Portfolio

Archive for the ‘Columns and Editorials’ Category

, ,

Superheroes Getting Laid

In Columns and Editorials, Comic book journalism on October 13, 2011 at 8:04 pm

By now, everyone in the comics blogosphere is more than familiar with the controversy that arose from the recent Catwoman #1. In case you don’t know, here’s a quick and dirty synopsis: Batman sneaks into Catwoman’s room, she pounces him, he initially resists but quickly gives in, they start making out, clothes start coming off, the end.

It is then suggested that these events were leading to a sexual encounter. The four pages of story at the end of this issue seemed to get a lot of people hot and bothered, with many bloggers weighing in on what kind of role, if any, that human sexuality should play in the lives of fictional super-heroes.

“This must be what nerds think feminism looks like,” said contributor Andrew Wheeler at Bleeding Cool about the scene between Batman and Catwoman. “The scene is dressed up as female empowerment, but it’s not there for female readers.”

According to Wheeler, writer Judd Winick and artist Guillem March made a book that intended to stir up its audience by waving sex in their face throughout the issue.

What others are choosing to see as depraved, misogynist or prurient, I see as honest. This is an honest representation of how these characters might interact in real life. It’s not a pretty one, but Catwoman isn’t exactly a hero, is she? She’s a self-centered prostitute/jewel thief. Let’s not forget that.

The thing people are leaving out is that there was, in fact, context surrounding the sex. Before the sex took place, Catwoman was feeling pretty down on herself. Then Batman showed up and she jumped all over him, pushing past his attempts to stop her. With that in mind, I’d like to offer an alternative to Wheeler’s conclusion: perhaps Catwoman just enjoys getting laid after a really bad day.

Maybe Batman is just the vulnerable weirdo in her life that she takes advantage of sexually when she needs her fix. It’s not very heroic, but it’s a pretty common thing, and it makes perfect sense for these two characters. Surely Catwoman should be allowed to act that way in an effort to portray her as a well-rounded character with flaws and foibles. Furthermore, it was a new development in the relationship of the two characters, and I was intrigued to see how it would impact their lives in the future.

In Wheeler’s post, he says that the scene at the end of the issue between Batman and Catwoman reduces years of sexual tension to “drunken Halloween sex.” Here Wheeler seems to imply that sexual tension is good and acceptable between the two characters while sexual release is bad. Perhaps some people would find that more relatable, as it seems to be what our society demands of us.

His statement also assumes that Winick has no other sort of tension planned to take the place of the tension that has been removed. I mean, the situation between the two people still seems pretty awkward. After all, Batman appeared pretty takenaback by the whole thing initially. It seems like the incident was mostly raw impulse, without the characters having come to any sort of arrangement beforehand on where they stand with each other romantically. So that could potentially lead to some drama.

It’s still a sexually charged comic, to be sure, but I don’t know why that in itself is bad (it’s also a pretty violent one, but fanboys don’t mind that, only sex). I mean, for years DC Comics has had a blond female super-hero character whose sole equivalent to a traditional super-hero emblem was a hole cut out of her shirt to show her cleavage. It seems strange now to grumble about a female character for being too sexy when she’s covered from head to toe in an all black costume.

According to my issue of Catwoman, this is a T+ rated book that we’re talking about. Something intended for slightly older readers, like a PG-13 rating in a movie, so ostensibly it contains nothing worse than anything you’d see in a James Bond movie.

So, we have a T+ rated story about a woman who dresses as a leather cat and steals things when she’s not trying to get a rise out of the Caped Crusader. She’s Batman’s femme fatale, after all, but like I said earlier, she’s also a former prostitute that takes to the streets in all leather and a whip. I didn’t go into the comic expecting subtlety and nuance.

While I certainly don’t think every super-hero comic needs to brazenly illustrate the characters’ sex lives, I would like to see it not be so ridiculously taboo. I’m a sexually active guy in my mid-twenties, and sometimes I like reading about characters that have the same weaknesses and impulses that I do. I just wish my fellow readers could be as brave and honest about sex as these fictional characters are.

Originally published online by Sequart.com.

, , ,

Lying Fox attacks watchdog

In Columns and Editorials on May 16, 2010 at 11:55 am

Last Monday, the watchdog web site Wikileaks, a place built like Wikipedia where people from all over the internet can anonymously post classified information, released a video of a U.S. Army Apache helicopter gunning down unarmed Iraqis in 2007, including two journalists that worked for Reuters.

