Media Ethics and Steve Jobs

If you are interested at all in the subject of media ethics — from the standpoint of journalism and PR — here are two stories that are worth reading. Both involve Steve Jobs, privacy and financial disclosure and transparency.

“Health Isn’t A Personal Issue When You’re A Legend” — Joe Nocera, NYT.

“The Media’s Rotten Reporting on Apple” — Daniel Lyons, Newsweek.com.

Here’s from the article by Lyons:

The larger takeaway is what this episode says about how the media covers Apple. It’s one thing for PR flacks to tell lies. That is, after all, what they get paid to do. But it’s another thing for the media to join in on the action.

Ouch.

“Brace for Impact”

Well, I’m living in Treadmill City again this morning. Everything is frozen in Northeast Ohio. Even Firefox, apparently. Oh well. Running inside gave me another opportunity to see and hear the news reports of “the miracle on the Hudson.” It was a miracle that nobody on the plane was killed. And a miracle that the plane didn’t come down in Midtown Manhattan. Think about that for a minute.

I first heard about the crash yesterday on Twitter. And one of the subsequent tweets made the point that the outcome wasn’t a miracle — but rather a reflection of the professionalism, skills and education of the pilot and crew. Fair enough.

“Brace for Impact.” Those aren’t the words that you want to hear from the pilot. But certainly Chesley Burnett “Sully” Sullenberger knew what he was doing. He’s a pro. Credit him for the miracle on the Hudson. And maybe “Sully” is the model for what we need these days from our leaders in government, business and education. He’s a competent professional. He has experience. And he certainly appears to have a strong sense of personal integrity. Reports I saw on Twitter and elsewhere indicated that he was the last one off the plane. Going up and down the aisle at least twice to make sure the passengers and crew were safe.

Wonder how quickly the executives at National City Bank, CitiGroup, Bank of America, on and on, would have been off that plane?

Brace for impact — because leaders with personal integrity are in short supply these days. And I say again — we need to emphasize a new ethic of responsibility.

For instance. Bank of America is heading back to the federal bailout trough for another $20 billion. I’ll admit that I don’t understand what is happening with the banks. Why was Bank of America permitted to acquire Merrill Lynch — which has huge losses related in part to pathetic and arrogant former management — if the bank itself is bleeding cash? And why is it easy, apparently, to send BoA a check for $20 billion while the Detroit automakers have to basically strip naked in public for a fraction of the dollars that are going to financial institutions. Something smells here, folks. Brace for impact.

And I wish Steve Jobs well. It looks like he has some serious health issues — and I hope he gets the privacy now that he wants and argues that he deserves. But at least two questions linger. Did Jobs and Apple break the law by not being more forthcoming (honest?) about his health? If there is no legal issue here, is there an ethical one? Brace for impact.

Then we get to the really big story as we head to the weekend. The Baltimore Ravens head to the Steel City Sunday.

Brace for impact.

Tip of a Steelers’ helmet to Allison Tomei for sharing the “Ravens road kill.”

Stay warm.

Go Steelers!

George Bush: “My Bad”

Please. Don’t tell anyone. I’m going to take a nap this afternoon so I can stay awake to see George Bush’s farewell address to the nation tonight. What a hoot!  Wonder if it will be in a format and venue like American Idol? Oh well. At least by speaking at 8 p.m. he won’t preempt The Office.

And American presidents (with the exception of Tricky Dick) don’t just fade away. They like to opine before leaving office. And if it was good enough for George Washington, I guess we can’t deny George W. the opportunity. Note to W.: Washington said something about avoiding foreign entanglements. Oh well.

Actually, I am reminded of an idea I heard about a few years ago. It may have been on Saturday Night Live. Or maybe not. In any event, it was the proposal to require public officials to participate in a “swearing out” ceremony before leaving office. It would be organized something like this:

“Get the f*** out of here.”

Since we haven’t adopted that approach as yet, I guess we’re stuck with the TV address. Here’s Gail Collins, writing in The New York Times this morning, “He’s Leaving. Really”:

The White House has promised that in his final address, the president will be joined by a small group of everyday American heroes, which means that the only person on stage with a history of failing to perform well in moments of stress will be the main speaker.

