The Battalion
slam
eal
r hat this is|:
a smirk-inJ
' u gh a contriv;
' s the audiej
■ matching tJ
lam ’ '
TUESDAY
[July 23, 1996
H14
O’Neal ■
•* Glaser y
ood 16
0
ayable part:
i experience ■;
ilm itself, itJ
neater canjiJ
1 musical Sk
' $120 millif
\.
half as goods
said. “He car.
.brows. Alik
oect to leave:
hout their
11-dunking a
i Lakers’ or.
s the omnir:
r of the botu
one would a
to include. 1
zaam woult
ifficulty pla;
Titers provic:
to allow sue:
They, in fan
? with a cur.
is the All-Pr
:uy into a bai
heads of th
ik him intos
m-shakalaka’
no means!
injury fo:
; movies, bu;
gold meda.
s an icon, a:
nning. Then
great game:
ely some bet
E
1 today
at a
ader
ime
hip
St.
r of
ege
[ of
on
^ve
us
ase
1-
.edu
Everyone
wins with
lottery
T'first
J- time I
played the
lottery was
four months
ago while
stranded
with a bad
alternator
on a Friday
night in
Ganado,
Texas.
I used to think the lottery
was a contemptible govern
ment-sponsored scheme that
preyed on the impoverished
of America. However, be
cause of the complete ab
sence of things to do in
Ganado, I decided to throw
moral conviction out the win
dow in favor of something to
pass the time. I took a $5 bill
out of my wallet and pur
chased five scratch-and-win
lottery tickets. I didn’t win,
but the experience led me to
reconsider the argument for
government lotteries.
Who plays these games?
The lottery does not dis
criminate on the basis of in
come; the poor want to get
rich and the rich want to get
richer. No one cares,
though, when Bill Gates
blows a few bucks.
Rather, the debate cen
ters around the indigent
head of a household with
two young mouths to feed.
Why should the government
provide a gambling game to
take his money when he
should be purchasing dia
pers and formula?
Diapers aside, the lottery
rakes in a ton of money that
contributes to the state’s Gen
eral Revenue Fund. That’s
why the government should
provide a lottery to drain the
errant father’s money.
What about the family?
Its problem isn’t really the
lottery. Someone who ne
glects the well-being of his
family for the sake of a gam
bling game doesn’t really
care much about his family.
Therefore, in the absence of
a legal betting mechanism
such as the lottery, he
would find other ways to
blow the family income. In
stead of having money di
rected to other industries,
such as alcohol, tobacco or
even black-market goods
and services (such as illicit
drugs and prostitution), why
not channel his money to
the government?
In fact, giving money to the
state is an investment for our
poor friend. Proceeds from the
lottery are devoted to five dif
ferent categories: prizes, com
missions to retailers, adminis
trative expenses, cost of prod
uct, and deposits to the Gen
eral Revenue Fund.
What is the General Rev
enue Fund? It’s an account
set up by the state of Texas
to support various govern
ment expenses such as
health and human services,
parks public safety, public
schools and prisons.
What a bargain! By play
ing the lottery instead of
buying groceries, one can
blow money and support the
schools the kids are using
and the prisons they’ll even
tually end up in because
they were neglected by their
father.
So don’t get mad when
the guy at the front of the
checkout line asks for a cou
ple of Quick Picks and his
son is wearing a worn-out
pair of shoes with holes in
the bottom of them. His fa
ther could support worse
causes, such as the tobacco
industry. But instead of
supporting an addictive,
carcinogenic drug, he made
the civic-minded decision to
give back to the community
by playing the lottery.
Instead of giving him a
scornful stare, shake his hand
and let him know that his
benevolence is appreciated.
Not everyone these days is
so thoughtful.
David Recht is a Class of
’97 civil engineering major
OPINION
Gates, NBC merger as
colorful as featherless peacock
I s the future now?
Microsoft and
NBC would have us
think so. Last week, the
new “futuristic” news
network, MSNBC,
launched itself amid a
great press explosion.
Here, at last, was the
merging of the two
greatest technological
achievements of the
century — television
and the Internet. Like
many avid Internet users, I was excited
about what the debut night of program
ming would entail. With what new and
thrilling thing would MSNBC launch the
next generation of news media?
Tom Brokaw interviewed President
Clinton. Oh boy.
Not that Clinton is a poor interview,
or people don’t care about what he has to
say. It’s just that when you hear “In-
ternight” with Tom Brokaw, you’d expect
something a little futuristic. Granted,
there’s not much you can do with a presi
dential interview to make it computer
ized or futuristic, and dressing Brokaw
and Clinton in Star Trek uniforms just
wouldn’t cut it.