The video raised necessary questions about the Army’s rules of engagement. It also vindicated the families of the journalists who lost their fathers/husbands in that horrible miscalculation. Four days later, Fox News, ever the avatars of dissent, released a report saying that Wikileaks might have distorted the video or taken it out of context.

According to Fox’s report, a military spokesperson asserted that the full complexity of the combat operations that occurred that day were not adequately captured in the 17 minute video.

Fox also said that it’s likely that a few of the men that were fired upon in the beginning of the video were carrying weapons, although that cannot be clearly ascertained in the video. For instance, when one of the Reuters employees was walking around with his camera out, the Apache crew identified it as an AK-47.

While reading Fox’s report online, I definitely got the sense that I should be coming away from it with mistrust towards Wikileaks, and that I should doubt the video as some kind of hoax or liberal stunt to smear our military.

I’m wondering if the article was directed at people who hadn’t watched the video yet, and were waiting for Fox’s take on the tragic accident before they themselves came to a conclusion on it.

I’ve watched the video in question, and I can safely say that it is pretty explicit, and would be very difficult to distort or use out of context.

The most alarming part of the video comes after the initial group of men (who may or may not have been carrying weapons) were killed. The Reuters photographer is crawling to safety, and a van full of unarmed civilians arrives to assist him, only to be shredded to pieces by the apache’s guns.

According to Wikileaks, this lead to the deaths of several non-militant Iraqis, and the wounding of a few Iraqi children that were in the van.

I didn’t finish the video with a hatred for the American military, as I’m sure the carnival barkers at Fox would say is the agenda behind Wikileaks’ release of the information. This was obviously a terrible accident, and I’m sure things like this happen more often than we’d like to think.

I’m wondering if Fox’s scrutiny of Wikileaks comes from wanting to direct people’s attention away from the recent discovery that their own hallowed video expose of ACORN that two “citizen journalists” made last year was recently revealed to be a big hoax.

They neglected to check the facts before chastising ACORN over that video and instead of retracting their statements (which would make them look like the terrible journalists that they are) they try to make a different whistleblower look just as bad.

I think that Wikileaks did the right thing by releasing the video, and I’m appalled that Fox is attempting to shame an organization for being a watchdog.

Of course, that raises the whole debate of “who watches the watchmen,” but the answer to that question in every conceivable scenario is a very emphatic “NOT FOX.” They’ve proven themselves to only be liars and frauds.

Originally published by The Voyager for the University of West Florida.

, , ,

Intelligent political debate lead on Twitter

In Columns and Editorials on May 16, 2010 at 11:51 am

On Sunday, Congress passed Obama’s health care reform bill, much to the dismay of a bunch of grumpy, well-off jerks in the House that expect me to go broke every time I get sick.

I spent the evening chatting with people on Twitter as the voting process was carried out.

At first I was content to just read the tweets that were coming in from other people as various representatives shared their views on the bill before voting on it, but when certain representatives from the Republican party started losing their cool and turning the procedure into a circus, I felt compelled to start sharing my thoughts.

What bothered me the most was that every time a Republican approached the mic, they had to repeat ad nauseum that the American people have spoken and that they do not want such a bill to pass.

In response to this, I started a chain of tweets denouncing the generalization of a vocal minority of conservative Tea Party activists as representative of the whole of America.

Those people are jerks who yelled racist slurs at Democrats as they made their way into their offices the day before. They don’t speak for me, and they never will.

I spoke for myself when I voted for Obama, along with the majority of the people in this country, and that was a vote for health care reform.

The first response I got to these tweets were from a guy I’ve chatted with before, who was very polite in his disagreement with my views. This resulted in a civil discussion between two people with different viewpoints who were interested in learning from each other and getting a new perspective on the issue.

It was more akin to two sports fans discussing a game in which their teams were squaring off against each other (although I’d hardly consider any political party to be my “team”).

The other response I got was from a guy who immediately started flinging insults at me in a knee-jerk response to my support of the bill. It was ugly and uncalled for.

I didn’t say anything to insult people who weren’t in favor of the bill, so I didn’t think it was necessary to insult me for wanting it to pass, especially since I’m just a random person on Twitter and have no control over whether or not the thing gets passed.

All this did was convince me more that people on the other side are petty, reactionary, or at least take politics way too seriously for their own good. When I explained this to the guy, he apologized and lightened up.

