I walked up to two of the APD officers after they put the young woman in the car, because I noticed that one of the signs said the City was guilty of sponsoring “Chid Abuse”, and I wanted to see someone get arrested for that.

As I approached, one of them was saying to the other, “...and she was fine... oh, I’m sorry sir. How can we help you?”

They agreed that, yes. Chid abuse is a serious crime…

For chrissakes, I thought Sunday was a day of breast, er, I mean rest.

what a bunch of HOLY retards!

Anyone that cites World Net Daily for anything is immediately of suspect mental stability.  This is the same wingnut publication that has repeatedly been found to have published blatantly false drivel; they’re the ones who published the ‘Obama Kenyan birth certificate’ claiming it was the ‘smoking gun’.  They have a history of making up inflammatory nonsense.

Which leads to the question…why does MtXpress run their ads sometimes?  Might as well run an ad for the Raelians.

It’s not that they cite World Nut Daily (well, OK, a large part of it is that, too) - my problem is this asinine attitude of, “We’re right, you’re wrong and you need to look this up for yourselves.”

I can only assume they’re hoping one of us will find a justification for their foolishness that *isn’t* WND.

My problem with this is that the author (a former associate of Dr. Mumpower’s) concedes Carl’s argument that going around topless is illegal. According to the APD and the City Attorney, it is not. The law only kicks in if it is an overtly sexual display, not just simple nudity. If a woman is rubbing her nipples & moaning, or other explicit sexual behavior, that makes it illegal. If you’re just walking around without a top on because it feels good, you’re fine. As usual, Carl is framing this to mean what he wants it to mean by leaving out selected facts.

BTW, the same statute that Carl cites makes it illegal for a man to be in public with “a discernibly turgid state”, even if he has pants on. Who wants to scan through the video to see which one of these holy rollers we can get arrested?

When did “campaign photographer” come to mean “former associate”?

But yes, the Mums is overreaching his case here and is being aided and abetted by the author of the blog.

Should I have said ‘former campaign employee’?

Sure, this is just a blog, but when it’s presented as journalism, when the XPress presents it as NEWS: “indepth photojournalism and reporting,” a little more accuracy in attribution is warranted, IMHO.

And the disclaimer at the top:

His point of view? “I recuse myself from any opinion on this issue except that the whole thing is ridiculous and dead serious at the same time.”

He pretty clearly expresses the ‘opinion’ that Carl’s legal argument is right, which is not supported by the City’s legal and law-enforcement professionals.

Well, “former associate” implies a much different thing than “the guy who got paid to take pictures of the goober”.

Anyway, I agree that there’s a lot of gray area with what is being called “photojournalism” and/or “reporting” today. But, that’s a different ball of wax.

Perhaps when the City announces the choice for the Community Media Initiative, that person can work on some policy issues with local press/bloggers/etc. I think it would certainly fall under the jurisdiction of having a community seriously working toward being better media-savvy and educated.

Perhaps when the City announces the choice for the Community Media Initiative…

Are you talking about the potential replacement for URTV that the City/County was talking about back in June? I haven’t heard a peep about that since. When are they supposed to choose somebody, and how will that happen, I wonder…?

...back in June? I haven’t heard a peep about that since.

Well, you had to be looking for the coverage to see it. It was hidden in threads about city council meetings/etc.

My last info is that the seven proposals received were working through a joint city-county committee and a recommendation would be made to City Council at the meeting in late September. The RFP they put out was for far more than just public access management (in fact, it didn’t even have to include a provision for that) and was aimed more at education, job growth, etc.

The RFP (http://www.ashevillenc.gov/uploadedFiles/Business/Business_With/Bids/RFP_Community Media Development Services.pdf PDF file!) has listed the guidelines for “scoring” that will determine who is passed up to council.

I only wish that the proposals were being made public so some community input could be gathered.

Sorry, link busted (I forget that the Xpress’s site engine doesn’t handle spaces in URLs worth a damn)

http://1.usa.gov/qEOyse

Thanks - the original links from the City were dead.