Bush is going to devote some of his time to defending his record, although there has been quite a bit of that already. Over the last few weeks we have learned that he thinks the Katrina response worked out rather well except for one unfortunate photo-op, and that he regards the fact that we invaded another country on the basis of false information as a “disappointment.” Since Bush also referred to the disappointments of his White House tenure as “a minor irritant” it’s perhaps best to think of the weapons of mass destruction debacle as a pimple on the administration’s otherwise rosy complexion.

My advice to W. Don’t labor over the talk. Consider it the equivalent of a college commencement address. Keep it short and pithy. No one really pays attention to or remembers commencement addresses either.

So here is my suggested text for your remarks.

Just smile and say: “My bad.”

That should just about cover everything.

And it won’t delay the start of The Office.

Northeast Ohio and Seasonal Affective Disorder

Snow and cold don’t bother me that much. And I’ll run outside most days as long as the temperatures are in the teens — and the wind, if any, is coming from the south. Today wasn’t one of those days. First, way too cold this morning; near zero as best I can tell. Second, I don’t see well in the dark these days, and I’m getting more and more concerned about falling on the ice. Hey, once the state of Ohio sends you the Golden Buckeye you might as well face your own mortality — as well as accept the discounted movie tickets. So I chased the treadmill for 50 minutes watching the local TV news.

Something tells me that being tethered to the house is true for a lot of people — particularly, dare I say it? — seniors living in Northeast Ohio and similar parts of the country during the winter.

I thought about that yesterday. My mother-in-law is staying with us this week. She’s in her late 80s and in generally good health. But she doesn’t leave the house much, if at all, this time of year. Her days are spent pretty much anchored to the TV. Same for my mom and dad in Pittsburgh. Both afraid of falling now on the ice. My dad no longer driving. My mom shaky at best behind the wheel.

Here’s the point. I still visit or talk to my doctor routinely. As I’ve mentioned here previously, she is trying to keep me alive by having my thyroid function properly. But when I talk to her this time of year she always asks me how my spirits are. Kind of how am I making it through the winter. The reason? People with a low thyroid — one that in effect is under performing — often have symptoms that lead doctors to incorrectly diagnose and treat for depression: mood swings, weight gain, lack of enthusiasm, general malaise.

But she also tells me that during the winter here she sees a lot of people who just complain of “having the blues.” Holidays are history. Cold and snow. Gray skies. No wonder. But the fact is that this can be a symptom of depression — seasonal affective disorder. And like thyroid disease, it often goes untreated. Here’s from the Mayo Clinic online:

Like many people, you may develop cabin fever during the winter months. Or you may find yourself eating more or sleeping more when the temperature drops and darkness falls earlier. While those are common and normal reactions to the changing seasons, people with seasonal affective disorder (SAD) experience a much more serious reaction when summer shifts to fall and on to winter.

With seasonal affective disorder, fall’s short days and long nights may trigger feelings of depression, lethargy, fatigue and other problems. Don’t brush this off as simply a case of the “winter blues” that you have to tough out on your own.

Seasonal affective disorder is a type of depression, and it can severely impair your daily life. That said, treatment — which may include light box therapy — can help you successfully manage seasonal affective disorder. You don’t have to dread the dawning of each fall or winter.

So even in the depths of winter, keep active: walk, run, ski. And particularly for those you know who are more inactive during the winter, don’t discount complaints of “the winter blues.” It can be a serious health issue.

Yet always remember. We’re one day closer to spring.

And Bush will be out of the White House next week.

That should help too.

Arne Duncan — Some questions about education

It was almost balmy running this morning at 5 a.m. Must have been around 30 degrees or so. Expect that will change today as another storm approaches. Oh well. Steelers weather.

And more important than the weather is the confirmation hearing in Congress today for Arne Duncan, Obama’s choice for secretary of education. Don’t expect that the Chicago schools superintendent will have any problem getting the Senate OK. By all accounts he is a competent leader, and he represents somewhat of a compromise choice. Here’s from an article in The New York Times:

He represents a compromise choice in the debate that has divided Democrats in recent months over the proper course for public-school policy after the Bush years.

In June, rival nationwide groups of educators circulated competing educational manifestos, with one group espousing a get-tough policy based on pushing teachers and administrators harder to raise achievement, and another arguing that schools alone could not close the racial achievement gap and urging new investments in school-based health clinics and other social programs to help poor students learn.

Mr. Duncan was the only big-city superintendent to sign both manifestos.