From there we were able to have an intelligent conversation without devolving into childish name-calling. As the night went on, my online political conversations grew more civil as the behavior of certain members of Congress became more and more deplorable.

Perhaps our elected officials could learn a thing or two from my political exchanges on Twitter. There isn’t always a need to turn every debate into a shouting match, to turn every ideological difference into a four-letter word.

In order for this whole government thing to work, we have to be able to accept each others’ differences and work to find a common ground.

This isn’t Fox News where it’s okay to act immature and put on a big scene when talking politics. This is the United States government and people are expecting their lawmakers to act like adults.

Originally published by The Voyager for the University of West Florida.

, , , , ,

Tea party has double standards

In Columns and Editorials on May 16, 2010 at 11:47 am

Over the last 18 months or so, Tea Party activists have made a lifestyle out of traveling around America and protesting Obama’s health care overhaul.

Now that the bill has been signed, sealed and delivered, the Tea Party is probably going to need something new to protest. Don’t worry folks, I have just the thing.

Last Wednesday, a federal judge said that the Bush administration had subjected two American citizens to “unlawful electronic surveillance” in 2004. The two citizens are lawyers who were representing a Saudi charity called the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation.

The lawyers were able to provide sufficient evidence for the judge that their phone conversations were illegally eavesdropped upon by the National Security Agency without having been served a warrant.

You want to talk about government getting too big, this is some real Orwellian “Big Brother” stuff right here. Thank goodness the judge was on our side and ruled that the wiretapping was unlawful.

In light of this recent development, I think now would be a good time for citizens to stand up to our government and say that we are done sacrificing our privacy and our rights for this unconstitutional security provision, and that we want it repealed and we want the people responsible for the 2004 wiretapping scandal to stand trial. Let’s get to work, Tea Party dudes.

Oh, wait. No. I forgot — it’s OK when it’s the Republicans who do something bad. The Democrats are the ones we have to watch out for.

I mean, personally, I’d rather have health insurance than people from some big government agency listening in on my phone calls without my knowledge. It seems like that would be a bigger threat to our freedoms and constitutional rights than letting poor people visit the doctor when they get sick, but what do I know?

The whole Tea Party double standard of exclusively protesting Democrats is an amusing contradiction. For instance, everyone pretty much knows by now that the prototype for what the right refers to as “Obamacare” was the health care legislation that Mitt Romney put into effect for the state of Massachusetts in 2006.

Mitt Romney is, of course, a Republican. Why weren’t there Tea Party protests back then getting the word out that fascism and socialism were invading our wholesome American way of life?

Maybe because it was a state law, and that makes it all right because conservatives are all about states’ rights and stuff I don’t know. Or maybe it’s because the president is black. That could be it, too.

Well, I guess I’m fresh out of ideas about what the Tea Party folks should protest next, now that the health care thing is done with. I know that many of their members have told the press that they joined the party after being laid off from their jobs and they have some legitimate concerns that they want to voice to their elected officials.

I guess they can take some time away from Tea Partying to look for work and build their savings back up now that they’ve spent it all on signs and bus fare to D.C.

The more radical core of the movement, which exists on the fringes of the conservative side of the political spectrum, the people who Fox News and the GOP pander to, might just have to go back to complaining about the lyrics in rap music.

Or the blood in video games. Or that science is being taught in public schools. All of that scary stuff that is way, way worse than being illegally wiretapped by the NSA.

Originally published by The Voyager for the University of West Florida.

, , , , ,

Limbaugh out of line

In Columns and Editorials on May 16, 2010 at 11:42 am

In a recent episode of his radio talk show program, conservative shock jock Rush Limbaugh asserted that American citizens need not donate to Haiti because we have already made our donations in the form of the United States income tax.

Limbaugh also assured his listeners that our President was going to find a way to weasel his way into the hearts of ‘both the light-skinned and dark-skinned black community of this country’ by using the Haiti disaster to showcase his humanitarian side.

There is something quite sickening in the idea that someone can urge people not to help other people when they’re suffering, and then make the claim that if the President helps those people that he is being selfish and conniving.

What planet am I living on? Is this bizarro world? Is Rush Limabugh just a pasty, craggy monster engineered by Lex Luthor in a lab who, in his own inverted vernacular, is imploring people to support the Haiti relief effort and applauding the President for his response? Because if not, we are in sad shape as a country.

