From newswires:

The U.S. Treasury has granted a $600,000 one-time gift to San Francisco’s Asian Week in a dramatic new extension of the federal bailout program intended to help failing media organizations.

“We are starting with a struggling low-profit, family and community based ethnic media outlet like AsianWeek because of its important role to our American life,” said Winston Gee, the newly appointed official of the Troubled Asset Relief Program for Ethnic Media  (TARPEM).  “AsianWeek is the ‘Voice of Asian America” after all. If we’re going to guarantee old GM cars, we certainly can guarantee Americans a printed form of AsianWeek on their doorstep or news rack.”

AsianWeek publisher Ted Fang said the paper would use the funds to gear up the re-start of the printed edition. And he assured the bulk of the bailout would not be used as bonuses to the likes of its star columnist Emil Guillermo ( who blogs at www.amok.com).

“That is so AIG and we are so APA,” said Fang.  “We will be responsible and are honored to have the government realize that beyond saving financial institutions, saving failing institutions of the First Amendment should be a vital part of any economic bailout in this country.”

Gee said the idea came up when the Troubled Asset Relief Program gave $600,000 to Butler Point Bank of Caitlin, Illinois on March 13.

“Someone over late night pizza in the TARP war room suggested there were more Asian Americans served by AsianWeek than Butler Point Bank,” said Gee. “One thing led to another, and we all figured AsianWeek deserved at least $600,000 for the number of people it served. Instead of making the Fangs start a bank, we decided to make this a special First Amendment award, of sorts. The clear intent is to send newsprint back out into the streets teeming with important community information.”

Gee said that the papers early endorsement of Obama had nothing to do with this treatment.  But he mentioned that some of Guillermo’s biting columns about Obama had raised some eyebrows at the oval office.  AsianWeek’s last printing was in January.

“We were also hearing from people in Congress who stopped seeing it come in the mail,” said Gee. “They didn’t want to read it online.”

Gee said that other media organizations that were more corporate, like the Tribune group, or the Hearst-owned San Francisco Chronicle, could be in line for First Amendment bailout funds. But he added  that closely held family owned ethnic papers had a better chance to get those funds.

“The Chronicle can easily become a bank that loses $50 million a year, then it can apply for TARP funds under the normal procedures,” Gee said.

I love awards that just show up, where you simply get notice for being noticed.  The best ones are like  those MacArthur Genius prizes that just arrive. You didn’t have to fill out any application, you were too busy doing what you do, trying to make a difference.

I didn’t win THAT award.

But on Friday, I was named Northern California’s “Best Blogger on Ethnic Perspectives” by the New America Media group, the premiere association of ethnic media organizations.

I’ve won my share of awards.  But all of them were like others in the journalism business. Newsrooms have editors who work full time to pimp their organization’s work, filling out applications to all the different awards committees. Even the Pulitzers have an arduous application process. It gets to the point where the awards are actual awards for the newsroom’s award marketers. The work? that was good too. But did you see that Pulitzer layout?

Considering staffing cuts, those folks probably lost their jobs.

Maybe we’ll see more awards like the NAM awards, where good work is recognized without the campaigning.

That’s why I put this New America Media award in a class above all the self-aggrandizing awards in journalism, and a few thousand dollars below that MacArthur I haven’t won.

Sandy Close did win one of those a few years back. She’s the genius behind NAM. I thank her and the judges for recognizing what I do here, and all the things I post here that have been in the printed form of my “Amok” column Asian Week.

With this award, I have now won national, regional and local awards for journalism in radio, television, newspapers,and the web.

But I consider this award the most special  because it recognizes the work in my true labor of love–the  ethnic media.  It’s what I’ve called blood journalism.

It’s the stuff that counts.

Couldn’t make it to the Society of Professional Journalists discussion  last night about saving the SF  Chronicle. I figure a blog entry would be the appropriate place to give my Rx. After all, the blogs and everything digital are what’s killing the Chronicle at internet speed. All of that has brought on the concerns of good groups like SPJ, which should be alarmed at what it all means to journalism.