The part of this I don’t understand is the sunsetting of the funding. The City and County will still be getting PEG funding after three years, so why are they cutting it off from this initiative?

Foo. That link is weird.

They are cutting this off because this money isn’t coming from PEG funding at all. The current state of that money is, um, obfuscated.

*If* the winning proposal contains a public access clause, then PEG money will come into play. And, even then, the city and county are clearly in a position to want any public access channel to find its own revenue streams. After all, they have an ‘E’ and a ‘G’ of their own to manage.

I’m sure we’ll hear more in the next couple of weeks. You could possibly shake Gordon for answers over on ScrooHoo in an open thread.

(/me notices how wildly off-topic this thread has gotten, and attempts to put the train back on the rails)

http://matrophe.freeshell.org/images/topic.jpg

So, back to Mr. Cooper (or, ominously, DarkTopo). He’s got a few photog credits for the Asheville Tribune and admittedly worked for Mr. Mumflower. But, the question is: Is he now shilling for the Mum? Is the whole “you’re not interested in the truth, go look it up on World Nut Daily” a concoction?

Again, you’re right, smart consumers of media need to know the bias that’s coming at them in their “news”. Not that bias is bad, per se, but it needs to be properly identified. Otherwise, we’ve come through 150 years of journalism history to get right back to early 1800s nonsense.

I was going to look up the relevant info at that last bit but got completely lost after finding my library privileges revoked for fines. Whoops. Anyway, it’s in Brooke Gladstone’s new book. Remind me later….

I hear tell the bias in the media is liberal.  Are you suggesting otherwise??

Well, according to Chomsky, you would absolutely expect a liberal bias in the media as it would serve as a proper boundary to the discussion. Whatever the media says is so left wing there’s just no discussion of anything more progressive that’s allowed into the “marketplace of ideas”.

So, the answer is “Yes, there is a liberal bias to the news. Sort of.”

If we define “liberal” (at this point) as anything not FoxNews. After all, they aren’t part of the “lamestream” media or whatever other cute appellation that passes for “clever” among the drooling. I have no idea how a network that reaches such a high percentage of the nation is not “mainstream” but such is reactionary logic, right?

Anyway, there is some perception of that. Whether or not it’s true is a different tale. Certainly, there aren’t many newspapers or radio shows or TV outlets that could be considered to have been anything other than cheerleaders for the war in Iraq and, even now, the so-called “leftist” MSNBC regularly allows Rachel Maddow to get all teary-eyed aboard an aircraft carrier or when talking about a tank.

All, of course, in the completely dispassionate and apolitical terms of geekdom. Right?

Wrong. It’s cheer leading for war. Who owns part of MSNBC? GE? Does GE still have defense contracts?

“You betcha.”

Again, the problem isn’t that bias exists. The problem is when media entities hide behind (the myth of) objectivity (http://bit.ly/qWdsw2) and claim no bias at all. That hints that the viewer should trust the source as completely objective with no agenda whatsoever driving its coverage.

Not only is that never the case, it is by definition unachievable.

So the only answer that works is clear and up front admission. Sure, MSNBC urges its viewers to “Lean Forward”, which is probably the closest they will ever get to advertising as a bunch of pinko commies, but again, how honest are they being with that if there isn’t any real left-wing bias there? A lot of the shows are just left of center-right, or at least they mostly stay in some pretty safe waters.

So, essentially there is only the perception of a liberal bias, when what really exists is a predominantly center-right media with one far right outlier and one slightly left of center-right outlier. And, as all of them are owned and operated by corporations and cater almost exclusively to the middle and upper-middle class, it’s pretty safe to say that they are filling out their societal functions quite nicely.

In the interest of contradicting and confirming their suspicions all in one breath, shall we just agree that the ‘mainstream media’ has a “neoliberal” bias?

