OPINION

from The Mesa Tribune - Zone 1 - 12.19.2021

by Times Media Group

GET OUT

Share Your Thoughts:

Send your letters on local issues to: pmaryniak@timespublications.com

TheMesaTribune.com | @EVTNow /EVTNow

Only in America do we fight over holiday cheer

BY DAVID LEIBOWITZ

Tribune Columnist

At the risk of being politically incorrect in the extreme, there’s an old English insult known as “the Chinese curse” – though apparently no one can actually track it back to originating in China. Anyway, the idea is, the most pleasant times in life are often dull and free of drama. So the curse goes, “May you live in interesting times.”

That we live in times more interesting than any in the last 2,000 years was driven home for me the other night when I had post-golf beers with a few friends and our gathering degenerated into hard feelings over one fellow wishing another who was about to depart, “Happy holidays.”

The guy being wished well stopped a step from the table. He made a facial expression like something was putrid.

“You mean Christmas?” He gave out a theatrical snort. “If that’s what you mean, why not say it? Merry %$*ing Christmas.”

The well-wisher looked one part astonished and one part homicidal. “You’re kidding me, right? You’re bent out of shape because I wished you happy holidays?”

What became apparent from the beery argument that ensued is that – as with everything else in our culture today – Americans appear to be entrenched in several camps over the subject of season’s greetings.

Towards the more “woke” end of the political spectrum, it’s deemed appropriate to make every effort to be inclusive. Thus, phrases like “Merry Christmas” and “Happy Hanukkah” are considered offensive, on the off-chance the person being spoken to does not celebrate the holiday in question.

Among many conservatives, meanwhile, it appears that sayings like “Merry Christmas” are a badge of honor – sort of like a “Let’s Go Brandon” for the holidays. Despite the fact that some people may be offended when you say it, you say it anyway, and you do so proudly, because saying things that offend some people apparently brands you as a member of the cool kids’ club.

Then there’s the third group of people, to which I belong. My guess is, this group comprises approximately nine out of 10 Americans with an IQ above, say, room temperature – at the North Pole. In an igloo. In mid-winter.

Members of this group don’t take pride in actively offending people, nor are we offended when people make a sincere effort to wish us a “Merry Christmas” or any other sort of good day. If the holiday in question happens to be one we don’t celebrate, we give the person credit for trying and we say something clever in response. Like, “Thanks! You too!”

We handle situations like this in stride because we prefer not to spend our time on Earth policing holiday greetings, or arguing over minutiae. Not that we’re averse to arguments, understand. But we prefer to save our fighting for

truly earth-shattering topics, like whether “Breaking Bad” was a better series than “The Sopranos” (by a smidge) or which Valley community has the worst drivers (Apache Junction during snowbird season, hands down). In our world, a phrase like “Happy Holidays,” isn’t linguistic code for anything other than a genuine wish that the recipient enjoy the time period between late November (the beginning of Hanukkah this year) and late December to early January (which includes Christmas, Kwanzaa and New Year’s). For us, being in the holiday spirit also means cutting our friends and kind strangers a little bit of slack. To recap: If we meet each other, feel free to wish me season’s greetings, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah or whatever floats your boat. When you live in interesting times, you take your merriment and wishes for happiness wherever you can find them. Because only in America are we cursed to fight over holiday cheer. ■

‘Charlie Brown Christmas’ was a TV miracle

BY JD HAYWORTH Tribune Columnist

It’s happened again, and it’s not too farfetched to call it a “Christmas miracle.”

For the 56th consecutive year, “A Charlie Brown Christmas” appeared on national television. In 2021, just as in 2020, the Public Broadcasting Service telecast the celebrated animated special without commercial interruption.

A major commercial disruption of this holiday tradition appeared imminent in October of last year. AppleTV+ acquired the exclusive rights to all media related to “Peanuts,” the comic strip that introduced Charlie Brown & Company to America. Despite a pledge by AppleTV+ to make “A Charlie Brown Christmas” and two other animated specials available “free” for viewers on the platform over a three-day period, a clamor arose in the Heartland.

Well over a quarter million people signed an online petition protesting Apple’s decision, claiming that it left “us devoted fans who have grown up with Charlie Brown and the ‘Peanuts’ gang in the dark, unable to watch.”

The criticism prompted Apple – beware the mixed fruit metaphor – to take lemons and make lemonade. That’s when the tech giant struck the deal with PBS to air the show over traditional “free TV.”

