Think about the demands for attention in the 21st century. The clamoring cacophony, if you will.

Television viewing - broadcast, cable and satellite - gets, on average, four hours of time from each U.S. citizen daily (*). If I average a week, I’d say two hours of each day finds me in front of the TV.

The scary part is someone’s making up for me.

But, let’s not forget time in front of the computer. Forty hours per week over seven days is about five hours and forty five minutes of screen time daily for work. Often, I spend a few hours on my laptop when I get home from work (writing, research, paying bills, etc.)

That means screen time makes up almost 10 of my waking hours daily. Since I admit to surfing the Web and the TV simultaneously at times, the real attention time may prove lower.

Lower number or not, I feel somehow dirty when I think about it.

I argue that I allot my mindshare well: I make a living, run my house and try to entertain myself. TV and the Web make these tasks easy. In fact, the ease of these pursuits entices, and one often grows enwrapped.

With that in mind, I remind myself and my two readers to back away from the screen - be it television or computer. Relax. Read a book. Break out that vinyl copy of Fleetwood Mac’s Rumours, and bask in mellow with a cup of tea. Do some yoga.

But, whatever you do, come back soon to read the next post.

Thanks to Editorsweblog.com, I’m passing on the link to Der Spiegel’s Web site. The German news weekly now features English translations there.

Der Spiegel recently captured its share of Americans’ brief attention spans with the book Inside 9/11: What Really Happened. The book flows with good narrative detail. It focuses on the Hamburg cell, but also has the fullest architecture-for-laymen description I’ve found of why the towers fell.

I strongly recommend it. I read about a half dozen books on 9/11 in the fall of 2002, and Inside 9/11 was easily the best. It left a vivid impression. (The squeamish might want to skip some of the more graphic descriptions, though.)

Der Spiegel does have its critics, who say it tends toward sensational, but I trust it. Plus, I needed another good European news source.

[Ed. note: I wrote this in Sept. 2002, during a period of reflection and unemployment. It describes events leading to my rebirth as a journalist.]

“I’ve given it a lot of thought, and I don’t think I can do it anymore.” I heard myself say these words - quitting my job - and the corners of my lips tugged upward for the first time in weeks.

That was one Thursday morning in May of 2002.

Working at a software company was my first technical writing position. I came in with a bachelor’s in journalism. My editing and writing experience impressed higher-ups, and I gained responsibility quickly. I also gained responsibility as attrition eventually grasped the company. After two years, I wore several hats, from technical writer to marketer, from note taker to HTML tweaker. I still made just a bit more than I had before college, as a pizza delivery driver.

I admit my hopes were high. I was working in software, and I expected to learn and work with the cutting edge. Unfortunately, the company took a greater interest in training and supporting other more “vital” departments. Documentation, I discovered, is usually an afterthought. “Why?,” I would ask often myself. “Because they don’t know or understand what I could do for them,” was my usual justification. My reasoning felt thin, and a few years of tumbling around in this environment had worn it even more.

When my supervisor called me into his office and posited, “So, I hear you’re pretty upset over yesterday’s layoffs,” I had already thought of responses. Quitting was one of them, and I took it.

After I told him I couldn’t do “it” anymore, I told him how I felt about the company and its products. Phrases like, “financially bleeding to death,” “completely lacking in design,” and “poorly managed” flapped in the recirculating office air.

He sat there, listening patiently. “I’m sorry you feel that way,” escaped after a moment, and his extensive forehead furrowed.

Once I had laid my laundry out to dry, I went back to my desk to begin organizing my departure. Calls were made and meetings were held. Whether caught off-guard, or dragging their heels, it took management several hours to figure out what to do with me. In the end, they laid me off. I shook the hand of everyone in the building on the way out - including the president’s.

By that afternoon, the company had offered to call back an employee I had worked closely with. She had been laid off the previous day. It sounded like a fair trade to me.

I have no regrets, even though months have passed without sign of work. Unemployment is not as fun as employed people fantasize, but I’m confident that I’ll get by, and eventually find a job. The time off has helped me think. I understand now that it wasn’t that the company’s management didn’t know my potential. They knew what I could do, but had a different role for me based on their needs and budget. I also understand that, when the role you fill ceases to challenge you or spur you to excel, it’s time to move on.