He argued that the nation’s schools needed to be held accountable for student progress, but also needed major new investments, new talent and new teacher-training efforts.

In straddling the two camps, Mr. Duncan seemed to reflect Mr. Obama’s own impatience with what he has called “tired educational debates.”

Tired educational debates. Ouch. And yet true. We’ve been trying to reform education in this country now for more than 40 years. Has anything really changed? And if not, why not? I first became involved with the policy debate over reforming our system of public education in the early 1980s when I was at BFGoodrich. At that time, in the wake of A Nation at Risk, the business community believed that all you had to do was manage schools like businesses and we would see substantial improvements. And I was off to Washington working with the Business Roundtable, Heritage Foundation and other organizations.

But the problem was and is bigger than “business management” — touching on a whole host of issues and challenges, some in the classroom, many involving our society in general. And if we have learned nothing else during the past four decades, there are no easy answers here. Now after spending almost 10 years in the classroom and working with students at Kent State I’m back working on education issues with an advocacy group, Corporate Voices for Working Families. I remain convinced that this is the single most important issue facing this nation — even bigger than the current economic meltdown. And we’re not going to fix the economy over the long run without fixing education, K through graduate school.

So I don’t know if Arne Duncan is the right choice to head the federal education establishment. Let’s hope he is.  But in any event I’m encouraged by the attention that Obama is placing on education — and on the thoughtful debate that is taking place now in the media, in public policy organizations, in local school board meetings and, hopefully, in homes throughout the country.

Here’s an example, from Tom Friedman’s column in The New York Times Sunday, “Tax Cuts for Teachers“:

My wife teaches public school in Montgomery County, Md., where more and more teachers can’t afford to buy homes near the schools where they teach, and now have long, dirty commutes from distant suburbs. One of the smartest stimulus moves we could make would be to eliminate federal income taxes on all public schoolteachers so more talented people would choose these careers. I’d also double the salaries of all highly qualified math and science teachers, staple green cards to the diplomas of foreign students who graduate from any U.S. university in math or science — instead of subsidizing their educations and then sending them home — and offer full scholarships to needy students who want to go to a public university or community college for the next four years.

J.F.K. took us to the moon. Let B.H.O. take America back to school.

But that will take time. There’s simply no shortcut for a stimulus that stimulates minds not just salaries. “You can bail out a bank; you can’t bail out a generation,” says the great American inventor, Dean Kamen, who has designed everything from the Segway to artificial limbs. “You can print money, but you can’t print knowledge. It takes 12 years.”

And from Margaret Spellings, the current educaton secretary, writing in The Washington Post this morning, “A Word to My Successor“:

Many people believe that No Child Left Behind can be improved. I agree. In fact, constant improvement is the very point of the law. We have worked closely with states and school districts to implement it fairly and tailor it for their needs.

But I urge you to resist calls to dismantle the core accountability provisions that give the law its power to identify and help children in need. Without it, we’re back to doling out dollars and crossing our fingers.

You will need allies in this fight. And you will find them in the unique and growing nationwide coalition of reformers. These civil rights, business and community leaders understand that recovery on Wall Street and Main Street depends on reform in the classroom. They recognize, as do you and President-elect Obama, that when we raise expectations, we achieve results.

“Recovery on Wall Street and Main Street depends on reform in the classroom.” Without question.

And yet there is not going to be any reform in the classroom until we find ways to hire the best teachers; pay them in a manner that reflects the skills, training, dedication and hard work that they demonstrate each and every day; provide them with the training and support they need to succeed; support their efforts in the classroom and out; and value as a nation teaching once again as an honorable and important profession. I’m not sure that all the policy wonks really get these points. But I’m trying.

If I had the opportunity today as part of the Senate hearing I’d ask Duncan what he plans to do to help classroom teachers raise expectations and achieve results. If we can figure out the answer to that — and then stick with something that works and that receives proper funding from governments at all levels — we’ll finally make some progress in helping our young people succeed in an economy that demands workers with a whole range of new 21st-century skills.

We’re writing a lot about this now at Corporate Voices for Working Families. And — here’s a shameless promotion. Allison Tomei, a recent PRKent grad, is working with me at Corporate Voices. She just recently completed a complete update of our website. Go ahead. If you’ve read this far you have another minute to take a peek.

