Erik Moe Art & Design

While reading Sunday’s New York Times Magazine feature on Gary Slutkin and the application of epidemiology to urban violence, I kept thinking of the implications for the media. As a longtime city-dweller, one of my biggest gripes with the media is the way urban violence is covered, in particular by local TV news. If the media were to treat an outbreak like Philadelphia’s upsurge in murders more like a disease or virus outbreak, what would it look like?

Coverage of traditional viral outbreaks certainly has its share of irrational fear-mongering for ratings – think about recent years’ SARS and avian flu coverage. At the same time, I feel like the media also spent quite a lot of time explaining ways to reduce exposure and prevent outbreaks from spreading. This despite the remote chances of exposure to most people.

Typical TV coverage of a violent crime shows a map of the incident (message: be afraid of that part of town) and maybe a sketch, mugshot, or security camera footage (message: be afraid of people who look like that). This limited coverage only amplifies the effects of the crime since virtually no one in the broadcast audience is at real risk of being the next victim. A very small minority of crime victims are strangers who are at the wrong place at the wrong time. Most crimes instead are responses to personal gripes. I’m not sure what kind of information might be more effective in avoiding fear and helping the public assist in containing an outbreak of violence. The Chicago program discussed in the Times article primarily uses specialists to intervene with persons directly associated with criminal incidents, but surely the media has a role in helping communities fight outbreaks of violence.

The Sunday before an election is traditionally a time when newspapers make endorsements. In that spirit, here are a few notes in support of two candidates for this coming Tuesday’s primaries and caucuses: Illinois Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic Presidential nomination and Al Franken as Senate nominee for the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party in my home state of Minnesota.

On the cold weekend morning when Sen. Obama announced his candidacy last winter, I had been living in Chicago for about four months. The widespread enthusiasm for Obama in Chicagoland seemed genuine, honest, and – despite constant fawning from media sources I tend to distrust – unmanufactured. As I worked on Chris Dodd’s campaign over the intervening year, I watched cable news dig into and tear apart every minute detail of the “top tier” candidates’ personal and political lives to justify their omnipresent “BREAKING NEWS” graphic. Amid this caustic environment, Obama has continued to turn out huge crowds and energize groups that have historically had little voice in the nominating process. His campaign has raised absurd amounts of money through small online donations, making him much more of a true “people’s candidate” than a candidate of corporations and the wealthy. His early decision to pursue community organizing in crime and poverty-ravaged neighborhoods of Chicago rather than the easy money of corporate law shows the kind of commitment to common good that should be at the core of a progressive Presidency.

Al Franken’s netroots-savvy campaign has similarly energized Minnesota progressives. Over the past several years he has done serious legwork across the state to prove that he is not a novelty candidate merely coasting on his celebrity. In his years as a comedian (sorry, “satirist”), author and radio commentator he has been a leading voice in the effort to reject the very framing of American politics: we do not live in a blue and red nation, but in a have and have-not nation – with the disparity growing rapidly. As a Minnesotan, I will be honored to have Franken take on Norm Coleman in November and add his name to the proud list of prominent progressive Minnesotans that includes Humphrey, Mondale, and Wellstone.

Chicago, I hardly knew you. I already miss your irrationally exuberant municipal elections, your lovable but flailing transit system, and of course all of your amazing food. For those keeping score at home, my departure from Chicago and my most recent extended blogging lull is due to a very sudden move to Washington, where I’ve taken the position of lead graphics and web designer at Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd’s Presidential campaign. I’m excited to be working on a team doing some innovative things on the web and to be using my design skills to fight the good fight in support of a candidate with strong progressive credentials. To get a feel for the pulse of my new day-to-day and an introduction to Chris Dodd, might I suggest our campaign blog led by my colleague Matt Browner-Hamlin. As for Washington… So far so good. I haven’t even had cause to write an angry letter to D.C.’s Senator yet. Oh wait… D.C. doesn’t have a Senator.