Check this out. Britian’s Passport Office this week begins a trial program for personal identification cards.

Ten thousand Brits volunteered to carry cards similar to U.S. drivers licenses. The big difference: biometrics. Face measurements, iris scans or fingerprints qualify under the current trial.

A card-carrier always has the means to prove his or her identity. On the flip-side, all of that information is encoded in a magnetic strip and mounted on a card issued by the government.

The advent of this kind of identification in the United States is both inevitable and dangerous. Since the latter is scarier than the former, citizens need to make sure the implementation addresses civil liberty concerns.

For example, which kinds of information should the government collect and encode? Civil information, such as cross-border comings and goings and arrest records, seem appropriate enough. What about medical details? Financial records?

What balance of security and privacy is appropriate?

Lest readers think this is a British concern, U.S. companies have floated the idea of identification cards at least since 9/11. Typically, Americans approach it from a business standpoint - aiming to save travelers time at the airport and in other security-sensitive areas.

Whether such PIDs come as part of a government program, or through private enterprise (like Steven Brill’s VID), Americans need to ready themselves to have these discussions.

So far, so good. Thanks for the modest hits.

I’ve worked to find my writer’s voice again, and am a bit scratchy in the throat. But, since I last wrote regularly, I’ve edited several miles of copy. With any luck, my craft’s improved.

In the housekeeping department, the serial-killer-style mugshot will disappear from all pages soon. The new I’m-too-hip profile resulted from a night of mead drinking and listening to Kool Keith’s Black Elvis/Lost in Space (thanks LH).

Tonight’s link: The Complete 9/11 Timeline. In a word, comprehensive. Spend some time with it. We could all use a reminder of the roots of that event, and of our now.

Tonight’s excerpt:

I have tried at various times to show that there is really one simple principle that underlies everything: All things have outsides. You don’t know that the inside is an inside unless there is an outside. And you don’t know that an outside is an outside unless there is an inside.

Alan Watts’ Mysticism and Morality

Good morning, and thanks for reading.

Of course, there are no easy answers.

The impending attack that had the U.S. preemptively pulling personnel from Saudi Arabia happened this morning.

Bombs rocked Basra, in southern Iraq, as well, killing dozens, including school children.

The war on terror seems out of control. At least it does from this side of the media machine.

How does it look from the other side?

The blog Baghdad Burning offers this insight:

I hate American foreign policy and its constant meddling in the region … I hate American tanks in Baghdad and American soldiers on our streets and in our homes on occasion … why does that mean that I hate America and Americans? Are tanks, troops and violence the only face of America? If the Pentagon, Department of Defense and Condi are “America”, then yes - I hate America.

Hopefully, a prolonged U.S. involvment with Iraq won’t convince all Iraqis that the Pentagon, DOD and Condi are our best goodwill ambassadors. Love the sinner; hate the sin.

I recently bought software to help me learn Spanish. I’m not delusional; I know it’ll only teach me the basics. Any comprehension I had from high school courses wore off in the dozen or so ensuing years, so this can refresh those stale concepts hiding in the back of my head.

Still, the digital course has already taught me valuable phrases I can use in everyday life. Por ejemplo:

Esta de moda en los Estados Unidos. Mira que bien me queda.

Roughly translated: It’s all the rage in the U.S. See how good it looks on me.

I’m excited. Expanding my paradigm engages me. I may even try my hand at a post or two in Spanish. Stay tuned.

Shocking admission: I’ve downloaded copyrighted music.

Well, I don’t anymore, but have in the past. But, let’s get this straight, the music industry lost me long before CDs cost $18 in a mall. More on that later.

I set out with this post to find definitive numbers showing what I feel to be true: The music industry has lost its buyer base because that base no longer finds a good return on its investment.

I couldn’t do it.

I was inspired by this article, by Felix Oberholzer of Harvard Business School and Koleman Strumpf of UNC Chapel Hill. Their recent work compared U.S. file sharing traffic records to music sales. Their finding: “Even in the most pessimistic specification, five thousand downloads are needed to displace a single album sale.”