According to the data that I have at the time of this writing, the Haitian government is looking at having to bury between 50,000 and 100,000 humans when all is said and done. Ten times as many people are currently homeless.

Are we that sure of our own invincibility that we can take something this horrific and shrug our shoulders at it? Make a few cynical remarks about how these people don’t need help, and then change the channel?

I’m not sure what’s worse, the apathy toward the Haitian people, or the need to bring politics into the equation to justify that apathy. Lately, I feel that our country has become obsessed with politics to an unhealthy degree.

People act like Limbaugh and other media figures who constantly attack Obama are patriots who are daring to question a corrupt government and spread the truth about a man who fooled Americans into voting for him in the last election.

I suspect that this is a byproduct of leading a very dull, comfortable life and needing a fight or struggle to feel some sort of purpose. I also suspect that if we had anything close to the kinds of struggles that people currently have in Haiti, politics would be the last thing on our minds.

Obama isn’t trying to gain favor with the black community by helping the Haitian people, as though people with dark skin all over the world share some kind of common bond that excludes white-skinned people like me and Rush.

I don’t exactly see black people coming out in droves to say, ‘You go, Barack! Represent for us dark-skinned people!’ It just sounds ludicrous, and it’s diverting people’s attention from what is really important.

Whether or not you think Obama is a crappy President, it shouldn’t stop you from donating to the Haiti relief effort or from helping out in some other kind of way.

It’s bad form for a prominent media figure like Limbaugh to spin this into a political issue when so many people are in need of help. The world needs less of that right now.

Originally published by The Voyager for the University of West Florida.

, , , ,

No need to shout, student activists

In Columns and Editorials on November 7, 2009 at 8:03 pm

In recent weeks there have been demonstrations both on campus and off made by a group of UWF students attempting to persuade others to take certain political action.

Sometimes this action is directly related to events that have happened in the greater Pensacola community. Sometimes they are asking students to join their fight against the system as a whole.

I watched one of their demonstrations on campus last week and noticed that the student body seemed largely apathetic to what they were doing. Even if I am slightly sympathetic toward their viewpoint, I still have to wonder if the old tried-and-true method of taking to the streets really works anymore.

It seems like this entire decade has been filled with protests by people from one side of the political spectrum or the other trying to convert people to their point of view.

When Bush was in office we had an ever-increasing number of Americans marching on the nation’s capital and asking for the War in Iraq to end, or for the impeachment of the President. In spite of all of their hard work and planning, nothing changed.

I never heard anybody say that their minds were changed because of the angry protesters on TV. If anything, they complained that these people were getting the attention that they got.

It certainly didn’t put a dent in Bush’s morale, either. It’s the same with the Tea Party protesters (I’ll be civil here and not call them “teabaggers,” as much as it makes me chortle with glee), the abortion protesters on 9th and Creighton, or the “Bible Baptists” who condemn motorists out on Davis Highway. People don’t want to hear it.

They look the other way, drown it out with their car stereo, or even shout offensive things back at the protestors. You don’t exactly endear people to your cause by being loud and obnoxious about it in public.

In fact, you risk turning people off to it altogether. I am not saying that this group of protesting students were necessarily jerks to anybody. I’m almost certain that they weren’t. I’m just saying that they shouldn’t be surprised if people were less than receptive to their message.

As we say in mass communication, “the medium is the message,” and nowadays if your medium is a bullhorn, you’re guaranteeing that people are going to take offense to what you have to say.

For my money, things like politics and religion are just way too personal to people for you to just change their mind on it like it’s a consumer product. I think the only real way you can change their mind on such matters is by just setting a good example for your cause.

As cheesy as it sounds, everything really is inter-connected, and if you don’t want to say it like that you can say that we’re all part of the same conversation. Everything we do communicates something.

You’re communicating with people just by how you act when you pass them in the hall. If you’re a cool guy, people are going to see that and want to know what makes you so cool and maybe want to get down with what you’re doing.

Just a suggestion.

Originally published by The Voyager for the University of West Florida.

, , , ,

Socialism is now a four-letter word

In Columns and Editorials on November 7, 2009 at 7:58 pm

I hate talking about politics in this town. Being a non-conservative in Pensacola is like getting caught wearing the scarlet letter.

It sucks because whenever people want to talk about politics with me, I always wind up having to argue on the behalf of a certain ideology, even if that ideology isn’t mine.