Roger Ebert fell ill several months before I came to Chicago, so I haven’t yet crossed paths with him in my journeys through the Chicago film scene. Still, every week it seems I hear another anecdote about how amazing and down-to-earth the guy is. With the ongoing trial of Canadian media magnate Conrad Black comes disclosure of recent emails between Ebert and Black articulately expressing the film critic’s solidarity with his less famous brethren at the Sun-Times and the newspaper guild. Last week, Ebert made his first public appearances since his illness at his Overlooked Film Festival in Urbana-Champaign. In advance of his appearance he wrote a quick column warning that he wasn’t a pretty-boy anymore, but that he didn’t want to be part of the culture of hiding illness and wasn’t going to miss his film festival for the sake of avoiding the paparazzi. Go Roger!

I’m about a decade early on this one, but it just came to mind while I was perusing the recent “Essential Chicago Lists” edition of Time Out Chicago. The issue included a list of fascinating (to design and history geeks) facts about Chicago’s flag. I’ve learned to love the municipal standard’s simple design since moving here, but somehow never asked what its four stars represented. I assumed that it must represent territory of some sort, as with the 50 U.S. stars, but it turns out that each represents an important event in Chicago’s history.

When the flag was created in 1917 there were two stars, one for the 1871 fire and one for the 1893 World’s Fair. In 1933 a star was added for Chicago’s second (and less noteworthy) World’s Fair. In 1939 a star was added to commemorate the Fort Dearborn Massacre of 1812 (well before the city was founded).

All of this means that it has been 74 years since anything star-worthy has happened here. Since half the stars are for tragedies, we can be half-thankful. At the same time, the symbolism of the stars seems to require that one be added every so often to show that the city is alive and still doing great things.

I might suggest adding a star for Sonic Youth’s recently announced performance of my favorite album of all time, “Daydream Nation,” in its entirety at this year’s Pitchfork music festival, but somehow I’m not sure the rest of the city would agree that this is as star-worthy. I can’t think of anything as potentially important to the city as the the two World’s Fairs other than an Olympics, so perhaps the ongoing bid for the 2016 games will bring with it a flag upgrade. Taking the next logical leap, in 1,000 years will there be twenty stars on the Chicago flag?

An overhaul of the Chicago Public Radio website went up today. For those of us who can’t be bothered to turn on a radio anymore but are always looking for new ways to get that old public radio fix, they’ve added no less than eight RSS feeds for different categories of local news: arts, education, business, etc. The new design is a vast improvement as well – clean, semantic, and easy to find what you want. I’d like to see a little more design around all those text blocks than just thin gray lines, but plain vanilla done well is sometimes better than Chubby Hubby. Actually, I take that back – nothing beats Chubby Hubby.

Ice cream analogies aside, this web re-launch is nicely timed timed for Chicago Public Radio to shine in the spotlight of its debut in television production. I’ve just laid hands on the first six episodes of Showtime’s This American Life series to review for About Documentaries. As a longtime TAL junkie, adjusting my critical eye for this new incarnation is tricky. First impressions are mostly very good, though. It is a little odd to see Ira Glass posing as a hipster newsman all over the press kit. Then again, he actually is the hipster newsman – so I guess there isn’t a problem. More thoughts soon over on the documentaries site…

A designer’s blog ought to touch on design now and then, and because good design makes anything better – especially coffee – here is a quick photo appreciation of the exterior. This cup from Intelligentsia has a lot going for it: a single star, a coffee cup (or is it a bean?) in aviator wings, squiggly lines. The bold, clean arched text with shadows. What’s not to like?

Intelligentsia is the reigning U.S. coffee roasting champion according to Roaster Magazine. I can’t really disagree with that decision. They are also doing plenty of fine things in pushing the “Fair Trade” concept even further.

For some reason I’m just now getting around to experimenting with Flickr. More (exciting!) images of this cup have been deposited, tagged, and cataloged there.

