Surprising Opinions of Top Anchors

KIDS AND THE NEWS
More than ever, children witness innumerable, sometimes traumatizing,
news events on TV. It seems that violent crime and bad news is unabating.
Foreign wars, natural disasters, terrorism, murders, incidents of child abuse,
and medical epidemics flood our newscasts daily. Not to mention the grim
wave of recent school shootings.
All of this intrudes on the innocent world of children. If, as psychologists
say, kids are like sponges and absorb everything that goes on around them,
how profoundly does watching TV news actually affect them? How careful do
parents need to be in monitoring the flow of news into the home, and how can
they find an approach that works?
To answer these questions, we turned to a panel of seasoned anchors, Peter
Jennings, Maria Shriver, Linda Ellerbee, and Jane Pauley--each having faced the
complexities of raising their own vulnerable children in a news-saturated
world.
Picture this: 6:30 p.m. After an exhausting day at the office, Mom is busy
making dinner. She parks her 9-year-old daughter and 5-year-old son in front
of the TV.
"Play Nintendo until dinner's ready," she instructs the little ones, who,
instead, start flipping channels.
Tom Brokaw on "NBC News Tonight," announces that an Atlanta gunman
has killed his wife, daughter and son, all three with a hammer, before going on
a shooting rampage that leaves nine dead.
On "World News Tonight," Peter Jennings reports that a jumbo jetliner with
more than 300 passengers crashed in a spinning metal fireball at a Hong Kong
airport.
On CNN, there's a report about the earthquake in Turkey, with 2,000
people killed.
On the Discovery channel, there's a timely special on hurricanes and the
terror they create in children. Hurricane Dennis has already struck, Floyd is
coming.
Finally, they see a local news report about a roller coaster accident at a New
Jersey amusement park that kills a mother and her eight-year-old daughter.
Nintendo was never this riveting.
"Dinner's ready!" shouts Mom, unaware that her children may be terrified
by this menacing potpourri of TV news.
What's wrong with this picture?
"There's a LOT wrong with it, but it's not that easily fixable," notes Linda
Ellerbee, the creator and host of "Nick News," the award-winning news
program geared for kids ages 8-13, airing on Nickelodeon.
"Watching blood and gore on TV is NOT good for kids and it doesn't do
much to enhance the lives of adults either," says the anchor, who strives to
inform children about world events without terrorizing them. "We're into
stretching kids' brains and there's nothing we wouldn't cover," including
recent programs on euthanasia, the Kosovo crisis, prayer in schools, book-
banning, the death penalty, and Sudan slaves.
But Ellerbee emphasizes the necessity of parental supervision, shielding
children from unfounded fears. "During the Oklahoma City bombing, there
were terrible images of children being hurt and killed," Ellerbee recalls. "Kids
wanted to know if they were safe in their beds. In studies conducted by
Nickelodeon, we found out that kids find the news the most frightening thing
on TV.
"Whether it's the Gulf War, the Clinton scandal, a downed jetliner, or what
happened in Littleton, you have to reassure your children, over and over again,
that they're going to be OK--that the reason this story is news is that IT
ALMOST NEVER HAPPENS. News is the exception...nobody goes on the air
happily and reports how many planes landed safely!
"My job is to put the information into an age-appropriate context and lower
anxieties. Then it's really up to the parents to monitor what their kids watch
and discuss it with them"
Yet a new study of the role of media in the lives of children conducted by
the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation reveals that 95% of the nation's children
ages 8-18 are watching TV without their parents present.
How does Ellerbee view the typical scenario of the harried mother above?
"Mom's taking a beating here. Where's Dad?" Ellerbee asks.Perhaps at work,
or living separately from Mom, or absent altogether.
"Right. Most Moms and Dads are working as hard as they can because we
live in a society where one income just doesn't cut it anymore,"
NBC News correspondent Maria Shriver, the mother of four--Katherine,
13, Christina, 12, Patrick, 10, and Christopher, 6--agrees with Ellerbee: "But
Moms
aren't using the TV as a babysitter because they're out getting manicures!"
says the 48-year-old anchor.
"Those mothers are struggling to make ends meet and they do it because
they need help. I don't think kids would be watching [as much TV] if their
parents were home organizing a touch football game.
"When I need the TV as a babysitter," says Shriver, who leaves detailed TV-
viewing instructions behind when traveling, "I put on a safe video. I don't mind
that my kids have watched "Pretty Woman" or "My Best Friend's Wedding"
3,000 times. I'd be more fearful if they watched an hour of local news.That
