I know there are those of you out there who do NOT like FaceBook, and I’m sorry if this move upsets you, but I’ve given this a lot of thought, talked to my advisors, ETC. and everyone concerned feels that the privacy benefits outweigh the any of the negatives…
That said, the May 8, 2010 Danz501 Recital Photo Collection can be found at the following FaceBook link: http://www.facebook.com/thesacnews?ref=profile#!/album.php?aid=2034755&id=1604241474.
You have to "friend" me to see them. (Part of that security thingy I was talking about earlier.)
Enjoy :)
Copyright (c)2007-2010 Curtis Bloes All Rights Reserved
Too bad cause there are grandmothers that would like to see the pictures, but do not care to get on Facebook.
ReplyDeleteThank you! I appreciate not having everyone see pictures of my children. This is why my facebook page is private and only certain people are allowed to see my children. There are some very sick individuals out there in the world. Great call!
ReplyDeleteThat's the same way people feel about being filmed at council meetings!!!!! or all the other meetings that are being put on the web for the whole world to see!!!! Everyone needs to have this right.... shut the cameras off but leave the microphones on and you will see a higher participation in the meetings.
ReplyDeleteOnly the roaches run from the light, my friend. Those of us with nothing to hide show up and participate as often as we like.
ReplyDeleteThere's no reason that people shouldn't act the same with the camera off as they do with it on. The sad thing is that people won't. As Curtis said, only the roaches run from the light. Remember, you should never say anything that you would be ashamed for other people to know.
ReplyDeleteFor the "grandmothers" who aren't on facebook (you're likely to find nowadays, actually, that Grandma and Grandpa know as much about computers and facebook as anyone else), you can save the relevant pics from Curtis' fb down to your own computer and print them out.
ReplyDeleteSo am I reading this right that if you don't want to be videotaped and broadcast, that automatically means you have something to hide? Ever consider that some people (maybe on the 'lesser' boards) would rather just do their job and stay 'behind the scenes'?
ReplyDeleteThere is no such thing as a behind the scenes job on a "lesser" (a term I disagree with) board. Public board member = public figure. The entire world owns every single word and gesture that you make while in its service.
ReplyDeleteDoes it automatically mean you have something to hide if being broadcast makes you uncomfortable?
Yes, it does. Even if that something, whether it be your true motives, or your lack of confidence in your ability to lead, is something you are in personal denial about.
If someone from the public comes to a council, school or supervisor meeting and ask not to be video tape would grant their request??
ReplyDeleteNot under any circumstance would I ever honor such a request. It is completely unreasonable to ask that the viewing public not be as aware of who is in the room at a public meeting as any person who is physically present.
ReplyDelete...Of course, if you don't speak, or don't sit near anyone who intends to speak there is a slight chance that you will escape unfilmed.
...actually my recommendation would be that you introduce yourself and tell me how to spell your name :)
ReplyDeleteHey Curtis,
ReplyDeleteif some 'grandma' sent you their e-mail, would you send them the 'public link' from the bottom of the album in FB? That way they could see the pics too w/o joining and you could still have some control over content dispersal?
nice thought Vicki!!!
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, there *are* people that do not want to be videotaped - for no reason other than not wanting to be taped, or not being comfortable in front of a camera (and that has NOTHING to do with insecurity or bad motives - that's just some people). Those people may be completely comfortable standing up and speaking in front of a small room of people, but the presence of a camera turns the meeting into a hostile environment they will not enter.
ReplyDeleteBut Curtis will dismiss this argument, saying "If you've got nothing to hide, there is no reason not to be on camera." Some of the best leaders I've met in my life are people that as soon as a camera shows up, you can't find them. And they had NOTHING to hide.
Here’s what this is really about, folks. Anonymous has personal friends that are unwilling to play by the rules and appear before the public to ask for taxpayer funding for their pet projects. Not because they don’t want to be on camera, but because they know that without a camera present, their friends on the council will openly and legally cover it up in a line item that will, coincidently, not be discussed.
ReplyDeleteHe, (and I’m pretty sure I know which council person “Anonymous” is, since I’ve had this conversation with him face to face,) is trying to play on your emotions and ask you to imagine what it must be like to show up in public and have mean old Curtis verbally savage you for sitting in the audience.
Folks, I must have a higher opinion of you than Anonymous. It is my belief that 99.9% of you are good honest people with nothing to hide, and that the only reason some of these council people are even sitting on these boards are because they promised to help their friends benefit financially if elected. I know this because you continue to show up at these meetings even after expressing to me that it makes you uncomfortable to be on camera.
