Let’s talk about the fourth branch of the government. Wait, I can see you counting on those fingers… Executive, Legislative, Judicial… Isn’t that it? Well, officially, yes. But there is one other “branch” that was put in place as a means to inform the populous through the “freedom of the press” clause in the First Amendment. It was deemed necessary that newspapers operate without the hindrance of the government because it was felt that they were responsible for keeping an impartial (or at least unencumbered) eye on the government. With that in mind, every Sunday I get the Star Tribune on my doorstep, and I consider that to be my most important source of news.

A friend of mine once poked a little fun at me for this quaint attachment to the newspaper. After all, this is the digital age. Why have a static sheet of paper dropped on your doorstep with this dynamic content with instant access to breaking news is constantly at your fingertips? The newspaper is as dead as the trees it’s printed on, was the gist of his message, and now is the time to fire up the web browser and have your news aggregator mine the Internet for all the news that’s important to you and bring it to you from wherever in the world it is. And it’s all for free!

And that’s what the problem is. This whole new age of information via the Internet grew out of colleges and basements where everyone gave things away for free simply for the sake of intellectual growth. That was great when that was the only purpose, but there’s still this culture of free on the Internet. There’s this misconception that having the free flow of information means that it should be free in a financial sense as well. I’m guilty of it, too, as I will often go searching for a free solution to my computing needs before actually shelling out cash for something. But it’s wrong for the news and it’s only hurting us.

Let’s go back to that concept of the news being the “fourth branch” of government. Ultimately, everyone involved in the three official branches are put there by the citizens of this country, whether directly by election or indirectly by the electoral votes or by appointment by the people we elect. And while things are in place to keep things in check so that no branch is more powerful than the other, it’s a robust news media that keeps the government from becoming more powerful than the people. We need the news to tell us what those elected officials are doing, every one of them from Washington D. C. on down to your city hall, lest they do something they shouldn’t.

As an aside, of course there are plenty of other things in the newspaper that I enjoy. Stories of local interest, coverage of business, travel, arts, entertainment, it’s all there and it’s all written for a local audience. There’s the Sunday magazine, which newspapers used to do well when they had the budgets to. The Star Tribune distributes the wholly disappointing “Parade”, a thin, quick read of fluff stories and ads and is not really a step up from the equally dismal “USA Weekend” that it had replaced. I believe that the New York Times still does their own Sunday magazine, a meatier affair than the aforementioned magazines, and it’s full of thoughtful stories and is actually worth carrying in your briefcase for the week for leisure reading. I’ve looked through the archives of the Star Tribune, and they used to have their own real magazine as well. Oh, the things that we readers used to have at our fingertips.

Back to my point, though, what this all takes a lot of resources. Feet need to be on the ground, working the beats. Gathering, analyzing, and reporting the news takes a lot of people, and people need to be fed. All of those news stories that people are nabbing off Associate Press feeds for nothing? Somebody wrote that, and that somebody got a paycheck. How about the somebody that goes to the city hall meetings and follows up on the decisions they make to make sure your tax money isn’t going to waste? That person needs a paycheck, too. And while you may think that the content that you’re getting gratis is covered by advertising, keep in mind that Internet ads collect as little as a cent for every advertising dollar that would be collected for the print version. It’s no secret that newspapers are losing money on this Internet distribution deal, and the upshot is that they top brass makes staff cuts to make up for it, leaving the people left behind to stretch themselves thin and focus more on the quantity of stories that they need to put out rather than the quality. This means that, soon enough, there aren’t going to be enough journalists to adequately cover those that govern us, and the news that is put out will be rife with inaccuracy.

Big, fat, hairy deal, right? It’s the newspapers’ fault for continuing with a failing model, so there’s no skin off my teeth, right? Besides, there’s local television news, right? Wrong, wrong, and wrong. It is a big deal that our government entities could operate unchecked. You’re going to lose out on some pertinent information without these newspapers to cover things. And television news is nowhere near in-depth, what with their news staff being a mere fraction of the size of the typical newspaper newsroom, and they’re guilty of boiling down complex issues into mere sound-bites. You can help fix this, though.

