Production Design for former President Barack Obama’s speech:
Museum of the American Revolution, and a sprig of fresh flowers on glass vases: Simple, solemn, meaningful.
For many who are on Zoom every other day since the start of the pandemic, most have become their own production designers, lighting staff, and sound technician: See the March 26 post herehttps://wp.me/p2mko-ceX
on: making sure devices and apps are updated and on checking that your background does not have too many objects in there and with only a maximum of three dominant colors — less is better.
A real room / real background is more honest than a digital, virtual one: Look-see here the production design of President Obama.
And he’s on hisfeet while delivering the speech (well, not all of us can do this). Standing up delivering a speech presents more energy than a person who’s seated, and allows full use of all movements for better emphasis.
Most of all, the speech is substantial. He starts with the origins of their Constitution, its imperfections, and how, thru “civil wars and bitter struggles” , it changed to guarantee civil liberties for everyone regardless of race, color, gender, religion, creed; and justice possibly for all …
(music credits: as stated in the embedded pod and vid)
It seems three months late though, still, the Supreme Court is expected any Tuesday now of this month to issue a ruling on the issue of whether or not the NTC can summarily shut down without any hearing, and without the minimum requirements of due process, a news media organization that is the ABS-CBN network, during the pendency of its franchise application in Congress (on a petition for certiorari and prohibition filed by ABS-CBN a week after it was summarily shut down on May 5, 2020).
The inaction of the Supreme Court until it was too late can be seen by some as perhaps a testament to its seeming indifference, at best: an inaction that allowed events to overtake the legal issues presented before it — because now the franchise had been denied by 70 committee members of Congress without any substantial showing (substantial evidence) of violations of laws as basis for “killing” the franchise (the phrase “kill the franchise” being a quote from one of the committee leaders).
In other words, the issue presented before it (the grave abuse of authority of the NTC in shutting down a news organization without due process while the franchise application is pending) had become moot and academic because the franchise had been “killed” by 70 committee members …
… unless the Supreme Court seriously takes up its judicial function and takes judicial notice of the televised public congressional hearings, and traverse the legal issues presented by the “killing” of the franchise being based not on substantial evidence of violation of laws but on the way that the news network had in the past exercised its editorial judgment — perceived by some congressmen as “biased”.
Based on its inaction for months that show its indifference, it may continue taking this road of indifference to the violation of the fundamental rights of the people, and dismiss the case for mootness without a substantive discussion of the issues raised, even for academic purposes.
Or the members of the Supreme Court can wake up one sunny Tuesday morning and decide: “Why don’t we traverse the constitutional issues once and for all and discuss whether or not Congress can deny a franchise based on no standard of evidence at all?”
Would that they could care for the time given to them when they could still make a difference.