would scare them. They might feel: 'Oh, my God, is somebody going to come
in and shoot me in my bedroom?'"
In a move to supervise her own children more closely since her husband,
Arnold Schwarzenegger, became Governor, Shriver
scaled back her workload as Contributing Anchor to Dateline NBC and set up
her office at home: "You can never be vigilant enough with your kids," she
says, "because watching violence on TV clearly has a huge impact on
children--whether it's TV news, movies, or cartoons."
This view is shared by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry, which states: ""TV is a powerful influence in developing value
systems and shaping behavior...studies find that children may become immune
to the horror of violence; gradually accept violence as a way to solve problems;
and resort to anti-social and aggressive behavior, imitating the violence they
observe."
Although there are no rules about watching TV in 49% of the nation's
households, TV-watching at the Schwarzenegger home is almost totally
verboten:
"We have a blanket rule that my kids do not watch any TV at all during the
week," she notes, "and having a TV in their bedrooms has never been an
option. I have enough trouble getting them to do their homework!" she states
with a laugh. "Plus the half hour of reading they have to do every night.
According to the Kaiser survey, Shriver's household is a glaring exception to
the rule. "Many kids have their own TV's, VCR's and video games in their
bedroom," the study notes. Moreover, children ages 8-18 actually spend an
average of three hours and 16 minutes watching TV daily; only 44 minutes
reading; 31 minutes using the computer; 27 minutes playing video games;
and a mere 13 minutes using the Internet.
"My kids," Shriver explains, "get home at 4 p.m., have a 20-minute break,
then go right into homework or after-school sports. Then, I'm a big believer in
having family dinner time. Some of my fondest memories are of sitting at the
dinner table and listening to my parents, four brothers, and my grandmother,
Rose. We didn't watch the news.
"After dinner nowadays, we play a game, then my kids are in bed, reading
their books. There's no time in that day for any TV, except on weekends, when
they're allowed to watch a Disney video, Sesame Street, Barney, The Brady
Bunch, or Pokemon."
Beyond safe entertainment, Shriver has eliminated entirely the option of her
children watching news events unfolding live on TV: "My kids," she notes, "do
not watch any TV news, other than Nick News," instead providing her children
with Time for Kids, [Teen Newsweek is also available], Highlights, and
newspaper clippings discussed over dinner.
"No subject should be off-limits," Shriver concludes, "but you must filter
the news to your kids."
ABC's Peter Jennings, who reigns over "World News Tonight," the nation's
most-watched evening newscast, emphatically disagrees with a censored
approach to news-watching: "I have two kids--Elizabeth is now 24 and
Christopher is 21-- and they were allowed to watch as much TV news and
information anytime they wanted," says the anchor. A firm believer in
kids understanding the world around them, he adapted his bestselling book,
The Century, for children ages 10 and older in The Century for Young People.
No downside to kids watching news? "I don't know of any downside and I've
thought about it many times. I used to worry about my kids' exposure to
violence and overt sex in the movies. Like most parents, I found that although
they were exposed to violence sooner than I would have liked, I don't feel
they've been affected by it. The jury's still out on the sex.
"I have exposed my kids to the violence of the world--to the bestiality of
man--from the very beginning, at age 6 or 7. I didn't try to hide it. I never
worried about putting a curtain between them and reality, because I never felt
my children would be damaged by being exposed to violence IF they
understood the context in which it occurred. I would talk to my kids about the
vulnerability of children in wartime--the fact that they are innocent pawns--
and about what we could do as a family to make the world a more peaceful
place.
Jennings firmly believes that coddling children is a mistake: "I've never
talked down to my children, or to children period. I always talk UP to them and
my newscast is appropriate for children of any age."
Yet the 65-year-old anchor often gets letters from irate parents: "They'll
say: 'How dare you put that on at 6:30 when my children are watching?' My
answer is: 'Madam, that's not my problem. That's YOUR problem. It's
absolutely up to the parent to monitor the flow of news into the home."
Part of directing this flow is turning it off altogether at meal-time, says
Jennings, who believes family dinners are sacrosanct. He is appalled that the
TV is turned on during meals in 58% of the nation's households, this according
to the Kaiser study.
"Watching TV during dinner is unforgivable," he exclaims, explaining that
he always insisted that his family wait until he arrived home from anchoring
