Today on Air Talk we'll look at the protests and support behind the Chick-Fil-A franchises, we'll also invite our distinguished guests who cover the Orange County to recount the week of news in the O.C., the collaboration between USC and former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, the other presidential race going on for the most popular candidate on twitter, and beware the internet troll, how anonymity is stirring the pot. Plus, the latest news.
Chick-fil-A feels the controversy — and the love
Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy set off a firestorm when he publicly aired his anti-same-sex marriage views. The company has since attempted to distance itself from Cathy’s comments, issuing a statement saying they would “leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government and political arena.”
But the damage has been done — or has it?
When gay rights supporters clamored for a proposed boycott, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee responded by declaring Wednesday, August 1st “Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day.” He did the company a huge favor: customers swarmed the fast-food outlets throughout the country, making it a record day for sales for the chain.
But wait, there’s more. Mayors of several cities with large LGBT populations have spoken out against having Chick-fil-A in their cities; Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel said the company’s values “are not Chicago values. They disrespect our fellow neighbors and residents.” Meanwhile, same-sex couples are encouraged by the LGBT community to swarm their local Chick-fil-A and commit a Public Display of Affection on Friday, designated "National Same-Sex Kiss Day at Chick-fil-A.”
Does the controversy help or hurt the chain? Should corporations stay out of public policy debate? Or are they right to air their values and count on the support of the portion of consumers who share them?
Guests:
Ira Kalb, Assistant professor of Clinical Marketing, USC Marshall School of Business; Expert in branding, image creation, marketing and corporation communications
Bill Peacock, Vice President of research & planning and the director of the Center for Economic Freedom at the Texas Public Policy Foundation
Larry Chavis, Assistant Professor of Strategy and Entrepreneurship, University of North Carolina
Orange County journalists’ roundtable
Topic: Orange County journalists’ roundtable: Larry and our talented Orange County journalists riff on the latest news from the O.C.: feds enter the fray in the Anaheim police shooting investigation, e-mails sent by UC Irvine professor charged with arson point toward plans for a mass shooting, the repair bill for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station mounts up and more fallout from the Carlos Bustamante sex scandal.
Guests:
Ed Joyce, Orange County Reporter, KPCC
Norberto Santana, editor-in-chief of the Voice of OC, a non-profit investigative news agency that covers Orange County government and politics
Schwarzenegger to bring 'across the aisle' approach to USC think tank
Arnold Schwarzenegger, former governor, action star and body builder, can now add another occupation to his resume. He has co-founded a new think tank at the University of Southern California, called the USC Schwarzenegger Institute for State and Global Policy.
Schwarzenegger will also serve a dual role as the Governor Downey Professor of State and Global Policy and the chairman of the advisory board for the group.
The organization will be bipartisan in nature, and its objective includes a focus on education, energy and environment, fiscal and economic policy, health and human wellness and political reform. The former governor has personally committed $20 million to the think tank, and will surely be involved in future fundraising efforts as well.
The Global Director of this new think tank, Bonnie Reiss said she has faith in Schwarzenegger because of his work “across the aisle” during his time as governor, citing his work on environmental policies and California’s stem cell institute.
But more importantly, Reiss pointed to the political fatigue citizens are feeling as their representatives become more and more divided.
“What we’re seeing from all the different studies and polls...is that there are extremes on both sides in our state and in our nation, but the overwhelming majority of people, whether they’re registered Democrats or registered Republicans or registered Independents, really are in the center and really do seek common ground on dealing with issues that we care about,” she said.
The USC-Schwarzenegger partnership will benefit the public through symposiums, research in tandem with the university and students, as well as through fellowship programs which aim to bring in young, innovative minds to work on policy.
But as it stands now, the Board of Advisors for the Institute is made up of seasoned politicians and arguably lacks the “freshness” it’s touting.
Reiss assures, however, that the think tank is seeking people to join them -- young “outsiders” with new ideas -- but they are still in the early stages of development.
“The majority of people across Ca and across the nation, really do want their leaders no matter what their political philosophy to be willing to work together and find solutions. It does seem to most of us citizens...it seems most [politicians] are more interested in defeating the other party and getting their party in the next election,” she said.
Reiss continued, adding,”Some of it is pure politics and some of it is philosophical divides, but whatever the cause it doesn’t benefit the people they serve. That’s why we’re reaching out to find people that share this point of view to collaborate with all of them to advance ideas that influence public debate and public policy on these most challenging issues.”
Weigh In
Why exactly did Schwarzenegger take up this new role? Is it a smart move for him to get back into the political arena in this way? And what about the goal of bipartisanship? How realistic is that given the modern political climate? What sort of projects and ideas can we expect to see come from all this?
Guest:
Bonnie Reiss, Global Director, USC Schwarzenegger Institute for State and Global Policy
Twitter's popularity contest for POTUS
Sports fans, social media addicts and television producers have been cursing Twitter during these Olympics. Spoilers rip across the globe and tweets overload networks to the point of jamming TV signals. That little birdy and its billions of 140-character posts are edging in on all major events. And now Twitter wants to capitalize on that data by getting in the polling game.
Yesterday, it launched a tool that tracks mentions of President Barack Obama & his opponent Mitt Romney. The “Twindex” churns out a daily approval rating of the presidential candidates based on positive or negative tweets. Mitt is at 26 (+ over yesterday). Barack is +10 over yesterday to 44.
So what, right? Not so fast. The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza says, "Ignore the 'Twindex' at your peril."
So how does it work exactly? How does it compare to old-fashioned polling? Is it accurate? If not, what are the consequences? Can it detect sarcasm? What would Twitter be without sarcasm?
Guests:
Adam Sharp, Head of Government, News & Social Innovation, Twitter
Chris Cillizza, writes The Fix for The Washington Post and author of "The Gospel According to the Fix: An Insider's Guide to a Less than Holy World of Politics"
Julia Clark, Pollster, Vice President, Public Sector Practice, Ipsos Public Affairs
Beware of the internet troll
Those who hide behind an anonymous online name are known as ‘trolls’ – waiting beneath a bridge with their laptops, ready to hurl vitriol disguised as opinion at any passing target.
Their insults, rants, threats and name-calling show up in the comments section of blogs, articles and Facebook walls, sometimes with lightning speed, on a daily or even hourly basis. Who are these virtual haters, and what drives them to such heights of spite?
It’s the combination of anonymity, access and audience that brings out the worst in people, writes Lisa Selin Davis in Salon. As for who they are, nobody knows. Anyone with an e-mail account can hit “send” and express their deepest, darkest biases for all to read, without fear of reprisal. It’s what psychologists call the “disinhibition effect,” and it can make for a very toxic online environment.
But should that be allowed? The internet promises personal privacy along with a platform for democratic discourse, but does that make online trolling fair game? Does the First Amendment protect online commentary to the point of threats, slander or worse? Would those who indulge in the practice be as free with their language if their names were public as well as their insults? Have you ever left an anonymous comment that you wouldn’t voice in person?
Guests:
Karen North holds a Ph.D. in psychology and is the Director of the Annenberg Program on Online Communities, USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism
Kevin Bankston, Senior Counsel and Director of the Free Expression Project at the Center for Democracy & Technology, a Washington, DC-based non-profit organization dedicated to promoting democratic values and constitutional liberties in the digital age