To me, the question of saving the Chronicle seems to be a tad misguided.  What did the horse and buggy folks do when they saw Henry Ford gaining on them? That trade rolled over and died, and exists today only as sheer nostalgia at places like Central Park, or among those who live in the past permanently like the Amish of Intercourse, Pa.

Like it or not, the market is the arbiter and will force change. There’s little we can do to change it. Unless we take some extraordinary measures that re-positions and places value on  newspapers and their role in society.

The newspaper will no doubt will have to become like the horse and buggy–a relic of the past.  But it will be more than that if it can transition from being the first draft of history, to offering real history.  That’s the role change that’s necessary. The place for breaking news, or what passes for news for mass consumption is the net, where everything is quick and speedy and now. So you go on-line. You pick up your PDA. You go to cable. You get what you need, and then you  get back to your life.

Where do you go to watch Watergate unfold before your eyes? The newspaper.

Where else can news junkies get the real hard-hitting,  “this is what matters” stuff? That’s a nostalgic sense of the news, but it leads people back to newspapers.

Watergate could have been broken on-line had it been around. But what newspapers as institutions have are huge staffs of veteran people, an archive, and a watchdog mission. They are the churches of journalism, built on the First Amendment.  For that reason they need to stay around. Except they can’t when papers like the Chronicle claim to lose $50 million a year.

So how do we save daily newspapers?

We treat them as non-profits and not for-profit businesses.  The Catholic Churches in San Francisco save millions in taxes. They don’t need your offering on Sunday.  What if the big media owners were to spin off their properties to non-profit foundations.  Treat the newspaper business a public service.  We’d save the newspapers, help veteran writers and editors keep their jobs, and get better journalism.

Subsidizing the newspaper wouldn’t be such a bad idea.  We already have a model in broadcasting with PBS and NPR.

I admit that even non-profit newspapers and media have trouble in these tough times.   Poor management can still wreak havoc on the bottom line. But even a non-profit doesn’t deserve to be in business if it loses $50 million a year like the Chronicle.

I grew up in San Francisco and read the Chronicle because of Peanuts, Herb Caen and the Sporting Green. In high school, I delivered the Chronicle, and I was even covered by the Chronicle (I was Mayor for a Day).

I’ve written for the Chronicle (and the Gate), and have some friends who still work there.

I think the paper should survive. But only after a real shift in how we view them.

For-profit, mass circulation newspapers are dead.

The newspapers that have a chance of surviving are publicly-funded,non-profit, community focused papers dedicated to public service.

Does anyone want to be in that business?

—–

Since AsianWeek went on-line only, I blog here from time to time.  To be alerted when I post email me at:

emil@amok.com

On the whole, one must be happy for our Filipino Veterans of WWII who have been finally remembered in the new $787 billion federal stimulus bill passed by Congress.

But being remembered isn’t the same as being made whole.

Nearly 500,000 Filipino nationals who fought under the U.S. flag during World War II were promised full rights and benefits by Roosevelt in 1941. But they were denied by President Truman in 1946 when with a stroke of the pen, any and all promises made to the fighting Filipinos were rescinded.

The vets had their advocates throughout the years, but community politics was all about the Marcos dictatorship until the early ’80s. Since then, the aging veterans became the rallying cry of the community. And the word was equity–not compromise.

Every Congress, the battle would be waged. Every year the vets would be a few votes closer. But every year more vets would die. The stall/attrition tactic finds the number of eligible Filipinos down to about 15,000. Lobbying Congress has been its own death march.

To be included in the stimulus is a real breakthrough of sorts. The vets get something: A lump sum of $15,000 for those who are U.S. citizens; $9000 for non-citizens who are in the Philippines.

It’s just not like the $900 a month pension a normal low-income vet would get.

If a vet lives longer than 2 more years, then what? More money would be helpful.But in the end, it becomes something of an actuarial game. As the vets die off, the numbers decline, it finally reached a point where the vets could get something. And in this “something-is-better-than-nothing world,” we leave with what we can. What we have is not quite the money, not quite the recognition as full U.S. vets,and therefore not quite the equity we all sought.