the news. "You're darn right they waited...even when my kids were tiny, they
never ate until 7:30 or 8 pm. Then we would sit with no music, no TV. Why
waste such a golden opportunity? Watching TV at mealtime robs the family of
the essence of the dinner, which is communion and exchange of ideas. I mean,
God, if the dinner table is anything, it's a place to learn manners and
appreciation for two of the greatest things in life--food and drink."
Jennings is likewise unequivocal in his view of junk TV and believes parking
kids at the tube creates dull minds: "I think using TV as a babysitter is a
terrible idea because the damn television is very narcotic, drug-like. Mindless
TV makes for passive human beings--and it's a distraction from homework!
"My two children were allowed to watch only a half an hour of entertainment
TV per night--and they never had TV's in their bedrooms.It's a conscious
choice I made as a parent not to tempt them...too seductive..."
Adds Ellerbee: "TV is seductive and is meant to be. The hard, clear fact is
that when kids are watching TV, they're not doing anything else!"
Indeed, according to the National Institute on Out-of-School Time and the
Office of Research Education Consumer Guide, TV plays a bigger role in
children's lives now than ever before. Kids watch TV an average of14 to 22
hours per week, which accounts for at least 25 percent of their free time.
"Dateline NBC" Anchor Jane Pauley, intensely private, declined an interview
to discuss how she and her husband, cartoonist Garry Trudeau ("Doonesbury")
handle TV-watching with their three teens, two of whom are fraternal twins.
But in a written response, she agreed that kids need to be better protected
from the onslaught of violence: "I was a visitor at a public elementary school
not long ago, and was invited to peek in on a fourth-grade class on 'current
events.' The assignment had been to watch the news and write about one of
the stories. Two kids picked the fatal attack on a child by a pit bull and the
other wrote about a child who'd hanged herself with a belt! They'd all watched
the worst blood and gore 'News at 11' station in town. The teacher gave no
hint that she was as appalled as I was. My response was to help the school get
subscriptions to "Time for Kids" and "My Weekly Reader." People need to be
better news consumers. And tabloid TV is very unhealthy for kids."
On this point, Ellerbee readily agrees:"I really do believe the first
amendment STOPS at your front door. You are the boss at home and parents
have every right to monitor what their kids watch. What's even better is
watching with them and initiating conversations about what they see.If your
child is watching something terribly violent, sit down and DEFUSE it. Talking
makes the ghosts run...and kids can break through their scared feelings."
Adds Pauly:
"Kids," she maintains, "know about bad news--they're the ones trying to
spare us the bad news sometimes. But kids should be able to see that their
parents are both human enough to be deeply affected by a tragedy like
Columbine, but also sturdy enough to get through it...and on with life. That is
the underpinning of their security."
"I'm no expert on the nation's children," adds Jennings, " but I'd have to say
no, it wasn't traumatic. Troubling, shocking, even devastating to some,
confusing to others, but traumatizing in that great sense, no.
"Would I explain to my kids that there are young, upset, angry, depressed
kids in the world? Yes. I hear the most horrendous stories about what's going
on in high schools from my kids. And because of the shootings, parents are
now on edge--pressuring educators to 'do something.' They have to be
reminded that the vast majority of all schools in America are overwhelmingly
safe," a fact borne out by The National School Safety Center, which reports that
in l998 there were just 25 violent deaths in schools compared to an average of
50 in the early 90's.
Ellerbee adds that a parent's ability to listen is more important than
lobbying school principals for more metal detectors and armed guards: "If
there was ever a case where grown-ups weren't listening to kids, it was
Littleton. First, don't interrupt your child...let them get the whole thought out.
Next, if you sit silently for a couple of seconds after they're finished, they'll
start talking again, getting to a second level of honesty. Third, try to be honest
with your kid. To very small children, it's proper to say: 'This is never going to
happen to you...' But you don't say that to a 10-year-old."
Moreover, Ellerbee believes that media literacy begins the day parents stop
pretending that if you ignore TV, it will go away. "Let your kid know from the
very beginning that he or she is SMARTER than TV: 'I am in control of this box,
it is not in control of me. I will use this box as a useful, powerful TOOL, but will
not be used by it.' Kids know the difference.
"Watching TV," Ellerbee maintains, "can makes kids more civilized. I grew