So, if Oberholzer and Strumpf are correct, one million people downloading an album might cost a record company 200 unit sales.

Knowing statistics to lie sometimes, I checked around a bit. The Recording Industry Association of America had their own numbers. The paper, titled “CDs: A Better Value than Ever,” reads as if bought and paid for by the RIAA. I had trouble following some of their logic as well.

At the same time, people flaming the industry as greedy find their own statistics. I’m not sure if the numbers on this site bear more credence than those of the RIAA, but their presentation at least makes sense.

The best I can make of these numbers is that, yes, illegal downloading has affected music sales. The affect, however, has been statistically small for unit sales while overall sales have grown dramatically — for a few lucky titles.

Now, back to where the industry lost this lamb. Oberholzer and Strumpf list among their “plausible candidates” for declining sales: “a reduction in music variety stemming from the large consolidation in radio along with the rise of independent promoter fees to gain airplay, and possibly a consumer backlash against record industry tactics.”

I’ve always spent a good portion of my disposable income on music. In that respect, I consider myself one of the consumers the industry should have in its sights. Yet, I feel the industry spends a disproportionate amount of time chasing 14-year-olds.

That means that I have to spend more of my time finding music that pleases my ear. Good artists are hard to find, and consumers often have to overcome a massive marketing deficit to find them.

Bypassing that gap, many artists now market directly to their fans. Rap artists such as Public Enemy and Souls of Mischief are really good at self-promotion. They provide possible models for the future of music distribution. Apple’s iTunes Music Store, the resurrected Napster and similar services offer another (Ed. note: I currently own Apple stock).

One thing is certain, though, music distribution is changing. Rapidly. And the RIAA and consumers need to ready for the change.

The last few days have, as is tradition, been aflutter with tax-time stories. It’s almost as if the press think Americans will forget to pay taxes absent this annual barrage.

I, for one, don’t really mind paying taxes. Of course, when Uncle Sam cashes my check, it hurts. But then I keep thinking, this interstate highway system is pretty nifty, isn’t it?

The context I wanted to offer is this: The successful collection and redistribution of taxes help separate the U.S. from developing countries. A strong, but limited, federal government gives us the framework in which we generate wealth. America seems particularly adept at this, in comparison to other countries.

Note this article by the BBC. One third of Brazilians live on less than $1 a day. “Less than a cup of coffee,” as Sally Struthers used to say.

The article also includes this item: Brazil has a higher income per head than China, India and almost all of sub-Saharan Africa. If the reporting is right, by my estimate, that’s about 3 billion people living each month on what I spend casually at Starbucks.

Whether Lula de Silva is succeeding in Brazil is a matter of controversy. But, I think he has the vision to succeed.

“It is time to call peace by its true name: social justice,” he told the 58th U.N. General Assembly.

He understands the wealth discrepancies felt as hunger pains in South America, Africa and other regions. Many of these areas lack the framework for enterprise — the spirit of which drives the U.S.

Taxpayers need to remember that taxes help make this land of privilege possible.

Of course, critiques of the government’s priorities with taxpayers’ cash are an entirely different matter.

I don’t mean to play the alarmist, but shouldn’t we be alarmed?

As far as I can tell or recall, our Homeland Security Advisory System hasn’t nudged from yellow in months (at least weeks). Does everyone still feel elevated?

This morning, I see this. The State Department has asked non-essential U.S. citizens to leave the Kingdom of Saud. The nut graph: “The U.S. Government has received recent and credible information indicating that extremists are planning further attacks against U.S. and Western interests.”

I know, Saudi Arabia is never the safest place for a U.S. citizen. Still, tensions have escalated across the board. Spain saw its own tragedy. Iraq’s in a handbasket. (Though I agree with Whatever that it’s not quite the quagmire Vietnam was.) Our president just offered a major concession to Israel, further enraging or alienating the millions of Palestinians and those sympathetic to them. Osama bin Laden’s still living large, and getting great press.

Still feeling yellow?

Kind of makes you wonder what “U.S. and Western interests” means. Does the “chatter” all focus on Europe and the Mideast? I doubt it.

We can have 9/11 hearings until we’re blue, but the fundamental question is, are we safer? The support for a “no” answer seems to grow by the day.