Go ahead — make your day

Eastwood is fantastic. A career triumph. Dust off the Oscar.

Jewell — PR on the run

There. Now I can add movie critic to my resume. And I have to admit it. I did enjoy Gran Torino, the Eastwood flick that made its way into general release over the weekend. Usually I don’t go to movies until they have been playing for several weeks (sometimes months). Too many people. It’s like being stuck for several hours in an airplane that doesn’t move an inch on the runway.

So I figured I’d take advantage of the eight-inch snowfall Saturday and head to the theater. Glad I did. And Eastwood really is at the top of his game in this one. It’s like Dirty Harry relocating to Detroit and retiring from Ford as his world comes apart. And that’s what I think is special about this movie. It easily could have turned into a parody of Eastwood’s career as an actor. It didn’t — and he emerges as a candidate for an Oscar not as a reward for a long career but for recognition of his performance.

Despite my review — this isn’t a movie that will resonate with young audiences. And it’s not politically correct. Good. So go ahead. Sneak out of work today and watch the movie. It will make your day.

And speaking of politics. Ohio’s senior senator, George Voinovich, is expected to announce today that he won’t seek reelection when his term ends in 2010. I know many Republicans don’t view Voinovich as being conservative enough. And he has taken some heat for strongly pushing the auto bailout package and other decisions.

Still, I think Voinovich is a good public official — a good leader — during terms as senator, governor and mayor of Cleveland. Governing at the conservative and liberal extremes doesn’t work in this country. So OK. Voinovich generally is in the middle — but doing, at least in my opinion — apparently what he thinks is right for his constituents and the country. Expect we would be better off  if more politicians followed that model. (Interesting perspective in a Plain Dealer Story this morning, “Sen. George Voinovich, a fiscal conservative careful on government spending, may back economic stimulus package.”

And I’ve mentioned this in previous posts.

I head to D.C. occasionally these days on business — taking a Continental shuttle from Cleveland to Reagan National. Voinovich has been on the same flight at least twice. Not sure exactly why. But I like that, and it makes me think that maybe he is just trying to put in an honest day’s work like the rest of us.

And dare I say it? The road to the Super Bowl heads through Pittsburgh — as usual. Hope my cable TV doesn’t go out again next Sunday. I managed to miss part of the third quarter — although I guess San Diego only managed to touch the ball twice. And one of those times one of the Chargers thought he was playing soccer and tried to head the ball to the end zone.  So it goes.

Pittsburgh — City of Champions

C’mon. You knew I had to write about the Steelers this weekend. The holidays are history. Weather in Northeast Ohio is terrible. So might as well just sit back Sunday with a cold Iron City and watch the Steelers as they try to grab another Super Bowl ring. Note to Browns’ fans: Steelers are running out of fingers and thumbs. You know what I mean.

But I’m really not writing today about football. I’m writing about cities, economic development and perception versus really. In the 1970s, Pittsburgh gained the title of “city of champions” — linked mostly to the good fortunes of the Steelers and Pittsburgh Pirates. And reinforced by a Sports Illustrated cover story highlighting Terry Bradshaw and Willie Stargell. But the other story and reality at that time was that Pittsburgh was just completing the first part of a long, painful economic transition — designated if you will a “renaissance” by the city fathers.

Now, with some ups and downs I’m sure during the past two decades, Pittsburgh still has a strong claim on the city of champions title. Not because of sports — but because it has transformed itself into a thriving, liveable city with a vibrant downtown and an economy that no longer relies on steel. And I believe this is reality — based on my recent visits to the city,  the conversations I’ve had with my parents and brothers (all lifelong Pittsburgh residents) and from a Plain Dealer article in November (available via the PD archives), “The Pittsburgh Plan: Five Things That Could Work Here.”

And the national news media is taking notice as well.  An article Wednesday in The New York Times — “For Pittsburgh, There’s Life After Steel” — said:

PITTSBURGH — This is what life in one American city looks like after an industrial collapse:

Unemployment is 5.5 percent, far below the national average. While housing prices sank nearly everywhere in the last year, they rose here. Wages are also up. Foreclosures are comparatively uncommon.

A generation ago, the steel industry that built Pittsburgh and still dominated its economy entered its death throes. In the early 1980s, the city was being talked about the way Detroit is now. Its very survival was in question.