Questions and varying degrees of controversy have surrounded “A Charlie Brown Christmas” since it was literally on the drawing board. “Peanuts” Creator Charles M. Schulz teamed with Producer Lee Mendelson and Director Bill Melendez to take his characters from the newspaper comics section into prime-time TV. By the production standards for animation in the mid-1960’s, this presentation was…well, different.

Not only did it look different, with limited animated movement among the characters; it sounded different. No laugh track. A soundtrack that primarily featured the jazz piano of Vince Guaraldi, with a little Beethoven and a couple of Christmas Carols added for good measure. And the voices of the characters weren’t adults trying to sound like kids; they were children.

But the biggest difference was found in the story that Schulz devised. It did not revolve around Santa or Frosty or Rudolph; this was a Christmas story that dealt with the “reason for the season.” Charlie Brown bemoans the commercialization of the holiday; depressed and exasperated, he shouts the question, “Isn’t there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about?”

Linus answers him, effectively and movingly, by reciting from the Gospel of Luke: “For unto you is born this day in the City of David, a Savior, which is Christ the Lord.”

“That’s what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown,” he concludes.

A historical observer might conclude that this all came together seamlessly in the year 1965; that the tenor of the times was favorably disposed toward religious expression, and that the creative team was of one accord.

That wasn’t the case.

As Schulz outlined the story, Bill Melendez objected.

“You can’t put the Bible on television,” the director exclaimed.

Producer Lee Mendelson recalled the response of Charles Schulz: “If we don’t do it, who will?”

Jean Schulz, the cartoonist’s widow, explained her husband’s sense of purpose in an interview last year with “Yahoo Entertainment”: “He just loved the Bible, and thought there were just marvelous things in the Bible that were true.”

Believers and non-believers alike can

THE MESA TRIBUNE | DECEMBER 19, 2021

Companies’ competition for repairs hurts consumers

BY DIANE E. BROWN Tribune Guest Writer

Not a lot of companies inspire the brand loyalty that Apple does. After all, the maker of Macs since 1984 and iPhones since 2007 did put the world in our pockets. But while Apple generally garners accolades, one of the company’s core business practices has been rotten to consumers.

For years, Apple has monopolized product repair by withholding the parts and tools that customers and independent repair shops need to fix broken products. That’s finally changing.

Recently, Apple announced that it will begin sharing with the public more than 200 parts and tools for its products, starting with the iPhone 12 and 13 lineups and its new Macs. This program will presumably grow to include newer smartphone models and Mac computers.

This is a complete U-turn for one of America’s favorite gadget makers.

For years, Apple’s lobbyists told lawmakers that sharing access to parts, service tools, and manuals would result in safety, security, and intellectual property risks. When an iPhone’s battery died, or its screen cracked, Apple insisted that only an Apple-authorized repairperson could fix it. But independent repair specialists knew that these “concerns” were overblown. In addition to the rising chorus of people who just wanted to fix their own stuff, or choose where to have it fixed, this fall, Apple faced pressure in the boardroom. And Apple, previously defiant and combative, made an about-face, announcing newly minted support for independent repair.

To be fair, Apple is far from the only company with a history of hostility toward competition in its repair market.

John Deere won’t sell farmers the software tools they need to fix their tractors. Hospital repair technicians trying to focus on COVID-19 patient care say medical device manufacturers have created hurdles to them fixing equipment needed to save lives.

A PIRG study from earlier in 2021 found that repairing more products and using them longer would save Americans $40 billion per year, or $330 per family. And repair not only helps consumers, but repair helps prevent waste. When people find it inconvenient to fix a product, they’re more likely to give up and buy a new one – especially when it comes to continuously, incrementally updated products such as smartphones. Empowering more independent repair options would extend the lifespan of products, reducing the material drain of manufacturing, and reducing the electronic waste heading to landfills.

The right to repair issue goes far beyond phones. Arizonans want to be able to fix their products but too often run into roadblocks erected by manufacturers who want to control the repair process.

Companies should ensure that their products are built to be easy to fix – and, better yet, built to last. But if they don’t, policy makers should.

Diane E. Brown is the executive director of the Arizona Public Interest Research Group (Arizona PIRG), a statewide public

interest advocacy organization. ■

HAYWORTH from page 21

recognize this truth in the resolve of Charles M. Schulz: his insistence on incorporating scripture in “A Charlie Brown Christmas” makes that first “Peanuts” Special truly special.

The vagaries of television and the legal wrangling of powerful corporations may conspire to keep this Christmas tradition off of “free TV” next year. Whatever its fate, the message will endure.

Though he left this earthly realm two decades ago, Schulz no doubt understood these words from the Gospel of John: “The light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it.”

That’s the real “Christmas Miracle.” ■