Go out and buy a subscription already! Stop expecting your free AP or Reuters feeds to cover everything, get off Drudge and Fark, and pick up a newspaper. Or, if you’re intent upon being a member of the new age of digital media, pick up a virtual subscription. Newspapers nowadays provide their entire content in electronic form as well, and you can subscribe from that computer screen or eReader that you’re already getting your news off of and not have to worry about any dead trees being dropped off your doorstep. And your money will only be multiplied, as a boost in subscriptions means a boost in advertising sales as well. This leads to your local newspaper surviving to keep your local governments scrutinized, thus keeping them honest. Freedom of speech only works if people can make a living doing that speaking.

If you expect to get something for nothing, you’ll eventually just get nothing.

 Yes, I’ve heard whisperings on the wind for a while that Apple was coming out with a new tablet computer.  And, like any other impending Apple announcement, rumors was all that would be provided.  Being the patient sort, I’ve long since stopped groping for such tidbits, as I know that Apple will dish out the info when they’re good and ready.

But, being as I’m also keeping an eye on the market for a new Apple notebook since the near-death of our PowerBook (my lovely daughter being its attempted killer, the weapon being a cup of coffee), I did have my hopes up for this one.  A tablet, you say?  I was gearing up for something like this little number from HP:

What they put out was this:

It’s called an iPad.  Essentially, it’s more than an iPhone and less than a laptop.  It’s Apple’s answer to a Netbook, those pared-down notebooks with just barely enough power for you to read your e-mail.  And upon first look it seems like it’s a device that I could get into.  I’ve considered an eReader for a while, mostly for the purpose of getting my newspaper subscription without all the hassle of actually getting a paper, and I’ve often wanted something portable for just surfing the web or typing like mad during NaNoWriMo.  So, looking over the specs, I was nodding and thinking that if I had the five hundred bucks to spare I could really consider this.  It is an eReader, but it also comes with all the goodies available for an iPod Touch only in a larger format.

Also, just think of the possibilities for a nerd-boy like me!  What dorky Star Trek fan and gadget geek hasn’t pined after a PADD, those hand-held touch-screen computers that the crew carries around?  I sure would love to have one, and this iPad looks to be just that: A hand-held computing device with a touch screen.

That is, until I realized its limitations.  Mainly, it’s not even a computer.  It’s a computing device, an accessory that you need to tether to your desktop or laptop so that you can update it and sync it with the data you already have.  It’s far too much like Star Trek’s PADDs in that both aren’t really meant for using as a full-scale computer but are instead an extension of a computer (in the show, PADDs only accessed information from the ship’s central computer).  Further, it’s literally a large iPod Touch in its function, as it shares an operating system and is limited to what apps that Apple has allowed to be sold in its stores.

I need not also say that on a limited budget in a time where I would rather simplify things instead of spread my time and effort around to multiple toys, it’s something less than what I need.  I need a replacement for my computer, not an extension of it.  Here’s a formula for what I really want from Apple:

 +

That’s right, Apple! I want a REAL Mac Tablet!  Wouldn’t that be slick?  Say, a 13 inch touch screen with a real computer behind it.  Forget the twisting hinge of the HP up there, I can live with the on-screen keyboard when I’m on the go.  That sounds extremely nice and simple, a true all-in-one computing device that can run my Photoshop and InDesign and Scrivener and still be easy enough to curl up on the couch with and read an eBook.  And wouldn’t the combination of Photoshop and a touch screen just make life so much easier?  I mean, there just comes a point where you’re just using your Mac to dock your iPod, iPhone, and now iPad and keeping it tied down when what you really need is to take some of that and recombine it back into a real, fully functioning computer.

Please do this, Apple.  I promise we’ll buy an iPad to go with it, since my wife just wants one to check her e-mail.  I would prefer something with a bit more meat.

That’s also the title of a book, by the way.  It’s a fairly decent one written by a St. Paul author.  The book is actually a quick read, short and rather fast-paced, but the story is engaging and it zips along at a healthy clip.  The book isn’t exactly focusing on streetcars, but they do serve as a historical point of reference: The main character’s father is a streetcar driver at the time that the Twin Cities Rapid Transit was on the verge of dismantling the entire system.

