New Mexico Independent: Comments by Gene Grant

Gene Grant — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:05:38 GMT

Much congrats to all involved. A great start…with even better to come!

Gene Grant — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 17:42:50 GMT

Very well done here. It absolutely amazes me no one else has found, let alone written about this. And let me just say that finding those quotes/perspectives are what separates the grown ups from the kids in news gathering.

The premise of this thesis is fascinating on a lot of levels. At the time of it’s writing I have no doubt it was right in the sweet spot on this issue. In the refraction of today’s times…and her record as a representative…it makes it more interesting still.

Wilson, as demonstrated here, has a lot of intellectual layers. But over the ten years of her Congressional tenure this has not fully come to the surface. A lot of that may be her personality and comfort zone, but there’s a part of me that feels an opportunity may have been lost by NOT getting this side of her out there earlier in the Senate push. The lost opportunity was not seating the notion that her level of intellect is, in fact, Senatorial.

Gene Grant — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 19:31:49 GMT

So wonderful to have Arthur Alpert back on the scene! This AA fan is very happy…

Gene Grant — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:02:06 GMT

Our incentives, more accurately, were not the first of it’s kind certainly. But for an important period they were/are certainly the “best” of it’s kind. But there’s a furious rush by many states to match and/or exceed.

For a clue, a Google search for “state by state filmmaking incentives,” will reveal an interesting array of states either looking at this or recently passing legislature, including Alaska. They all get it now. Or they will. NC, for example, did not pass a higher level of incentives last go ‘round and has paid a dear price. They had a lot of momentum cooking and it’s fallen off markedly.

On the other end, New York has gotten off its high horse and revamped its incentive program to much success. But the one to watch is Michigan, who decided to take a “no brainer, go for it all” approach to incentives that has produced many dividends, including a sick 40% cash rebate, among other things. BUT, much like NM a few years ago, they lack crew and soundstages, so there’s only so many who can take advantage.

Previously we were the only state (I believe) who dealt in hard cash (25%) back to prodco’s vs. tax incentives. As Sinatra said, the best revenge is cash. I think this is a trend you’ll see states adopt, but that’s a hard sell in some legislatures.

The Variety pieces reveal a softer, but equally important “incentive” about NM when they talk lifestyle, etc. No legislature in other states can write that in.

Interesting to note that as recently as May of this year, Variety did a fairly comprehensive story (http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=festivals&jump=st…) ranking the top five states and their incentives, ranking us second to Louisiana.

Regarding LA., its a rather awe inspiring story of how they came roaring back on film work following Katrina. Its rather amazing, to the point where they are well on track in ‘08 to break their record for productions in ‘07, which was a stunning success.

But overall, we’re in pretty good shape right now.

Gene Grant — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:57:24 GMT

Good catch David.

I just about gagged when he said that. What doesn’t come across in the transcript was the look on Warner’s face and her tone when she responded, “New Mexico?” Nor her lovely bit of hesitation that followed. It was a riot.

I can only imagine how many New Mexicans watching from every corner, all saying out loud, “what?!”

I know I did.

Gene Grant — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 20:09:00 GMT

The reaction to The Speech has been most interesting. I don’t know if anyone caught Tavis Smiley the last couple of nights, but there’s somewhat of a racial gulf since. meaning, for some Aftican Americans, The Speech did not do much. I experienced the same talking with some folks who had watched it under a huge tent in the Five Points area of Denver, the AA community there.

Whatever your feelings of Cornell West, he made a very strong case (as an Obama supporter, btw) that the narrative to date on Obama and race has been in essence a white narrative, or POV, if you will. Meaning, the barometer of success (or not) in speaking to this issue has wildly swamped the narrative from African Americans.

The clearest example is this notion of a white narrative driving his angle on race is that Obama cannot risk talking straight at AA issues lest he spook off white fence sitters. This is now accepted as fact.

We’ll see how this plays out. What I do know is there will be very little reporting on how this narrative is working in the AA community, which is much more nuanced than one might think on first blush, considering the 90 plus percent of support he is receiving in the AA community.

Gene Grant — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 19:12:30 GMT

Arthur! Wonderful post.

I can’t recall who said it on a chat show a couple of weeks ago, but his prediction that one of the aftermaths of this campaign season is we will look back at 2008 as “The Year Journalism Died.”

I expect this to be a rising tide of opinion as the end nears.

PLEASE stay on this. You are, to my mind, the one who can lean on this credibly.

We are yet again at one of those points in the business and for a fantastically interesting read on the idea of “objectivity,” The Columbia Journalism Review did a cover story called, “Re-thinking Objectivity,” (in ‘03!) that is a must read for news nerds. Note the second section “Tripping Toward The Truth,” on the history of how being objective has bobbed and weaved through journalistic history.

It’s a primer for what is happening now.

http://cjrarchives.org/issues/2003/4/objective-cunningham…

Gene Grant — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 05:09:27 GMT

Hmmmmm. This feels somewhat late on the draw, considering that a number of the points in her letter have been knocked down (or confirmed, with differing details) for a few days by factcheck.org (and other org’s like it), the Time cover story, the AP profile (sorry Arthur!) in the NY Times a few days ago reporting from Alaska, etc. etc. It’s fascinating that she feels no journalists have questioned anything else in her original post.

It may be, in fact, that they are not referring to her directly in their pieces, but the reporting results…depending on the issue…have been vastly different.

That said, her personal opinion on what is/was appropriate on Palin’s spending decisions etc. in Wasilla seems perfectly fine to me since she lives there and has to live with the results.

I guess my biggest issue on her letter is the oil and gas dust-up. Like all political battles, boiling them down to white hat – black hat bullet points misses the nuance. An opposite example is the story in the Wall Street Journal, “How Palin Beat Alaska’s Establishment.” It’s an extraordinary tale, full of twists and turns vs. the one paragraph on it from Ms. Kilkenny, which leaves a rather different impression.

http://online.wsj.com/article/potomac_watch.html

Gene Grant — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 23:32:05 GMT

Note that I listed other sources besides factcheck.org after it, as well as mentioning they (press) also, “have confirmed, with different details.” It certainly wasn’t about factcheck.org as a complete source disputing her point by point. They haven’t, reading their release quite carefully. I made pains to try and make that clear.

And “late to the draw,” was obviously a reference to the story, How could it possibly be about Kilkenny?