Deindustrialization in Pittsburgh was a protracted and painful experience. Yet it set the stage for an economy that is the envy of many recession-plagued communities, particularly those where the automobile industry is struggling for its life.

“If people are looking for hope, it’s here,” said Sabina Deitrick, an urban studies expert at the University of Pittsburgh. “You can have a decent economy over a long period of restructuring.”

I’d like to have hope that this could happen in Cleveland and elsewhere in Northeast Ohio. Yet I don’t believe we have made the progress here in transforming and restructuring the economy and employment base that we’ve seen in Pittsburgh. That’s reality here — and no amount of advertising and public relations can alter it. Still, it’s not for lack of trying — or the work over a long period of time of many, many thoughtful, talented and committed people. See for instance the op-ed article in the Akron Beacon Journal this morning, “First lesson of bad times? Collaborate.”

So Pittsburgh remains the city of champions.

I’d love to have Cleveland challenge for that title — beyond football.

“Rahm — I need $5 billion”

Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, according to The Washington Post, left that message  recently on soon-to-be White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s phone answering machine. Couldn’t help thinking about that message — and the financial mess facing Ohio and the nation — as I was running this morning. By the way. I was messing around with Twitter (@rsjewell) at 4 a.m. and forgot to check the weather report. Wow. It was almost like winter out there.

Anyway — back to dialing for dollars. Those of us living in Ohio know only too well that we have been facing a recession for years, well before the feds got the message that the economy was fundamentially unsound. We’ve lost 100,000 manufacturing jobs in the Buckeye state last year alone — and unfortunately, it looks like things are going to get worse. A story in USAToday this morning forecasts that unemployment could get “truly gruesome,” hitting 10 percent and even more if you look at the so-called underemployed and those who just give up looking for work. Ohio isn’t going to go against that trend.

The point. Strickland is going to have to take a sharp knife and start slicing the state’s budget — even beyond the $1.9 billion already cut. From The Washington Post article:

“We’re not crying wolf. This is real,” Strickland said in an interview in his statehouse office, pointing to charts that project the most serious erosion of state income in 40 years and a two-year budget deficit of $7.3 billion. Revenue shortfalls in the upcoming two-year budget could amount to about 25 percent of the state’s discretionary spending.

And this is going to touch education and I expect just about everything else. The Akron Beacon Journal reported this morning that Kent State will lose $460,800 and the University of Akron $342,500 as part of an across-the-state reduction in support to higher education. More state funding reductions are certain to follow — with I expect at some point the resulting pressure to increase student tuition and fees.

Clearly, we are in a situation now where we need thoughtful leadership and timely, effective communication. That hasn’t always been on display in Columbus. We also need Strickland to step up and let everyone know — repeatedly — how tough things are and what the plan is for managing our way through this recession. No easy answers here either. Can’t increase revenues via tax hikes — not during a recession and not when Obama is making tax cuts the centerpiece of his stimulus plan. So prudent management and stewardship of taxpayer money is key.

And it’s a time when administrators at public universities and colleges — and school systems in general — need to manage resources wisely and recognize that there isn’t going to be any blank checks coming there way anytime soon. That’s the point I was trying to make yesterday during the post about merit pay for public school teachers. Sounds like a good idea. But realistic and doable? And I know this is symbolic — but senior administrators at all Ohio public universities, colleges and school systems should pass on pay and benefit increases.

Yet saying all that — maybe Rahm will check his voice messages and figure out a way to send Ted the needed $5 billion.

Nah, probably not.

Besides Ohio is in the bailout queue with at least one other suitor for federal funds. And one with a much higher profile — the porn industry.

CNN reported yesterday (and it was all over Twitter) that “Hustler publisher Larry Flynt and Girls Gone Wild CEO Joe Francis said Wednesday they will request that Congress allocate $5 billion for a bailout of the adult entertainment industry.”

“The take here is that everyone and their mother want to be bailed out from the banks to the big three,” said Owen Moogan, spokesman for Larry Flynt. “The porn industry has been hurt by the downturn like everyone else and they are going to ask for the $5 billion. Is it the most serious thing in the world? Is it going to make the lives of Americans better if it happens? It is not for them to determine.”

Note to gov: You’re screwed.

Teacher pay: How much is too much?

As a voter who is asked every few years or so to approve a local school levy — would you agree to pay a high school English teacher, as an example, $130,000 a year?