Not that many people got a chance to
complain either. MSNBC is offered as a
cable channel, and in very limited areas
at best. TCA Cable doesn’t offer it here
yet, and larger markets, like the city of
Houston, don’t get access to the so-called
“future of broadcast news.”
In desperation, I decided the key to the
future of this channel must be on the In
ternet. But after visiting the MSNBC
web site (httpv/www.msnbc.com), I dis
covered nothing extraordinary.
From the site you can access text ver
sions of the top stories, a programming
guide, and links to sites related to the top
stories. Big deal. You can get that at any
news-related site. The big thing I was
looking for was a live news feed. After all,
with the freeware program Streamworks
you can access a live Internet news feed
from NBC, NBC PRO. Albeit basic, it is at
least a start on a live news program.
But MSNBC, because of its rampant
commercialization, only offers the audio
version of the Clinton interview in one
format, RealAudio. RealAudio is a pro
gram plagued with problems in accessibil
ity from various networks. If this is the
future, shouldn’t there be more of an ef
fort to be compatible with other plug-in
programs that can work for all platforms
and all processors?
MSNBC did offer an option titled “Ask
President Clinton.” I figured this would be
an online chat with the president, or at
least Brokaw would pick questions from
the list to ask Clinton during the interview.
The only thing MSNBC did with the view
er-submitted questions was to create a cute
little bar graph displaying the frequency
and type of question submitted. Oh, and a
nice “Thank you for watching” printed at
the top of the screen. It seems the “futuris
tic” network is about as cutting-edge as an
episode of “Lost in Space.” But if MSNBC
wants to find the future of news broadcast
ing, a model site to look at would be the
Bloomberg Information Service.
Once you get to the site
(httpv/www.bloomberg.com), one click
takes you to the world’s top stories, the
world’s financial markets, or whatever you
determine is important. Not only that, but
Bloomberg offers live TV news on your
computer. If your Net connection isn’t fast
enough, it offers live radio. In contrast to
MSNBC, the most amazing thing about
Bloomberg is this: It doesn’t claim to be
the future Internet news source. It claims
to be the first source for news and informa
tion. There’s a novel concept. Leave the
bragging aside, and use the technology to
live up to your claims.
Obviously, MSNBC is suffering from
an old ailment — egotism — that isn’t
rare when two big companies get together
to improve our lives. The recent media
mergers, such as Time Warner with
Turner and Disney with ABC are similar
ly overblown corporate deals. MSNBC be
lieves itself to be different just because it
uses catchy Internet terminology to pro
mote itself.
The technology is new. But what has
really happened here? A news channel
formed from the merging of two big com
panies. Except this time, it’s nothing
that new.
MSNBC is right, the future is now. Just
don’t expect it to stem from corporate
mergers that have been occurring forever.
Stephen Llano is a Class of ’97
history major
STEPHEN
LLANO
Columnist
Retail giant stonewalls on questions
e all
go
there.
Once, twice,
maybe even
three times a
week.
No, not the
Chicken.
I’m talking
about the Mec
ca of that major
world religion
known as capi
talism: Wal-Mart.
But this shrine of consumer
goods is only shiny on the surface.
What people don’t realize is
there is a giant magnet some
where in each of these oversized
stores that attracts cars from
miles away and pulls them into
the parking lot. It’s like a Death
Star tractor beam. We’re utterly
helpless against its only partially
true claims of “Made in America.”
Here in Bryan-College Station,
we not only have an expanded
Wal-Mart, but also a SuperCenter
and a Sam’s Wholesale Club. The
power to purchase garden tools,
boxer shorts and bad produce at
2:00 in the morning is ours.
We must be the luckiest con
sumers on Earth.
Or maybe not.
We’ve all heard about how
Wal-Mart invades small towns
and wipes out Mom and Pop
stores. But I wanted to know how
the retail giant affects an area
like Bryan-College Station.
I called the Chamber of Com
merce and the Better Business
Bureau to find out if any small
businesses have been forced to
close their doors as a result of the
Wal-Mart expansions in our area.
Apparently, neither organization
keeps such information. Well, OK.
So I called our local Wal-Mart
stores. Managers at each location
claimed, “It’s against Wal-Mart
policy to comment on any aspect
of operations.”
They wouldn’t reveal profits
generated by the company, pay
rates or even the number of
Wal-Mart employees in the
Twin City Microplex.
According to the managers, all
questions are handled by CEO
David Glass’ office at Wal-Mart
headquarters in Bentonville, Ark.
