Read more about the Presentation of Our Lord.

I found this link at my friend JT’s blog Exit 78 (BTW: Jt’s blog is primarily a photo blog with some nice shots on it). This is a commercial for the Sony Bravia TV using Jose Gonzalez’s cover of a song entitled “Heartbeats” (by a Swedish group called The Knife?). This is footage of Jose Gonzalez performing “Heartbeats” live. I haven’t heard of this guy before, but I like this song. Very nice and melodic.

You can find Jose Gonzalez’s MySpace Music page here.

A few posts back, I quoted Alexander Solzhenitsyn at length on politics and the perils of having a society dominated by only the legal level of reality. I found this interesting article which highlights another part of the Soviet Russian exile’s 1978 Harvard commencement address. The writer of the article, Darryl E. Owens, makes the claim that the media is doing a lot to encroach upon our right to privacy. Here’s a sample:Once, some things were private. But today unmentionables routinely are aired on The Today Show.
But the practice seems all the more disturbing in a case like Shawn’s, yet another reminder of America’s schizophrenic mind-set.
In a day when Big Brother eavesdrops on our chats, satellites can read our tattoos, and our most private moments can earn a very public airing on the World Wide Web, we vociferously bemoan our withering privacy.At the same time, an insatiable, vaguely prurient curiosity has yanked down the veil that once cloaked private life from the searing public eye and replaced it with a clear curtain.

The “Shawn” mentioned above is the Shawn Hornbeck–the now young man who was abducted four years ago in Missouri. Owens is critical of Oprah Winfrey’s having Hornbeck and his parents on her show just days after his being rescued, asking the boy himself if he had been sexually abused. After Shawn opted not to talk about his experience, Oprah went to his parents–she “went there”–and asked if they believed Shawn had been abused.

As America hung on every word, the parents of the Missouri boy looked the Queen of All Media in the eye, slowly bobbled their heads, and answered, “Yes.”Yes, indeed. After all, wasn’t that the burning question that inquiring minds wanted to know? Isn’t it what we deserved to know?

It’s this right to know that bothers Owens, me, and Alexander Solzhentisyn. Don’t we have the right not to know, and doesn’t Shawn Hornbeck have the right not to relive a painful experience on national television. Here are Solzhenitsyns’ thoughts:

Because instant and credible information has to be given [ in the media], it becomes necessary to resort to guesswork, rumors and suppositions to fill in the voids, and none of them will ever be rectified, they will stay on in the readers’ memory. How many hasty, immature, superficial and misleading judgments are expressed every day, confusing readers, without any verification. The press can both simulate public opinion and miseducate it. Thus we may see terrorists heroized, or secret matters, pertaining to one’s nation’s defense, publicly revealed, or we may witness shameless intrusion on the privacy of well-known people under the slogan: “everyone is entitled to know everything.” But this is a false slogan, characteristic of a false era: people also have the right not to know, and it is a much more valuable one. The right not to have their divine souls stuffed with gossip, nonsense, vain talk. A person who works and leads a meaningful life does not need this excessive burdening flow of information.

One must wonder if Oprah and other journalists who are so quick to nab the story and get the scoop think of what they’re doing in these cases as “gossip, nonsense, [and/or] vain talk.” I think Oprah probably has good intentions, but you know what they say about those.