That issue is at the heart of the debate these days over how to best reform and improve the public school system in Washington, D.C. In that city, high-profile school chancellor, Michelle Rhee, wants the teacher’s union to waive tenure in exchange for merit pay.  This is an issue that is beginning to resonate in Northeast Ohio and throughout the country. And it’s an approach that is gaining strong support among business organizations and others that have watched nearly four decades of educational reform efforts provide little, if any, results. C’mon folks. When it comes to education we’ve been a nation at risk since before 1983.

So — reward excellent teachers. Fire the underachievers. Well, that’s a common business model. The question is whether it will work in education? (The Plain Dealer had an excellent series of articles in November that addressed these and other issues, “Good teachers are a key to student achievement, but bad ones are hard to fire.”

Here’s from a New York Times article:

Michelle Rhee, the hard-charging chancellor of the Washington public schools, thinks teacher tenure may be great for adults, those who go into teaching to get summer vacations and great health insurance, for instance. But it hurts children, she says, by making incompetent instructors harder to fire.

So Ms. Rhee has proposed spectacular raises of as much as $40,000, financed by private foundations, for teachers willing to give up tenure.

Policy makers and educators nationwide are watching to see what happens to Ms. Rhee’s bold proposal. The 4,000-member Washington Teachers’ Union has divided over whether to embrace it, with many union members calling tenure a crucial protection against arbitrary firing.

“If Michelle Rhee were to get what she is demanding,” said Allan R. Odden, a professor at the University of Wisconsin who studies teacher compensation, “it would raise eyebrows everywhere, because that would be a gargantuan change.”

And according to article:

Ms. Rhee has not proposed abolishing tenure outright. Under her proposal, each teacher would choose between two compensation plans, one called green and the other red. Pay for teachers in the green plan would rise spectacularly, nearly doubling by 2010. But they would need to give up tenure for a year, after which they would need a principal’s recommendation or face dismissal.

Teachers who choose the red plan would also get big pay increases but would lose seniority rights that allow them to bump more-junior teachers if their school closes or undergoes an overhaul. If they were not hired by another school, their only options would be early retirement, a buyout or eventual dismissal.

In an interview, Ms. Rhee said she considered tenure outmoded.

“Tenure is the holy grail of teacher unions,” she said, “but has no educational value for kids; it only benefits adults. If we can put veteran teachers who have tenure in a position where they don’t have it, that would help us to radically increase our teacher quality. And maybe other districts would try it, too.”

Now the obligatory personal disclosures. I held a nontenure-track faculty position at Kent State and remain a member of the American Association of University Professors. My wife is a career public high school teacher in Akron, a member of the Akron teacher’s union and has a contract that in effect provides tenure. My son teaches 7th grade history in a charter school in Colorado Springs; no union.

One of the reasons I included that last paragraph is that I plan on using this post as the foundation to look at a number of issues emerging these days involving education — among them teacher hiring, training and retention and how businesses can be enaged more effectively in education.  I’m not a strong believer in unions. I’m also skeptical of the ability of most administrators in education (and a lot of other areas these days) to actually manage anything professionally. But I am a strong and committed believer in the need to improve education in this country — and quickly, even though I recognize that Obama is going to have to deal with the economy and other issues before tackling this one.

In any event teacher unions — and many teachers — are not sold on Rhee’s idea. Trust me. Why? Well for starters, how do you measure the effectiveness of classroom teachers? Test scores as measured by criteria established by the No Child Left Behind Law? Maybe. Should you take into account the performance of teachers who work with the most at-risk students in the most challenging schools? Maybe. And are administrators in public school systems — most with no business or management experience or background — really qualified to evaluate the effectiveness of classroom teachers? Maybe.

And maybe voters will approve the funding via local school levies to provide teacher compensation based on merit. But that doesn’t appear to be on the front burner in Akron or other communities. In the District of Columbia foundations are willing apparently to test the idea of merit pay in exchange for giving up tenure by providing funding to the school system. That’s not going to happen in most other communities. So whenever people start pushing new plans for education reform, one of the questions has to be: “Show me the money.”

For instance, on Monday Akron school board President James Hardy told the Akron Beacon Journal that there will not be any new school levy on the ballot this year even though the school district faces a $37 million deficit in 2011. Fair enough. Difficult to pass a school levy in good economic times. Probably impossible right now.