Of course, he was unavailable
for comment. So my call was
transferred to various public rela
tions departments and I was
eventually put on hold for 20 min
utes. Anyway, some Wal-Mart bu
reaucrat eventually promised to
send me a copy of last year’s an
nual report with sales figures and
other information for its Bryan-
College Station stores. The packet
never arrived.
So much for customer service.
Local officials were also unwill
ing to comment. They wouldn’t
even discuss how much of the
cities’ budgets are generated from
sales tax collected by the local
Wal-Marts.
“Call the state comptroller’s
office in Austin. They can tell
you everything,” a receptionist
told me.
So I did.
After dialing up the comp
troller’s office and introducing
myself, I was greeted with,
“You damn newspaper people.
...” Without elaborating, I will
only say the conversation went
downhill from there.
So what’s the deal? Why are lo
cal and state officials afraid to say
anything about Wal-Mart? And
why is Wal-Mart even afraid to
say how many people it employs?
All this secrecy is enough to
make a sensible consumer like
myself think Wal-Mart is up to no
good. Maybe the retail giant is
planning to turn all of its little
“associates” into zombies and take
over the country and eventually
the world.
Hey, it could happen.
But I’d be a liar if I said every
thing is a secret at Wal-Mart. A
local manager was willing to an
swer one of my questions.
And I’m very proud to reveal
the “Discount City” does peddle
items from the Kathy Lee Gifford
Sweatshop Collection.
Michael Heinroth is a Class of
’96 political science major
Market forces drive
NBA players' salaries
I am writing in response to
Ray Hernandez’s July 22 col
umn on “out of control” NBA
player salaries. This trend in
the NBA can easily be ex
plained with a little help from
ECON 202. Supply and de
mand drives most aspects of
our economy, and the NBA is
no exception. Owners are will
ing to fork over millions to the
players who will give them the
best chance to win; this win
ning, in turn, will lead to
greater fan support. It is this
euphoria for a quality home
town team that will lead fans
to want tickets (and other team
merchandise) at all costs. Any
businessman with half a brain
(admittedly that’s all some
owners have) will figure out he
can increase his profits by rais
ing the price of the product as
long as the consumer will still
buy it. So that’s exactly what
the owners do. They continue
to escalate ticket prices and the
fans blindly throw money at
them. Was it merely a coinci
dence that the Lakers raised
their tickets prices at The Fo
rum the same week they signed
Shaq? Not a chance.
The simple reason NBA
players (and other professional
athletes) receive such incredi
ble paychecks is because they
are specialists in their field.
These 7 ft., 300 lb. “Freaks of
Nature” can do things on a bas
ketball court that mere mortals
like you and I couldn’t even
fathom. Since they are the best
in the world at what they do
they can demand whatever the
market will allow them. Her
nandez’s article suggested that
changing the rules of the
salary cap would solve this es
calating pay scale in the NBA.
We need to look no further
than the NFL to see this isn’t
the answer. NFL player agents
(namely Leigh Steinberg) have
become so adept at circumvent
ing the rules of the cap (with
signing bonuses, incentive
! Mail
I Call
clauses, etc.) that it has made a
mockery of the system. NBA
player agents would certainly
find ways to sidestep the NBA
league office if they attempted
to put more restrictions on the
cap. These agents would do
everything in their power to
ensure their livelihood is not
disrupted, and the end result
would net the league nothing.
Brian Martin
Class of ’9 7
Rio Grande does not
form entire border
I just stumbled across
Stephen Llano’s column in the
July 16 Battalion and puzzled
over the first sentence. What
claim might California and Ari
zona have on the Rio Grande?
My maps show that it misses
them by more than a few miles.
Surely Llano doesn’t think the
Rio Grande connects the Gulf of
Mexico to the Pacific Ocean! The
Panama Canal might have been
unnecessary if that were the
case. I wonder what Mexico and
Colorado, for that matter, might
think about being left out of his
postulated battle for Rio Grande
ownership. Colorado residents
know well what it means to bat
tle over water rights. But even
accepted simply as an analogy to
bring his point home to Texans,
the fact that Ellis Island is not
shared internationally, as is the
Rio Grande, suggests that per
haps a less-entangled analogy
with which he might be more fa
miliar would have served
Llano’s purpose better. Maybe
he could have Ohio and Mon
tana fight over the Red River or
something.
Bob Jarvis
Graduate student
Editor’s note: The editor apol
ogizes profusely for not noticing
such an obvious error. He would
ordinarily catch the mistake, but
has lately been unable to concen
trate on anything but the
Olympics in Atlanta, Florida.
ri
!
I
I