Go back and review those early meetings from 2007. Make a little note of who showed up to those meetings with their hands out for your money and compare it to the meetings this year. I don’t think you’ll be at all surprised to see which class of people are no longer showing up in 2010.
That’s the light of truth doing its job.
The lawmakers knew that allowing the proceedings of government to be filmed would lead to a more open and accountable government. Some boards found a way to use this unprecedented coverage to carry their own positive message to the people, choosing in some cases to film the proceedings themselves and post it permanently on their city websites alongside their minutes. Some boards react with fear and hostility.
Reaction to TSN in the cities of Auburn, Sac City and Wall Lake are almost textbook cases of fear and hostility. Because of the way the city council in Sac City reacted in 2007-2008, I can almost give you a point by point prediction of which lawsuit threats will be forthcoming from Auburn and Wall Lake.
Reaction to TSN’s cameras in Lake View, Odebolt and Early have been just the opposite. They may be a little uncomfortable with it, but they are helpful and open, and are not wasting blood pressure and effort trying to figure out ways to make the room noisier or to block the view of the camera, (LOL Wall Lake). To the credit of the professionals that work in Sac City’s business office, they have always been professional and courteous and it is only the council and mayor that persist in their un-charming ways.
So please continue to try and find ways to blame me for what you are lacking, “Anonymous.” I’ve got videos to edit full of empty Sac City Council audience seats where your supporters used to sit when they were pretending that you were really important to them.
...as long as they could support you without anyone else knowing.
ReplyDelete;)
Curtis, next time you are at a council meeting, ask where the hell that expensive iron fence went to that was at the cemetery. I was told that fence was worth $50,000.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I am unable to attend Sac City's council meetings these days because there is another city council meeting happening on the same night in which here is a level of hostility that I have to deal with personally until the situation settles down enough for me to feel that a volunteer would be safe to send.
ReplyDeleteOdds are pretty good though, that I could end up with a pic of the thing, if it is really in town.
Actually, Curtis, I am NOT on the city council, and honestly have never attended a city council meeting. I do sit on another city board, but have never discussed your filming with you. I won't even say that you shouldn't bring your camera to the meetings, as I do feel you are very well studied on proper governmental procedures (and do find it sad when you know more than the elected councilpersons), and have probably done some good in the few years you've been taping. I'm as much against the back-door and under the table decisions made as anyone else, and may even have a few other things for you to look into some time.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, all I ask is that you recognize that sometimes, people don't want to be videotaped simply because they don't want to be on camera, not because of something to hide or insecurities about their abilities.
Vicki Fisher,
ReplyDeleteI sympathize, but no. If grandma is hip to email, FB should present no challenge.
Anonymous,
We are just not going to agree. If a person feels strongly enough about assuming either a leadership or direct observational role in our government, nothing will stop them. If somebody doesn’t want to participate because they will be filmed doing it, it stands to reason that they are ashamed of some aspect of themselves, (personal appearance, beliefs, public speaking skills, etc.,) of which they don’t want the public at large to be aware.
So, I do not recognize “…because they don’t want to be on camera…” as a valid last word. I feel that something deeper is going on to which that person does not want to admit publically. You can twist that around with any “But, what if” scenario you want, and I’ll bet if I were that person’s personal friend, I could get them to privately admit to some shame-based underlying reason for not wanting the public at large to know that they are taking a role in the government.
Good grief! The dance recital was a public event and cameras were not prohibited. If parents don't want their kids being "seen" by people who are "not members of our community" they need to put their kids in a closet and throw away the key. Geez, much ado about nothing. You've been watching way too much FOX News, Curtis. By the way, what does 'not members of our community ' actually mean?
ReplyDeleteNatalie Mandernach
I understand the reason for no video or camera equipment were they want to sell the cds/videos to the public to make some money. I hope the had all the rights to the music they used and paid the bands their rightful residuals. If not it is the same as pirating and reselling music. Just an example of how ridiculous some people get. I agree with above we can only protect our children to a certain point. We can't keep our kids in a cocoon all their lives they are eventually going to have to spread their wings. Prepare them the best we can. We as a community have to protect all our children as if they were our own. Let kids be kids and have as much fun as they can when they're young. There is no better sound than that of laughter......
ReplyDeleteI've never seen such rediculous comments. Sounds like a bunch of teenagers. Public meeting are open to the public. Everyone has a right to know what is happening and see the events if they choose. It is simple. Arguments against are thinking similiar to what is happening in Washington,D.C. when things are done behind closed doors. If you don't want to be seen or heard you need to remove yourself from the "limelight".
ReplyDelete