So widespread and substantial merit increases for teachers? Well, probably not.

The board also wants contract negotiations with its unions out of the way before asking for a levy. All of the district’s labor contracts expire this year.

”We’re lucky in the sense that we do have better relationships with our bargaining units than we ever have had in the past, but it’s going to be tried and tested this year,” Hardy said.

He said talks are under way to roll over existing contracts, with the exception of provisions for health care, which might be treated separately.

”No raises, no nothing,” Hardy said. ”Everything remains flat. Keep the current contract.”

Wow. “No raises, no nothing.” So it goes.

Yet the Akron Beacon Journal opines the following day in an editorial:

James Hardy correctly assessed the priorities of the Akron Public Schools this year. The soon-to-be president of the city board of education explained to John Higgins, a Beacon Journal staff writer, that the district must put its house in order before asking voters to help with a projected deficit of $37 million in 2011. That includes closing school buildings to reflect a smaller student population, plus new labor contracts, ideally with higher pay for teachers posted in the most challenging classrooms.

“Ideally with higher pay for teachers posted in the most challenging classrooms.”

Show me the money.

And back to my original question — which will serve as the foundation for subsequent posts — would you pay a public school teacher $130,000 a year — in Akron, Washington, or elsewhere?

Steve Jobs and timely, honest disclosure

I didn’t run during the week I was in Dublin. I planned to hit the pavement at least once, most likely New Year’s Day. I was staying at the Shelbourne directly across from St. Stephen’s Green. Once around equalled about 1.25 miles. So do that four or five times. Ah, nah. Maybe it was the Guinness. Or the double Jameson before bedtime. Or the fact that they drive on the wrong side of the road. Oh, well. I’m back. And I had a great run this morning.

And I was thinking about one of the themes that I’ve written about many times here: timely, honest disclosure. I’m convinced that this is a key to restoring confidence and trust in business and government. And I’m equally convinced that it will require a renewed ethic of responsibility on the part of leaders throughout the public and private sectors to make it happen.

So I was intrigued yesterday by the disclosure from Steve Jobs that his very noticeable weight loss was due to a “hormone imbalance.” This, of course, is not a new story. Jobs several years ago was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. He now says he is cancer free. Still, the health concerns involving the CEO of Apple — and the probable link to the decline in Apple’s stock price and valuation — has been well reported and debated for months.

Joe Nocera blasted Jobs and Apple’s PR staff for not being forthcoming last July in his New York Times blog and column. I used that as an opportunity to opine as well.

So two questions. Did Jobs disclose enough? And what took him so long?

And exploring those questions could fill up a week’s worth of discussion in an ethics class. Here you clearly have what ethics guru Rushworth Kidder would define as a right versus right dilemma. On the one hand, Jobs’ right to privacy. On the other, his obligation to Apple and its shareholders.

And the law and corporate governance requirements relative to disclosure are murky. So in my mind at least it comes down to ethics — and responsibility. Here’s from a Business Week online article:

Securities laws require that publicly traded companies disclose facts that are “material,” but arguments rage over what constitutes material, Grundfest said. “Suppose Jobs were losing weight and it didn’t interfere with doing his job, but he didn’t know why he was losing weight,” he says. “What’s the board of directors to do? Say that the CEO is losing weight and it doesn’t know why?”

Strictly speaking, Jobs isn’t required to disclose much. The rules on disclosure of a key executive’s illness, while arguably material information as far as investors are concerned, are weighed against privacy laws and standards. Various CEOs have acted differently over the years. When then-Intel (INTC) CEO Andy Grove was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1995, the company didn’t immediately disclose the fact, but Grove did so the following year by writing an article for Fortune magazine about his experience combating the disease. When Warren Buffett, CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA), underwent surgery to remove benign polyps from his colon in 1997, he chose to disclose the circumstances to his investors and release details of his succession plan.

I know from experience that this is a tough call for Jobs and for his senior PR people — if they are in any way involved in the decision making. Still, I believe we have to keep prodding business and government leaders to disclosure more and more — and in a timely and honest manner. This ethic of responsibility falls to them.

By the way, as I mentioned a few weeks ago, I have a hormone imbalance. It involves my thyroid. Still not sure about Steve Jobs and his “hormone imbalance.” Oh well. It’s a start.