In all my discussions with people on the inside of the negotiations, it was the best outcome for now in what had become the death march of  politics.

Why is it when there’s an Asian American man depicted in the movies, we’re either the karate guy (old school), or someone’s gay tagalong (new school)?

We’re never the normal dude who just happens to be Asian.

As a normal dude who just happens to be Asian, it struck me that we are seeing the development of a new stereotype in mainstream movies: The flamboyant Asian. Hollywood is putting the Lee back in Liberace.

At least that’s what caught my radar in two recent and very heavily promoted feature films. In the movie, “She’s Just Not That Into You,” an Asian male is cast as a buddy of an Drew Barrymore who plays an ad rep for a gay newspaper. Leonardo Nam gets lots of laughs flaming it up. He’s actually an Asian born in Argentina who moved to Australia, prior to Hollywood. He may just not be into the same kind of sensitivities that some of us have.

In the movie, “Confessions of a Shopaholic,” another gay image of an Asian, played by Yoshiro Kono, at a shopaholics anonymous group meeting. Kono plays Ryuichi who loves leather and women’s shoes. Why couldn’t he just be a guy who goes crazy at Costco?

Mind you, I’m no homophobe. I’m proud to say a television report I did on AIDS was in the “AIDS Quilt movie” as one of the first reports ever on the subject in the early ‘80s. And I love those GAPA events in San Francisco.

But the movies are image factories for all of society. When I see an Asian male on screen why does his sexuality have to come into play at all?

In the Barrymore produced movie, she doesn’t play a lesbian. But the Asian guy had to be gay? He could have been straight—like Barrymore.

In “Shopaholic,” the sexuality of the Asian guy is irrelevant too. But they make the Asian guy the new vehicle to tell the old gay jokes.

As late as the ‘90s, we see the part played up as Bronson Pinchot did in “Beverly Hills Cop.” But the part has become the double-minority quota filler for race and gender. Like the minority-female anchor in TV news, we have the minority-gay joke dispenser. In the past it’s been Latin and black, and now it’s finally in full gear cycling to us.

It’s the feminization of the Asian male. Was Bruce Lee too powerful an image to sustain for the west?

I would gladly end my mild annoyance with all this if we saw full and rich characterizations of Asian Americans in mainstream films. Or if the male lead in either of the two romantic comedies were Asian.

Of course, I am exhilarated by the Oscarous “Slumdog,” “Grand Torino,” and all the offerings at the upcoming Asian American Film Festival in San Francisco. But most of those films are independents and outside of the mainstream image factory where we still seem to be going over old ground.

The fact is, we don’t have that full richness in American films quite yet. We have Asian Americans still appearing as extras in the jury box for the court room scenes. Or walking by in scrubs in a hospital scene. That image alone is a laugh considering all the Asian and Asian Amercan doctors in the country.

So is it such a breakthrough when we are the new vehicle for the gay joke in chick films?

I’ve written my “Amok” column for 14 years.  I confess, I miss the printed edition.

If you haven’t noticed my last entry was from Washington, D.C. The inaugural high was so overwhelming. I don’t want it to wear off. But I’m afraid, reality is starting to sink back in.

But I haven’t blogged in part because I miss the printed edition.

It hit me when I attended the Chinese New Year’s Parade in San Francisco on Saturday. It was the first time in years I braved the crowds. But it was fun. And the post-parade repast I enjoyed with my family at our favorite vegetarian joint–Lucky Creation on Washington Street–was fabulous too.

And then it hit me. We walked through Chinatown, past the now empty reviewing stands. And there underneath the seats and on the sidewalk were all the faces of the well-wishing politicians and advertisers on various pieces of newsprint.  I saw the imprints of all the Chinese papers on the street, even the Guardian.

But no AsianWeek.

I miss it. Do you?

More thoughts about the inauguration speech, specifically on what it implies about race politics: It’s going to change like everything else, but with a little give and take.