up in the south of Texas in a family of bigoted people. Watching TV made me
question my own family's beliefs in the natural inferiority of people of color.
For me, TV was a real window that broadened my world."
Ironically, for Shriver, watching TV news is incredibly painful when the
broadcast is about you. Being a Kennedy, Shriver has lived a lifetime in the
glare of rumors and
televised speculation about her own family. Presenting the news to her children
has therefore included explaining the tragedies and controversies the
Kennedys have endured. She was just eight years old when her uncle, President
John F. Kennedy, was assassinated: "I grew up in a very big shadow...and I
couldn't avoid it," she admits. "It wasn't a choker, but it was a big
responsibility that I don't want my own children to feel." Yet doesn't her 15-
year marriage to megastar Schwarzenegger add yet another layer of public
curiosity close to home? "My kids are not watching Entertainment Tonight--no,
no, never! And I don't bring them to movie openings or Planet Hollywood. I
think it's fine for them to be proud of their father, but not show off about him."
How does she emotionally handle news when her family's in it? "That's a line
I've been walking since my own childhood, and it's certainly effected the kind
of reporter I've become. It's made me less aggressive. I'm not [in the news
business] to glorify myself at someone else's expense, but rather to report a
story without destroying someone in the process. A producer might say: 'Call
this person who's in a disastrous situation and book them right way.' And I'm
like: 'Ahhhh. I can't even bring myself to do it,' because I've been on the
other side and know the family is in such pain."
A few years ago, of course, the Kennedys experienced profound pain, yet
again, when Shriver's beloved cousin, John F. Kennedy, Jr., was killed in a plane
crash, with his wife, Carolyn, and sister-in-law, Lauren Bessette. A blizzard of
news coverage ensued, unremitting for weeks. "I didn't watch any of it...I was
busy, " Shriver says quietly. "And my children didn't watch any of it either."
Shriver was, however, somewhat prepared to discuss the tragedy with her
children. She is the author of the best-selling "What's Heaven?" [Golden Books],
a book geared for children ages 4-8, which explains death and the loss of a
loved one. "My children knew John well because he spent Christmases with us. I
explained what happened to John as the news unfolded...walked them through
it as best I could. I reminded them that Mommy wrote the book and said:
'We're not going to see John anymore. He has gone to God...to heaven...and we
have to pray for him and for his sister [Caroline] and her children."
Like Shriver, Jennings is personally uncomfortable in the role of covering
private tragedies in a public forum: "In my shop, I'm regarded as one of those
people who drags their feet a lot at the notion of covering those things," he
explains. "During the O.J. Simpson trial, I decided not to go crazy in our
coverage--and we took quite a smack and dropped from first to second in the
ratings. TV is a business, so when a real corker of a story like Princess Diana's
death comes along, we cover it. I think we're afraid not to do it. We're guilty of
overkill, and with Diana, we ended up celebrating something that was largely
ephemeral, making Diana more than she was. But audiences leap up!
"I was totally opposed to covering John F. Kennedy, Jr.'s funeral, because I
saw no need to do it. He wasn't a public figure, though others would say I was
wrong. On-air, I said: 'I don't think the young Mr. Kennedy would approve of
all this excess...' But we did three hours on the funeral and it turned out to be
a wonderful long history lesson about American politics and the Kennedy
dynasty's place in our national life.
"Sometimes," Jennings muses, "TV is like a chapel in which we, as a nation,
can gather to have a communal experience of loss.We did it with the
Challenger, more recently with JFK Jr.'s death and we will do it shortly, I
suspect, though I hope not, with Ronald Reagan. It's not much different than
what people did when they went West in covered wagons in the last century.
When tragedy struck, they gathered the wagons around, lit the fire, and talked
about their losses of the day. And then went on. Television can be very
comforting."
In closing, Ellerbee contends that you can't blame TV news producers for
the human appetite for sensational news coverage that often drags on for days
at a time:
"As a reporter," she muses, "I have never been to a war, traffic accident, or
murder site that didn't draw a crowd. There is a little trash in all of us. But the
same people who stop to gawk at a traffic accident, may also climb down a well
to save a child's life, or cry at a sunset, or grin and tap their feet when the
parade goes by.
"We are NOT just one thing. Kids can understand these grays...just as
there's more than one answer to a question, there is certainly more than one
part to you!"