I can’t just talk about it openly with people and share my thoughts with them.

They hear my point of view on it and immediately assign me to a label and begin arguing with me about it. And it’s funny because when they’re arguing with me, they’re actually just arguing with the label that they stamped me with.

Ever since last year’s election I’ve had people telling me that I’m a socialist because I voted for the Democrat and not the Republican.

What is this? It’s like the right has completely abolished the left wing of American politics, going so far as to say that anyone who isn’t on their side of the spectrum should be living in another country: an evil, socialist country. That’s not fair.

First of all, America actually has a socialist party, and it’s not the Democrats.

It is a legitimate third-party organization that had its own candidate for the 2008 election, Brian Moore.

Moore was on the ballot in eight states, including Florida, and had his best showing in Tennessee, a “red state!” Days before the election, Moore even went on The Colbert Report to dispel the claim that Obama was a socialist.

If I was a socialist, why did I vote for Obama and not him?

Second of all, I swing both ways. I voted for both Republicans and Democrats in the last election, and I try to decide where to cast my vote based on the issue, not on which party I favor more.

Moderates like me are the ones that decide these elections, and let me tell you something: the way that the right has been acting lately makes me want to vote for them even less than before.

All I see is this vocal minority of protesters that are always on the news trying to make the case that Obama is a Muslim, a socialist, a national socialist, a liberal democrat, a communist and an immigrant (and the Joker, which really makes no sense because the Joker was an anarchist who didn’t believe in having any kind of structure) all at the same time.

It’s like they’re going down a big list of groups that America has been at odds with and saying that he’s one of them, not one of us. He’s an outsider, an “other.” It’s textbook xenophobia, and it’s terrible.

Now granted, I don’t think all people who dislike Obama are racists, but when you see a major figure from the Tea Party movement admitting to Anderson Cooper that he thinks Obama is an “Indonesian Muslim turned welfare thug,” you can’t exactly say racism isn’t a factor.

I understand some people don’t like the idea of universal health care, but that’s not enough to justify saying disrespectful comments like that about a president that was democratically elected fair and square.

I mean, have you checked out which countries have universal health care?

All the cool ones! Even the patron saint of conservative media himself, Rupert Murdoch, hails from Australia, which not only has universal health care but also strict gun laws that have been proven to reduce crime! I mean that’s borderline hypocrisy.

The man behind FoxNews, the most jingoistic news network on TV, is not only from another country, but from a country where liberalism is proven to actually work!

Anyway, I’m going off topic. All I’m trying to say is that we need to stop throwing labels at each other.

I’m not a socialist, or a communist, or a liberal.

I’m Mike. And I believe that countries work better when people don’t go around reducing each others thoughts and feelings down to a single boring word.

Originally published by The Voyager for the University of West Florida.

, , ,

A mouse among elephants

In Columns and Editorials on November 7, 2009 at 7:10 pm

Since the start of the semester and my first column, I have received numerous compliments from people all over campus who enjoy “Vultures.” I don’t know where these people stand politically or who they voted for, but I value every one of them as readers regardless.

My column is not about soapboxing, it’s about giving everyone something interesting to read, and hopefully getting a laugh once in a while as well. That’s why even though my values usually don’t match those of some of the people in the White House, I am making sure that none of my readers feel alienated from this column.

This Monday, President George W. Bush visited Pensacola to talk up his fellow Republicans Charlie Crist and Jeff Miller before the election on Nov. 7. Despite the fact that it was meant to be a quick speech and he wouldn’t be taking any questions, I still knew that if “Dubya” was in town I’d have to catch him.

The whole presentation before Bush spoke was similar to the mood before a rock concert or something. I felt like a lot of the anticipation was in simply waiting to see a famous person. Maybe politicians are taking America’s infatuation with celebrities and using it to their advantage. I’ve talked to politicians before, I’ve worked for politicians before, and this wasn’t like going to see a politician speak. It was more like going to Times Square and waiting for Britney Spears to look down and wave from the TRL window.

The actual speech was more or less a rerun of all the other speeches he’s made for the mid-term election. Bush talked up the local Republicans, then spent most of the time assuring everyone that everything that has happened in Iraq has been on purpose and that Democrats don’t have what it takes to protect the country or properly fight a war. (That was kind of interesting coming from someone who took us to war without the foresight of an exit strategy. I’m just saying.)