Having the first African American, bi-racial president means race is always on. But never in the foreground. It’s all subtext here. Race will never lead in discussion or policy. But it will always be there.

Obama has usually used a block  phrase in speeches  that mentions everyone, e.g., blacks, Latinos, Asians…

He didn’t do that in the inaugural. But you knew we were included. The “one America” idea has been one of the dominant themes during this whole week, from the opening concert to the closing ceremonies. One America means a move away from our individual ethnic and racial distinctions and more toward the old melting pot idea.

We saw the discussion divide modernists and traditionalists on race prior to the 2000 Census when there was debate over how to define all the individual categories. What’s a “Non-white Hispanic”? How is that different from black,or African-American?  If those discussions seemed silly now, the new president is moving us away from all that and more toward seeing ourselves less in those terms, save for pure demographics. The grid lines of race have too often led to the rancorous political divisions in policy issues where race is relevant. Clearly now that old-way of thinking is on its way out.

It’s almost a necessary change considering the economic circumstances America finds itself in.  That’s why the racial factor will be an even greater one in an America of scarcity, when tough times have it.

When we are one community, it’s not about individuals. When it’s not about individuals it’s not about selfishness. It’s about the greater good, common ground. And everyone’s all right about that.

But we need something to make sure the pain and the potential gains are distributed evenly.

Equality has come. Equity has been elusive.

That’s the trouble with folks who say, “Well Asian Americans are just American,right?”

Sure, we are. That’s why many of us who remember the ’60s still continue the struggle. The job isn’t over. Sometimes the gridlines are a necessary way to make sure the public resources are distributed properly.

This will be the on-going balancing act for the administration, and the reason why race advocacy will never truly go away.  But it will change. It means the blacks will have to be less black, the brown less brown, and the yellow less yellow. How else are compromises formed?

In his benediction, the Rev. Dr. Joseph Lowery used some phrases of the past,  when he closed the ceremonies yearning for a day when black will not be asked to get in back, when brown can stick around, when yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man.

It would nice to be that mellow. As for now, the AAPI community needs to fight being satisfied with some successes and not be lulled into being too mellow for its own good.

Race politics evolves in the Obama era, but the fight continues in a good way, in coalition with others to form that one perfect America.

Washington, D.C.

It’s all brand new. Everything. The change is complete. I was there to witness the last second of Bush and the first seconds of President Barack Obama.
His inaugural speech set just the right tone for the hard work ahead. It was broad and general, yet tough without saddling us with the despairing details. It was ominous while still being optimistic.The main theme came through: We are about to embark on a comprehensive American Makeover—a kind of New Deal for a New America in politics, attitude, and style. And mainly, because we have to.

America is in trouble and we need to rebuild. There’s the hint of big bold projects that will leave a legacy and contribute to our ongoing productivity and greatness. Think WPA on steroids. But to do all that we need to pitch in, and be better people, better citizens.

In this administration, it’s required that you leave your old ways at the door.

“On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord,” Obama said. “On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.”

That means to move forward we have to get along and get over ourselves. Time to go from “me to we.”

Two other words struck me in Obama’s speech. Have you ever heard a political speech use the term “humility” so often? America, get used to a massive overhaul of values that includes putting greed and selfishness in a much lower place.

Another word that caught my ear was the term “grievances,” as used in the phrase that called for “end to the petty grievances.”

As an Asian American, I don’t think any of our grievances are petty, but we may have to be less intransigent on some issues if we’re going to move forward.

In the past, grievances have been the stuff of race politics. In the future, we may have to be much more selective in where we pick our fights. That may stick in the craw of folks who have battled over every last inch on the issue of Asian American civil rights. But it may be the price of progress for the country overall.

In some ways, it may be the beginning of the end of race politics as we know it, where our individual concerns must be folded into general ones. In his speech,  Obama talked of  immigrants in general, stressing our commonality. I suspect we’ll see more of that.