Math Education Checklist

You need a math education. You want to enroll in an online school to get that education out of the way. The good news is that, in general, most of the mathematics courses that you will need to take are available to you on the web. The other bit of good news is that you can find a variety of schools providing a variety of educational curriculum for you to study. The bad news is that you still have to do the math work that goes along with learning this type of education. Nevertheless, one of the most important things you need to do before you enroll in this type of program is to know what to look for in a school providing you with your math education.
The following is a checklist of qualifications you want to look for in a school to ensure that you can achieve the goals that you have.
1.    Is the school accredited? It should be state wide or nationally accredited to provide the best level of education for you.
2.    Does the math education taught to you in this program fulfill any type of need that you have in another program? Do you need a specific type of math education and if so, does the school you are considering offer it?
3.    IS online education available from the school? If so, find out the process works as well as who teaches the education.
When it comes down to it, getting a math education on the web makes sense and it is quite possible to do. However, most students will need to ensure that the school they choose is going to provide them with the right level of education for however they plan to use it. There is a different from one school to the next and every student needs to understand what their options really are.

6 Resources for Business Intelligence News and Information

Despite Business Intelligence becoming an increasingly widespread practice, there appears to be relatively little to choose from in terms of good quality news and information resources. From monitoring several discussions on LinkedIn, we saw the same names tended to crop up over and over again.
1. Perhaps the most widely recognized for BI content was TDWI.org. The Data Warehousing Institute™ provides education, training, certification, news, and research for executives and IT professionals across the world. Founded 15 years ago, TDWI is the premier educational institute for business intelligence and data warehousing. Home to Wayne's World Blog, written by Wayne W. Eckerson, the director of research and services, it provides readers with anything from online conferences, to whitepaper downloads, to industry reports.
2. Frequently cited by several LinkedIn members, Information Management was another popular resource people turned to for BI news. It claims to be "the educated reader's choice for the latest news, commentary and feature content serving the information technology and business community", and with its relaunch last year, it offers original reporting, online radio programming, informative Web seminar programming, white paper resources and online education to professionals in the field of IT. Providing daily informative newsletters on a variety of content, it is understandable why info-mgmt.com has carved a strong position in the BI domain.
3. The BeyeNETWORK™ provides global coverage of the BI ecosystem. It supplies industry coverage and resources on business intelligence, performance management, data warehousing, data integration and data quality. B-Eye-Network also includes BeyeUNIVERSITY, a comprehensive curriculum covering all areas of the business intelligence ecosystem. These certificate programs are taught by experts who are nationally and internationally recognized as leaders in their respective fields, and best of all, are completely free!
4. The name Ralph Kimball cropped up on more than one occasion, although perhaps not soley in reference to BI. He is known worldwide as an innovator, writer, educator, speaker and consultant in the field of data warehousing. He has maintained his long-term conviction that data warehouses must be designed to be understandable and fast. His books on dimensional design techniques have become best sellers in data warehousing. To date Ralph has written more than 100 articles and columns for Intelligent Enterprise and its predecessors, winning the Readers' Choice Award five years in a row. Some of his books include "The Kimball Group Reader: Relentlessly Practical Tools for Data Warehousing and Business Intelligence" and "The Data Warehouse ETL Toolkit: Practical Techniques for Extracting, Cleaning, Conforming, and Delivering Data".
5. Similarly to Ralph Kimball, Bill Inmon was another name that graced discussions quite regularly. Inmon, a world-renowned expert, speaker and author on data warehousing, is widely recognized as the "Father of Data Warehousing". In addition to authoring more than 50 books and 650 articles, Bill has been a monthly columnist with the Business Intelligence Network, EIM Institute and Data Management Review. In 2007, Bill was named by Computerworld as one of the "Ten IT People Who Mattered in the Last 40 Years" of the computer profession.
6. Howard Dresner is an industry acclaimed expert, noted author, thought leader and lecturer for Business Intelligence, and Enterprise Performance Management. He spent 13 years at Gartner, where he served as lead analyst for Business Intelligence. Today as President and Founder of Dresner Advisory Services, he focuses his energy on creating and sharing thought leadership for Enterprise Performance Management (EPM) and Business Intelligence (BI) and speaks at forums around the globe. He has written two books: "The Performance Management Revolution: Business Results Through Insight and Action" and "Profiles in Performance: Business Intelligence Journeys and The Roadmap for Change".

Bilingual Education in the Press

In today's society, the distribution of information is controlled largely by the print and electronic media. Directly and indirectly, media affect the way in which people learn about their world and form opinions on the salient topics of the day, heavily influencing the process of social relations and the slant or spin applied to the news. This becomes most apparent when one analyzes the ways in which the media guide people's relationships with social institutions (e.g., educational, religious, governmental).

Lacking the time and ability to interact personally with every social institution, individuals depend on the media for information about a variety of issues. Media may not always be largely responsible for public opinion, but there are many documented cases in which this has occurred.

When the bulk of collective knowledge of a given issue is determined by the news media, the press becomes a major factor in the formation of social attitudes and beliefs. According to David Fan, has it been suggested not only that media shape public views of political issues but that they also mold opinion within specific agenda items. Michael Herzfeld maintains it is no exaggeration to say that in the United States, media are a major force in society: They create as much as they reflect the events taking place in the nation.

While individual, seemingly insignificant messages conveyed in the media might appear to have minimal effect, they may accrue over time and form long-term trends of public opinion that affect the outcome of public debate. This entry examines the portrayal by media of the relationship between bilingual education and immigration and provides a context for it in the broader dynamic of society and the press.

