orators and chanters on the way to class, most people's reaction in the digital-playlist world of today is to sidestep and simply turn up the volume on their players.

I've been there both as witness and guilty perpetrator. Granted, some protesters are downright offensive in their tactics and language, but before the widespread popularity of music players, there was nothing to prevent their rhetoric, no matter how grating, from at least reaching our ears and minds.

We have the right to disregard any message or messenger as we see fit, but these music players are rendering many of us deaf to these voices, effectively making us discard their message without even considering its merit.

These protests are an essential part of the governance of OU, which is in effect a microcosm of the larger institution of the nation as a whole. While a direct correlation is hard to produce, it's undeniable that ignoring small but essential parts of the governmental machine at this stage in life will have an escalating negative effect on an already politically apathetic populace later.

MP3 players have fast become indispensable parts of college students' lives. They undoubtedly have their advantages -- hence their popularity. However, they are the harbingers of some negative practices, as well.

As the vanguard of a population that is concerned with the self to a greater extent than arguably any past generation, we are being made even further isolated from our physical and intellectual surroundings at least in part by our heightened and extended use of our music cocoons.

I don't mean to berate or belittle the legions of portable music lovers, as I am one myself. I'm trying to simply draw attention to an aspect of our playlist-filled lives that is not entirely rosy. If after reading this, you don't agree at all, that's perfectly fine. It's your right to do so.

I just hope you read it with your 'phones out of your ears, so you can at least consider the arguments that reached your mind without having to compete with your personal soundtrack to life.

COLLEGE WINTER BREAK A BIG CHANGE FOR FRESHMEN

Published Jan. 18, 2006 in "The Oklahoma Daily"

Available Online Here

Some people would say that college has been less enjoyable than high school. For most, however, high school pales in comparison. But no matter which camp they are from, almost everyone would agree that college is different from previous schooling.

Some differences are pretty obvious, such as living within sight of many of your classes or having classes in separate buildings all over campus. Others are more subtle, like having a different state of mind or being more mature -- some of the time anyway.

As numerous as said differences are when classes are in session, it was a little surprising to encounter them during break, as well.

There are actually quite a few things that distinguish the schoolchildren's Christmas break of years past from the college students' winter break.

I suppose the first would be the name. Regardless of our high school's official term, most of us called our two-week reprieve from lockers and classrooms simply "Christmas break." However, on the OU campus, it's rare to hear that name; "winter break" seems to be the preferred term.

Perhaps this is a realization of the religious diversity of OU students; some regard Dec. 25 as simply the day after Dec. 24 and don't remember ever decorating a tree.

Or maybe this is just because this college vacation is much longer and far outlasts the traditional Christmas season.

Getting past the name, said break is different because it is just that; a complete break from classes. Unlike high school, there are no projects to finish, no papers to write and no finals to worry about in early January.

That last one will ring especially true to those of you fortunate enough to have gone to school in the Oklahoma City area during the last two or three years. It seemed there was more to do over break than when school was actually open.

The college winter break is a welcome change. It's nice knowing that first semester is done, finished, with grades finalized and recorded and, more importantly for some, that they have no effect on second semester grades.

The college break is undoubtedly a better deal for students. Now break is exactly that -- a vacation.

Almost all of us have close high school friends that are attending other, often far-away colleges. The only time we can hang out with them is during long breaks when they are home again.

This is a far cry from high school where we likely saw each other most every day, in and out of school. Thus, winter break serves as a mini-reunion with old friends at favorite hangouts.

This is made all the better by the length of the break. Twice as many days means twice as many parties, movies, Hornets games, whatever.

Although it is true that good friends can pick up right where they left off, it is a bit unnerving knowing that this reunion will probably be the last time everyone is together in one place until spring break, or even summer.

As a freshman, I call the dorms "home" during school. As such, I have to pack up everything I might need during break and cart it home with me. Most other freshmen are in the same boat.

Students living at home or older students living in their own apartments need not worry so much about this. But, for those of us that carry clothes, laptops, perishable food, etc., back to wherever home is often feel that second semester is a brand new school year.

A large part of this is that moving everything back once the dorms open in January brings back repressed memories of the chaotic August move-in day and hefting all your belongings up several flights of stairs because the elevators were slow and crowded.

A combination of all of these certainly makes this, my first winter break in college, feel different than any high school Christmas break.

Perhaps this is because of my first semester experiences in a new, much larger environment. Maybe it's because I saw close friends for the first time in months.

Or maybe it's simply because I had enough free time, thanks to the longer break, to actually reflect on why this break was different. Whatever the reason, it definitely was different.

This brings up the first point, in terms of college and high school, does different mean better, or worse? Many of you likely have your own answer to this, either from the experience of multiple years in college or from some epiphany somewhere along the way.

If you ask me, when it comes to my winter break, different is definitely better.