Today Chicagoist’s Kevin Robinson has another analysis of the heated race here in the 46th ward. Dismissing the train-wreck of embarrassingly hyperbolic online campaigning from a prolific minority on both sides, Robinson looks at last week’s debate, and criticizes both sides before essentially endorsing Shiller:

For all her faults - and there are many - we think Helen Shiller has done a pretty good job making Uptown a livable area for a community of people that might not otherwise have access to public transportation, low rent, social services, and the lake front. She hasn’t always done a good job communicating with her constituents, but she’s a great negotiator, and cares more about getting things done than talking about it, which is to her disadvantage.

I agree that openness is essential. Poor communication may well be the reason there is so much vitriol in the air. As a newcomer who’s been living and working in some far more troubled areas of Philadelphia for the past five years, Uptown Chicago looks pretty good to me, and there is active development going on. The unique issues posed by the ward’s concentration of mental illness and public assistance facilities guarantees heated debate. Robinson concludes:

We fear that the solution imposed on Uptown will be a mass exodus of the most vulnerable, sent away from social services, to be someone else’s problem. It seems to us that there is a small group of angry condo owners that are frustrated that Uptown hasn’t become the next hot North Side neighborhood. Without a comprehensive plan to do more than simply move the poor out of the ward, we’re skeptical of Cappleman and and those who support him.

Those are fighting words, but I have to admit to some of the same concerns if not the same blanket characterization of the Cappleman camp.

I don’t like what I’ve seen of the notorious political machinery here in my first Chicago election, but I don’t necessarily believe that anyone carried along by a dirty machine is completely compromised themselves. Of course, public statements advocating transparency, open government, and campaign reform would go a long way toward earning my vote and solving the problem in future elections…

PS: There is plenty more to digest in the comments section of Robinson’s post for Chicagoist. The mudslinging cuts both ways, but a quick count of the vulgarities shows a disproportionate count coming from the Cappleman camp supporters. What’s up with that? A little civility goes a long way in convincing undecided voters that your arguments are sound.

Yikes! I had no idea that Chicago’s electricity was so heavily weighted to the nuclear side until I opened up my latest ComEd bill and was greeted with this pie chart mandated by “the Electric Service Customer Choice and Rate Relief Law of 1997.” That’s the deregulation transition law that had frozen electric rates for the ten years prior to my moving here (nice timing).

I didn’t think the city was powered by magic fairy dust, but did think there would be more dirty coal and at least a little more than 1% renewable energy. ComEd is owned by Exelon, the same not-so-great company that owns Philadelphia’s PECO. In Pennsylvania they offered me an opt-in wind energy program that has seen lots of people electing to pay higher rates for renewable electricity. There seems to be no comparable program here (I think the program was mandated by the state of Pennsylvania). It’s true that anyone can go out and buy green energy credits on their own, but having the option appear on your monthly electric bill surely raises awareness and participation quite a bit. Still, green energy shouldn’t be a luxury item — it should be a mandated part of the mix for the entire system, as it is in some progressive states.

*Technically, the server that hosts this blog is in Arizona. I don’t have the breakdown for that state.

Who knew a few lines on the local aldermanic election would be this blog’s hottest topic?

Naturally, I’ll follow up with more on the 46th as time permits. Meanwhile, over the weekend I stumbled upon VoicesRising’s sad post on the state of democracy in the city of big shoulders. Paperwork technicalities have thrown three challengers off the ballot in the neighboring 48th district (which covers the area just north of me, my bank, my coffeeshop, my middle-eastern deli, my Belgian tavern, and my Swedish smorgasbord shop). The author was involved in the campaign of progressive candidate Christopher Persons, who has a full rundown of the developing situation on his campaign site. This is apparently a citywide problem. As many as 192 of the 245 candidates for alderman may be tossed off ballots based on obscure technicalities.