Given that media play an important role in the construction of public opinion and have the potential to directly affect the political process, it is important to understand the impact that individual media forms have and how they are consumed by the public. There are special characteristics of newspapers that help to shape public opinion. While many people elect to watch television and/or listen to the radio for their news and information, the printed format of newspapers offers specific advantages.

Newspapers are not limited by time. Readers can afford to devote more time to read and review print news and editorializing and to choose when and where they will do so. This lack of time constraint also allows newspapers to present many more stories than broadcast news on radio or television. This entry focuses on print media in one state and how it influenced the public's view of a ballot initiative to abolish bilingual education in that state

Good Technical Analysis Education For Trading Stocks

Technical analysis education is the key to successful stock trading. While a number of long-term investors focus primarily on fundamentals, as traders we know that the price movement reflects most accurately what the market thinks of the stock, so we make our decisions based on the technical analysis of price movement. Technical analysis is critical. Without it, you don't stand a chance at trading profitably.
So it should go without saying that good technical analysis education is the foundation of a profit-producing trader. Some fundamentals of good technical analysis are pivot points, volume shifting and stochastics, moving averages, and trends. Here today, I'd like to focus on trends. I'm sure you've heard it before, but I'm going to say it again, "The Trend is Your Friend".
If you ignore trends, they'll smack you on the side of the head with as many losses as it takes to get your attention. But if you take the time to get to know the trend, understanding its movements, its strengths and weaknesses, you can use its leverage to your advantage. Get to know the market trend.
Before going any further, I'd like to point out the difference between the market trend and current price movement. Pretty basic stuff, but it's important and so foundational to successful trading. Here's the distinction:
A trend can be moving in one direction, while the current price movement fluctuates up and down. For example, the trend can be moving up, but that price at any given moment may be moving down. The price might be going down for a short time, but the overall trend is still pointing up.
So what does that mean to us as traders? Well, think of the trend as a magnet that's pulling the stock in a certain direction. Sure, the stock price is untamed, moving up and down, seemingly at whim. But the larger trend is clearly pulling the stock in a certain direction. So the probability of the stock going with the trend is always greater than the stock moving against the trend. This means that if a stock is moving in a downward trend, it's always a safer bet to open a position as the price movement also trends down.
Therefore, in technical analysis education, the first rule of the trend is to open trading positions when trend and price movement match.
And how do we recognize trends? Well, there are a number of stock trading tools to identify trends, such as moving averages and trend lines, but I'd like to focus on size: bigger usually carries the most weight.
What I mean is that if you're looking to enter and exit a trade in one day, you should take a step back so you can see several days or a couple weeks of action on that stock. Or if you're looking to enter a position for a few days or couple weeks, look back at the past month or two to spot a larger trend.
The bigger the trend, the more weight it carries. If you see a three-month trend reaching its boundary, be very careful to trust a single day's trend heading in the other direction. Large trends get to push around small trends and price movements, so always give them the most respect.
That sounds pretty simple, but can we always trust trends? Well, put your technical analysis education to good use and watch out for these:
1) News- Know that if news on a company or major stock market news are due to come out, this may cause the trend to be completely ignored, at least temporarily. So watch out for the news.
2) Seasonal or time fluctuations- The volume of stock trading can change drastically with certain seasons or days of the week, weakening a trend. It's important to learn the rhythm of the market.
3) Trend boundaries- I mentioned this a little bit before, but it's worth mentioning again. If a trend is reaching some point where the market has shown to be stubborn, the trend may bounce back and reverse trend for a while. It's important to use trend lines and other analytics to know where these points are.
4) And last but not least, the Unknown- the market is always allowed to do something completely unexpected and irrational. That's why it's absolutely critical to have a good stock trading plan and money management strategy with risk vs. reward ratios firmly in place.
Spotting trends and moving with price movements takes a good deal of practice and quality technical analysis education. So don't skimp on your learning. Spend the time, and when necessary the money, to prepare yourself to be a successful trader. Below are a few great sources that will educate you via. demo trading and back testing.