Towards the end, he started to tug the WWII heart strings, bringing up how Japan had once been our enemy after attacking our base at Pearl Harbor, but is now an ally. Even though Japan has established itself as a pacifist nation after the horrific nuclear blasts that rocked its soil over a half-century ago, the word “pacifism” was gracefully left out of W’s speech.

Bush even had some jokes too. At one point I swear I heard him say that 500,000 multiplied by 4 is 2,000. But I could be wrong; I’m actually very terrible with math.

Ideas are a funny thing, aren’t they? Republicans have an idea. Democrats have an idea. Terrorists have an idea. The founding fathers had an idea. I have an idea. I also have a column to write it in. But at the end of the day, ideas are only something that pop in and out of our brain (usually while we should be thinking about something else).

Reality is what really matters. Reality is where everything is happening and where we all find ourselves once we finish thinking about all these great ideas. And in reality, we’re all human (even Bush) and we should all be cool with each other instead of inheriting the beef between two opposing political parties.

I really must admit that I’m a sucker for unity, and it was really nice seeing several thousand people in one place all very happy and optimistic.

But when you divide people in half and tell this group to be happy over here and the other to be happy elsewhere, then it isn’t really unity. In unity there is no duality, no division, and no opposition. In reality there is unity, in ideas there is division. Don’t let your ideas distract you.

Originally published by The Corsair for Pensacola Junior College.

, ,

Cheese coney contends with costumed cow

In Columns and Editorials on November 7, 2009 at 7:08 pm

Through the large screen holes in front of my face, I could see the crowd cheering for me as I stepped into the center of the makeshift arena. I was nervous, not because of the impending showdown, but because of possible health risks of attempting the rigors of combat while wearing something so hot and heavy.

My fingers pruned in the sweat that was collecting in my three-fingered over-sized cartoon glove. My legs bounced as I walked into the makeshift arena; it’s the only way to walk in shoes as large as mine. I lifted my hands into the air, provoking the crowd.

I turned to see my opponent, the giant man-sized cow, enter the arena. He was a big fucker, but the relative comfort of my costume gave me an edge. I also had the crowd on my side, a bevy of people shouting “Go Weiner!”

I couldn’t let them down. They were counting on me. I was a hot dog. And I was ready to grind some beef.

The space that served as our arena was meant for the kids from a local karate class to perform, one of many attractions at the festival for the grand opening of a branch of AmSouth Bank. I was there representing the Sonic I work at on 9th Ave. My costume was a giant cartoon representation of a Sonic Extra Long Cheese Coney. The man-cow was the mascot of Chick-Fill-A, or however you spell that place.

After I asked some of the karate kids to let me spin around one of their bo staffs for some pictures, the employees of AmSouth who were hosting the festival came up with having the two fast food mascots duke it out.

I’d like to take time here to just give you an idea of what I looked like in the costume. I practically act like a cartoon character anyway out of my own volition in my daily life. Putting on the costume and the big Mickey Mouse gloves and silly clown shoes gave me a chance to let that side of my personality take control and create a whole new character to live in.

There were no preconceived guidelines for how this giant bipedal meat byproduct walked, talked, and behaved. I created this character from scratch. I allowed my body to bob a little as I walked, and made sure to let my arms dangle and exaggerate each step I took. I spoke with a muttered, nervous shout, which developed from just the simple anxiety of being trapped in a hot musty costume and having to talk to strangers. It was this whole act, and the festival goers loved it.

Alright, back to the fight. Combat itself was tricky, especially since the Cow and I were both in ridiculous over-sized costumes and had no idea where a vital spot like the eyes, nose, or throat might be behind the masks we were pummeling. After about a minute the bank employees called out for the two of us to hug and make up, and that was the end of that.

In retrospect, there was no real victor, but we both got some good shots in that made for some really funny photos. I gave a bow and let the crowd cheer some more, then coolly went back to walking around and entertaining little kids.

Originally published by The Corsair, for my column, “Vultures on a Carousel.”

This article won me the 2007 FCCAA State Publications award for Best Humor Writing.

, , , ,

The Corsair visits Gotham City

In Columns and Editorials, Videos on November 7, 2009 at 6:13 pm


This is a video that I shot and edited myself to compliment a column I wrote for The Corsair. In the column I covered a viral marketing campaign rally for Harvey Dent, a fictional character from the recent Batman film, The Dark Knight.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.