“Neoliberalism is a label for the market-driven approach to economic and social policy based on neoclassical theories of economics that stresses the efficiency of private enterprise, liberalized trade and relatively open markets, and therefore seeks to maximize the role of the private sector in determining the political and economic priorities of the state…

“Neoliberalism seeks to transfer control of the economy from public to the private sector, under the belief that it will produce a more efficient government and improve the economic health of the nation.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism

Well, yea. If you want to be all technical and stuff.

We’re talking about city and police administration, media outlets, event organizers, participants, and parents ignoring the law

What law, Carl Mumpower?

ahh, i see. its in the link.

Mumpower says: “If an 8 year old who kisses a classmate on the cheek is a sex offender, why are stripteasers on a city fountain in front of children OK? If receiving an unsolicited text photo of a 15 year old’s breasts can result in a lifetime label as a sex offender, why is it OK to hold a celebration where 15 year olds are supported in exposing their breasts to a group of frat boys taking pictures and yelling words of encouragement? “

But isnt the point that NONE of those things should be ‘illegal’?

IS Carl saying he agrees that children should be charged as sexual predators for a kiss on the cheek?

Wouldn’t that require government interference in people’s lives?

I do not expect any answers from Teh Mump.

“Perhaps when the City announces the choice for the Community Media Initiative, that person can work on some policy issues with local press/bloggers/etc. I think it would certainly fall under the jurisdiction of having a community seriously working toward being better media-savvy and educated.”

That would certainly be advantageous to the local community. I prefer to hear all legitimate sides to an issue.  Maybe this will come to fruition.

As an aside, I’ve made requests to the City Managers office to obtain the proposals on the Community Media RFP, (which are public record.) No response in almost two weeks.  Why is that???

“Mumbitt”~ meaning from the ridiculous to the absurd.

Think this is worthy of placing in Urban dictionary?

Maybe this will come to fruition.

Well, I certainly hope it does.

As an aside, I’ve made requests to the City Managers office to obtain the proposals on the Community Media RFP, (which are public record.) No response in almost two weeks.  Why is that???

Snarky answer at ScrooHoo aside, does anyone know what the average turnaround time for those requests are? Also, are they public record upon receipt or at a later date *after* the decision is reached?

“Mumbitt”~ meaning from the ridiculous to the absurd.

Think this is worthy of placing in Urban dictionary?

Yup. I think Bill S. has an account.

I think we’re losing sight of the fact that this thread is supposed to be about boobs.

Besides, what did the anti-boobs expect? They live in a town called ‘A Sheville’.

It is about boobs..silly boobs & Mumbitt boobs.

“Perhaps when the City announces the choice for the Community Media Initiative, that person can work on some policy issues with local press/bloggers/etc. I think it would certainly fall under the jurisdiction of having a community seriously working toward being better media-savvy and educated.”

Here are the 9 applications for the CMI:

http://freepdfhosting.com/1769252002.pdf

Council will vote on this late Sept./early Oct.

*whistles*

wow nine…great!!!

Yeah, and some of these look pretty good at first glance. One or two are clearly in way over their heads.

(BTW, thanks to Davyne for getting these from the City.)

No need to thank me Barry, they are now public record & there for the asking…even if it takes almost two weeks to get a response.
Just happy to see so many interested people.  That has got to be potnetially good for Asheville…fingers crossed that City makes a good decision.

Are you going to arrest europe?
  It is customary in many city parks en europe and at most beaches for women to go without tops.  According to Mumpower amost of europe is guilty of child sexual abuse, and the officials which allow it are almost as bad.  If any of these officials visit America co when they step off the plane?uld they be arrested

Everyone knows Europe is gay, and comuniss, we’re amerikun and we’re exceptional!! We need smaller government, except in cases of natural disasters and enforcing our morality—and by that I mean Christianity.  Once we were tossed out of the Garden of Eden (because of women), we had to clothe ourselves due to our shame (tiny penises).

What is the big deal about womens breasts? They are for feed kids. How could that be considered child abuse? The whole child abuse argument is completely retarded and should be laughed at. I’m just happy that men and women are proud of their bodies and are free to go topless if they please.