Skills Equals Opportunity For Educators

To many in the 30-something and beyond generations, YouTube is a strange phenomenon and a somewhat confusing business concept. Older generations do not fully understand what YouTube is about and generally avoid it. 'Kids' spending hour after hour on the computer making & sending silly video clips to each other: "What is that all about? In my day..."
Well, YouTube (and other video sharing web sites) are here to stay and that is that. And if they are here to stay, can they be used in the field of education?
Or more accurately
1. Can the skills 'kids' are picking up in using video creation and sharing be used in education?
2. Can the making of educational videos by students be used in the classroom and how beneficial might this be in improving student understand a topic?
3. Would a 'hands-on' approach to make a video essay allow students to better retain what they are learning?
This article will argue that the short answer to each of these questions is 'yes'. The key is how is it to be done and what resources are out there to help.
Kids today love making videos and sharing them via YouTube (and other video sharing web-sites). Surely these interests and skills could (and should) be harnessed? After all, what is the traditional (boring?) approach to education?
You are given an essay to write/a project to complete. To write the essay, you need to do some research; read a little; take notes; produce a 1000 word essay. Hand it in. Your teacher reads it. You get your mark. You move on and apart from revision, you never see the essay again.
What about if the end product was not a written report but one you produced as a video documentary?
Everything is the same until you get to the 'writing' stage. Tell the story you would previously have written down using visuals. Make a commentary using your notes. Tell the story. Find some suitable video clips. Go and make your own video clips. Bring in your own photographs. Make a video essay/documentary. Hand in the finished masterpiece. The teacher can then watch it or share is with the class. Promote discussion. Compare approaches to the project. Finally upload the video to the school/college web site or YouTube. In other words, the video approach opens more opportunities to learn then the written word.
So in a sentence:
Don't Write An Essay See An Essay
But what is the current state of video use (and the use of YouTube) in education?
Even in 2009, simply using YouTube as a tool for education is seen as quite radical: in a popular web site and forum for history teachers in the UK  a recent talking point was a short segment on the BBC news channel where this 'radical' idea was aired (search 'Roy Huggins school history' on YouTube). What is most interesting about this interview and the general comments on the forum afterward is the thought that these videos have to be made by the teacher community. 'Lets make videos for students and share them', is the current thinking. No discussion of letting the students make the video.
The BBC introduced an annual 'School Report' project whereby school students spend a day making new reports for broadcast on television (although mainly aimed at school web sites). The main point here is that students are encouraged to think about what goes into a news broadcast as well as the technical aspects of making the news report.
Another development is the development of a new degree course based on YouTube: "YouTube for Educators" through the Boise State University Department of Educational Technology.
A short introduction to the course is shown here, 'This is an academic course for students in an advanced educational technology program. It is my belief that YouTube, and video-sharing in general, cannot be ignored within a field of emergent technologies for learning. YouTube is having an impact on society, politics, and the lives of individuals from all walks of life.' (Search YouTube for 'csnelsonbsu ').
But this course is still a step behind giving video clips to students to create mini video documentaries.
In summary, the use of video as an educating tool is slowing creeping along the corridors of the educational establishments. But it is still dominated by a teacher-centered approach.
It is the teacher who creates.
It is the teacher who uses his/her imagination.
It is the student that watches.
To turn this around and make better use of the medium of video, students need to be given control. Students should be allowed to use their imagination and create, not teachers.
Clearly there are hurdles to be overcome to give teachers the opportunity to move into video essays. In order for students to create mini video documentaries they need access to computers, the raw video material and teachers need skills to manage it.
Other questions to add to the mix:
1. How would they physically make these videos: in the classroom? At home? Both?
2. How would schools and colleges go about using this approach to education? Group projects? And which subjects? History? Sociology? Geography? Politics? All the above and more?
3. Do schools and colleges have the staff proficient and confident enough with this new communication medium to teach the youth of today? The Future?
This article asks more questions then it answers; It has merely scratched the surface of the video in education topic.
What is important to note and cannot be over stressed, is the importance of taking advantage of the inherent new skills that the young people of today have developed in using YouTube. Putting them to an educational use is a must.
And after all, when as a student of the late 1980's, this author used the now ancient skill called 'hand writing' in submitting essays and reports; A word processor (pre-Windows, Apple, PC's and the 'net'), was some sort of alien contraption only found in classrooms belonging to strange long-haired hippie types. Today, primary school students use computers as a matter of course.
Will video use in education become the norm in the next 10 years?

The author has developed various web sites & products designed for schools, colleges and university students and teachers.

Television News Anchors So Irrelevant

Most people by this point know either subconsciously or consciously the main reasons for why CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox News regulars act like a group of preppy high school girls. Let's briefly list 4 common reasons before moving on to the underlying explanation.

1) The nature of their work as charismatic and believable presenters of information rather than experts. It is key to mention that the separation between 24 hour cable networks and brief "serious" 6 PM broadcasts on basic cable is disappearing. It used to be that the evening news audience demographic was numerically dominated by the group of elderly depression era females. This explained the need for senior citizens like Dan Rather who was ideal marriage material for the widowed viewers and delivered the authority of a small town doctor. To this day a doctor is shown by polls as the most respected wage laborer whose opinion is considered the most truthful (it makes doctors natural lead characters in TV drama series and movies). However this demographic is dying off and being replaced by baby boomer women (greater female life expectancy always tilts corporate marginal profit seeking) who respect Katie Couric's professional achievement and ability to look good at her age.