A quick side note: I’ve seen the opinion that the biggest mistake of the removal of the streetcar lines wasn’t that it shouldn’t have happened at all, as many of the lines were unprofitable for the private company that was running them, but that some lines should have stayed.  If you take a look at the three light rail lines that we will have running in the near future, Hiawatha, Central, and Southwest, these all basically follow some of the busiest lines from the old streetcar system.  Had the streetcars been kept running on just the lines that got the heaviest use, we would be talking about just making improvements to our rail transit system today instead of trying to rebuild it from scratch.  Anyway, continuing on…

My previous post griping about cuts to mass transit in my neighborhood made mention of the Southwest light rail line.  There are three stops planned in my fair city of Hopkins.  One, the Blake Road station, is at the intersection of Blake Road and 2nd Street North and is of no consequence to this blog post.  The other two are closer to my side of town, the Downtown Hopkins station at Excelsior Boulevard and 8th Avenue South and the Shady Oak station, which is currently in the middle of an industrial area at the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard and 17th Avenue South.  Plans are in process to create an entirely new mixed use residential/commercial neighborhood around the Shady Oak station, which, incidentally, is not on Shady Oak Road or even close to Shady Oak Lake.

Of greater consequence, it seems, is that the Downtown Hopkins station is, like Shady Oak and its namesake station, not actually in downtown Hopkins.  The city already sort of shot itself in the foot with the rerouting of Excelsior Boulevard in the 1980s (1990s? I’m not sure), as the original route went straight down what is now called Main Street.  But, instead of allowing the on-street parking to be removed for the purpose of making the road two lanes in each direction, the city got the county to shift the road two blocks south to preserve the parking and pedestrian spaces downtown.  So, kudos to the city for being able to preserve the downtown area, but they’ve been scrambling to maintain a viable business district what with everyone now zipping past two blocks away.

The Southwest line will be of no help, as the Downtown Hopkins station will essentially be a quarter mile walk from downtown Hopkins.  I know that at some point the idea was floated to attempt to get the light rail to be routed much, much closer, but it was something that was apparently shot down long ago.  This light rail line has the unfortunate characteristic of many of the suburban bus routes: A focus on park-and-rides outside of Minneapolis with a goal of just getting people downtown.

The City of Hopkins is looking to rectify this with, yes, a streetcar.  The plan (PDF, page 19) to turn 8th Avenue South between Main Street and the Downtown Hopkins station into a boulevard with wide sidewalks and classic downtown-style buildings to get people to walk from the station to where the businesses are is pretty much a go, but one thing that they want to do is also provide some sort of shuttle as well.  One method, what I hope is the preferred, is a streetcar.  The idea is that people are taking the light rail because of the perception that rail transit is far superior than busses, so that’s what should be provided.

I agree, and in so many ways I want to ask: Why stop with just those three blocks?  Why not have a route that takes people up and down Main Street as well?  Why not do like the City of Minneapolis is hoping to do, as they have a plan in place to replace their high-frequency bus routes with streetcars?  Heck, why not extend a streetcar network beyond downtown and funnel people both into downtown Hopkins and to the light rail stations as well?

Yes, the initial investment in streetcars is so much more than busses.  I mean, with a bus all you have to do is buy the vehicle and send it on its merry way down the streets that already exist, right? Long-term, though, the bus just isn’t as financially attractive.  Busses have a higher replacement cost, as they need to be replaced much sooner.  The energy cost is higher, as the fossil fuels used in engines today cost more than the electricity used for streetcars.  Busses also destroy the roads much faster, as their considerable weight puts much more wear and tear on the asphalt than a car.  And the overall image of a streetcar is just that much better.  We all love those exhaust fumes, right?

About the only thing that busses have over streetcars could also be their biggest disadvantage as well.  It’s easy to just buy a bus and decide it’s going to go down a certain street.  But it’s also just as easy to take it away, as I’ve learned a couple times in just two years of living on what I had assumed was a higher-frequency mass transit line.  Streetcars have permanence.  The tracks and canternary take some effort and money to put in, so chances are that if you decide to put your home or business near the streetcar line that it’s not going to just go away any time soon.  In an age of disposability, it’s reassuring to know that something like your means of transportation will be there for you for years to come.

So, yes, I am sitting here with the improbably hope that, since the light rail line won’t be trundling down Main, a streetcar will pass close by my house someday.  And I’ll be able to hop on and head out to do my shopping or (by that point) head to work, or I’ll take it to the light rail station and head into Minneapolis.  Until then, I’ll just suck it up and ride my bus and keep on wishing until they bring the streetcars back.