No doubt, this was an historical moment. But it was also no time for sentimental tears. Where I was, I didn’t see anyone crying. One lady told me the cold dried up her tears before they fell out of her eyes.  But there were cheers.And lots of quiet.This was a tough minded speech that really was a call to change for the good so we can roll up our sleeves and stave off impending doom on a number of fronts.

It was the right speech for the time. And the right place.

If you want to experience this new politics first hand experience what the hundreds of thousands of believers did on Tuesday.

Put yourself in a crowd. Any crowd. Then start a conversation. And hope everyone smiles and gets along. Offer help, good cheer. Like one another. Exchange more than pleasantries, but engage in real conversation about the common purpose of something bigger than yourself. Like rebuilding America.

I experienced it on Tuesday before Obama’s oathtaking. At 6 a.m., I was up early to get to the Capitol to see the speech. On my Virginia Metro train, there was a remarkable camaraderie, a sense of common purpose. No selfishness. Lots of people.

In a six foot space, I stood among 6 people. There was an African American and his African immigrant wife holding their subway map. A Latino mother who had volunteered for Obama in Indiana. She had driven ten hours with her young child the night before just to get close to the speech. Next to her was a African American woman from Louisiana. Then a Caucasian woman from New Jersey via Ohio. And me of course, your resident Asian American of Filipino descent. We were so crammed in that train beyond personal comfort. There was no reason for someone not to have lost their cool. They almost did. Most mornings they would have. But not on this morning.

Instead we all hung in and displayed a side of human nature we need to see more and more of. In a crowded train, you don’t fear falling if you know someone will help. And there’s a someone all around you.

That’s the kind of feeling that was all over Washington on Tuesday. That’s what it’s going to take if Obama’s hope and vision of America is to come true. .

Let’s hope that feeling lasts more than one day.

Washington, D.C.

It was cold, crowded and nearly unbearable. But not like the last 50 years if you’re a minority, certainly the last 8 if you are not.

Standing in a crowd of nearly 500,000 people at the Lincoln Memorial on Sunday was just a warm-up for the big day on Tuesday. But I could feel the difference in this crowd.  It wasn’t Woodstock for political junkies. This was a crowd of real Americans who came to Washington as if called. There was a certain reverence about the event, even though it was a fun made-for-TV concert. During the event, standing on the front, there was an astonishing quiet in between the acts. Have you ever heard 500,000 people standing in the cold still and quiet. With a crowd of 500,000, the size of a small city, you’d expect something to happen. But that’s the difference between this inaugural week and others I’ve attended. There’s a sense of pilgrimage, of people coming together not just to celebrate, but to begin some truly hard and significant work.

Personally,while I suppose I could have watched the events here on television and commented from afar, there is something special about being an ethnic journalist–an Asian American journalist– in this democracy witnessing the first person of color ascend to the presidency. In my 30 years in the business,  every word I’ve written, every image and sound I’ve captured in radio, TV, newspapers or on-line has contributed to what we are about to see.

I admit, I might have been especially harsh on Obama throughout the campaign. But being in the crowd I must say, I got it.

His is a new style of inclusion, not grievance. His is the new public compassion that Bush could only hint at in his first term. He failed miserably.

At the opening ceremonies here, you could feel the love and compassion as the performers from U2 to Springsteen and Seger to Beyonce came out and sang .

And this was just the warm-up for the swearing in that binds it all tomorrow.

I saw many Asian Americans in the crowd.  Some were people like a family that just came for the day from the Maryland suburbs, two kids in tow, and not particularly political, but compelled to be a part of the crowd.

But then there was the Asian American woman who I saw in a coffee shop as I made my way back from the incredible concert. Others like me were coming in from the cold ready to warm-up after being part of this happening.

She had been in the coffee shop the whole time with her computer, studying, oblivious to it all.

Which Asian American are you?

AsianWeek’s print edition may be down for the count, but this blog will be alive in D.C. next week. Obama may look like my index finger from where I’ll be placed with my press credential, but we’ll be there. I can guarantee, you will see more Asian Americans on this blog than you will on any of the national broadcast, cable and general media outlets.

That’s a shame. But that’s the truth.