2) Support by biggest media corporations of Reagan's efforts to reduce funding for department of education (either through cheerleading it or tacit support from silence). 40 year olds watching the news on TV today were directly affected by the across the board reduction in quality of schooling. Television and newspapers thus have to use less big words and their writers are increasingly relying on baby speak, puns, and outright prepackaged talking points (Gretchen Carlson playing dumb to keep her job is one extreme example of this). Shorter attention span is not the cause but the social symptom. This directly feeds into 3)

3) MSM responding to an Australian tabloid oligarch's invasion of United States with headlong rush towards turning news into entertainment. Of course this would have happened even without the accelerating influence of Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation conglomerate. The aging of current TV demographic is permanent since mostly those remain who are unable to master the use of internet two way transmission medium. Since the audience is increasingly represented by rural senior citizens who were failed by the education drives in the 50s and 60s, the intensification of circus style hysterical entertainment as seen on the radio is inevitable in the short term. Murdoch's influence must again be mentioned however. Newstartainment ( trademarked =] ) saw a publicly visible deepening split between internationalist media oligarchs (who encourage globalization since USA is not essential to their base of operations) and nationalist media oligarchs who use their media asset influence to help out USA based heavy industry. NBC Universal can be said to be an example of a nationalist oligarch mouthpiece since it is owned by General Electric (which is reliant on selling real tangible items like engine parts to US military and government organs). News

Corporation of course is not as reliant on the well being of United States military-industrial complex so its assets like Fox News can be extra irresponsible with their newstartainment. From the financial perspective it is better strategy for GE's bottom line to support nationalist Democratic party wing of the oligarchy (since better educated/healthier peasants allow US based corps to better compete abroad). That is why MSNBC leans towards democratic millionaires and their businesses. The fact that Fox News was emulated points less to its success than to a transition of formerly US tied corporations towards a more global status. For more information on who the top 10 owners of media clusters are, here is a handy chart (warning: This is from 2002 and the industry got more consolidated and monolithic since then. Use it to get the thrust of the idea).

4) Losing ad revenue to the internet since television news (and TV programming in general) did not live up to its promise of raising human consciousness as envisioned by the first head of the FCC. The internet serves as a type of American glasnost while television serves as a way to sell state propaganda and mass produced TV drama garbage at home and abroad. That is easily recognizable. Getting young people's trust back (to keep going long term as old people die) is now almost impossible and the road of least resistance is to intensify the circus. Some young people watch the news and MTV just to laugh at how terrible it is (that still is a mild boost to ad revenue). News "anchors" themselves do not come into contact with relevant information much since their networks have actively cut recruitment of journalistic investigative talent. Since it is cheaper to analyze second hand information with talking heads than hire sufficient numbers of understimulated human explorers (and pay for their plane tickets, hotel accommodation, security, etc), news anchors come less and less into real contact with knowledgeable experts. Ridiculous cowards like Wolf Blitzer for example, do not get hits to their self esteem as much from interaction with resident stay at home talking heads than with old school journalist data fiends like Michael Ware. To be fair, as Fox News anchors show, there is a lot of self censorship and dumbing down to remain on the job.

***drum roll***

And the underlining explanation is....

National news anchors and pundits are members of the wealthiest 5% or 1% of the population.

Even if they started out poor (which is increasingly becoming unlikely as key people in the conglomerate hierarchy flood these simple job openings with their children) the long cut throat climb to the top irreparably changed them. The laughing playboys on TV are completely insulated from vast majority of the problems that Americans are facing (except of course problems of taxes on income and capital gains and regulations on financial gambling). Whether they work for Fox, CNN, MSNBC, many of them are good friends and are always on the look out to jump ship to another network to bump up their salary. People like Anderson Cooper, Lou Dobbs, Sean Hannity would never be caught dead riding a piece of third world joyride called the NYC subway.

To them life in America is great and getting better all the time. Every day is just an ego bolstering practice of either driving from luxurious suburbs or being driven to a place where people put make up on them, where they see their friends, and where they talk to some senior citizen politicians/celebrities (who are naturally as insulated). They sit down and chit chat about the problems of places like Detroit ( which for all intensive purposes is as foreign and distant as cities in Africa are). They are goofy and full of giggles not just because they are professional entertainers but because the anchors that elderly people get their "news" from are but middle aged preppy high school girls on the equivalent of a fashion show.