Encyclopedias have been around for about 2,000 years, but good luck trying to find a printed edition now. How could something that was so common for generations be essentially non-existent now? As paid-subscription newspaper publishers discovered, selling content for a fee can be difficult when you give most of it away on the internet for free. 

For the younger readers of this newsletter, encyclopedias were like the internet in print — only more accurate. They were valued sources of information from the experts of the day. The printed and bound versions were found in libraries, schools and other educational institutions. They were also found in many homes. 

The encyclopedia salesman was commonly seen walking door to door and selling the benefits of having a full set of these reference materials in your house. At its peak, industry leader Encyclopedia Britannica had about 2,300 employees in the United States and Canada. I remember seeing these well-trained salesmen in our neighborhood as a child. And, yes, I say “salesmen,” as I don’t recall ever seeing females in this profession at the time. 

I asked our office staff if they had encyclopedias in their childhood homes. Those who are 40 or older smiled and nodded. Those 40 or younger looked puzzled. One said she thought they might have had CD-ROMS. 

My mother bought an off-brand used set of encyclopedias for our family in the late 1970s. They were miniature-sized but were still quite helpful with classroom assignments and to settle an occasional argument of facts. Unlike information from the internet, this data was indisputable. 

Prior to the internet, research projects required the use of encyclopedias. I worked at the library during my freshman year in college, and I was amazed how many encyclopedias had pages torn out of them and how many students would become frustrated because they needed that information. The librarians I knew were even-keeled, but this would get them steaming. 

Encyclopedia Britannica quit publishing print editions in 1996. After 244 years, the company decided to go digital. The salesmen were laid off, and the multi-volume sets ended. At the time, the remaining 32-volume editions were retailing for $1,395. Today, an online subscription is $74.95 annually or $8.99 per month. 

You can pay those fees, or, like most people do today, you can roll the dice on the internet for free. 

Have a fantastic Friday, and thanks for reading. 

Shane Goodman
Editor and Publisher
Times Vedette digital editions
shane@gctimesnews.com
641-332-2707

My now-predictable comment when I see people older than me on their smart phones is to say to them, “Damn kids and their phones.” It usually prompts a chuckle. Usually.

The truth is that older generations are spending more time on their phones than ever before. Web surfing. Checking email. Texting. And using social media, among other activities. 

Most of them resisted early on, chastising the “kids” who were seemingly glued to their phones 24/7. But this addiction has spread beyond any specific age group. That’s what addictions do. Drinking. Smoking. Drug use. Gambling. None of those are specific to a single generation. 

Older generations have been gradually introduced to the addictions of smart phones. Younger generations have not known a life without them and even had their parents taking their photos with smart phones from day one. 

That may sound concerning to some of you, at least until you realize that many of us spent more time in front of a television than in front of our parents. I have not known a life without a TV, and I spent way too much time as a child with Oscar the Grouch, Scooby Doo, Gilligan, Barney Rubble, Bruiser Brody and Marcia Brady. 

If there is any solace in this truth, it is that I watch very little TV today. Many of you can relate. Unfortunately, the addiction just changed screens.

I have often quoted legendary wrestling coach Al DeLeon, who said, “A little bit of everything is OK. Too much of one thing is bad.” He said that in an age before smart phones, and he was referencing diet choices, but that continues to be some of the best advice ever given. Period. 

Have a terrific Tuesday, and thanks for reading.

Shane Goodman
Editor and Publisher
Times Vedette digital editions
shane@gctimesnews.com
641-332-2707

They are called vanity plates for a reason, or at least that is what the license plates our eyes are drawn to are commonly referred to as. The Iowa Department of Transportation calls them Specialty and Personalized Plates. That sounds less vain. 

From what I can tell, there are about 30 basic options for specialty license plates in the state of Iowa, ranging from the Black Out Design, to Breast Cancer Awareness, to Ducks Unlimited. If you are affiliated with the military, you may want to choose from another 24 military service plates. And if you are a proud alumni, you can select from 31 Iowa college and university options. If those 85 are not specialized enough for you, feel free to file for an assortment of numbers and letters that may tickle your fancy. Some of you remember when we had one option. 

How much do these plates cost? According to the Iowa DOT, the plate fees range from $25 to $60 with annual registration fees.

What can you put on a personalized license plate? Well, it may consist of up to seven characters and numbers and must have at least two characters.

Maybe more importantly, what can’t you put on a personalized license plate? No punctuation marks. No denoting a government agency. No display of characters that are sexual in connotation. No characters suggesting profane, obscene or inflammatory words or phrases, or those contrary to public policy. No characters or words defined in dictionaries as a term of vulgarity, contempt, prejudice, hostility, insult, or racial or ethnic degradation. No characters considered to be offensive. No characters that conflict with the regular license numbering system. No swear words. No references to illegal substances or criminal acts. No foreign words falling in any of these categories. And you cannot use all numbers.

Whew. That’s a lot to consider, and that’s probably why I have never ordered one of these plates. It’s not about vanity, really. If we are being honest, we are all vain, at least to some degree. These license plates are more like a tattoo for our vehicles, only not permanent. I can’t think of anything I am willing to pay for to have inked on my skin or my vehicle, and I certainly don’t want to draw more attention to my driving. Call me boring. Call me cheap. Just don’t call in my license plate number. I prefer to keep some things private. 

Have a fantastic Friday, and thanks for reading. 

Shane Goodman
Editor and Publisher
Times Vedette digital editions
shane@gctimesnews.com
641-332-2707

Happy Valentine’s Day to you and your sweetheart. Before you open your card or taste the chocolates, you may want to smell the roses, as the history of Valentine’s Day may surprise you. 

Many of you may recall that St. Valentine was executed on Feb. 14, and, as unfortunate as that was, the holiday’s deeper roots are equally creepy. 

Valentine’s Day dates back to ancient Rome and the festival of Lupercalia, which was created to celebrate and encourage fertility. That sounds encouraging enough, but the practices were much different than how most of us celebrate Valentine’s Day now — unless animal sacrifices are part of your festivities 

Yes, Lupercalia began with the killing of animals, a strange ritual that was an integral part of Roman culture. No bunnies or kittens, but it was a slaughter all the same. According to the Color Meanings website, goats were typically killed, and their blood was smeared on the foreheads of priests (called Luperci) who were at the celebration. Afterwards, the blood was wiped from their foreheads with wool soaked in milk. The skin of the sacrificed animals was then touched to women in order to increase their fertility. And who said the Romans weren’t romantic?

And now you also know why red — the color of blood — is the color of Valentine’s Day. The same website shares how red is also the color of heightened emotions and how, in nature, it is a color of warning. In addition, red is linked to a range of different emotions including anger, passion, love, aggression, passion and intensity.

St. Valentine is believed to have been beheaded. As a result, some say the blood-red color of Valentine’s Day is connected to the holiday’s namesake. On a more positive note, red was one of the most luxurious, rare and expensive colors for textiles in the early days. The gift of red fabric was also a special one, as it was hard to come by.

I am going with the Greek mythology explanation for the connection of red to love, as noted in the Color Meanings website. The goddess of love, Aphrodite, loved a mortal named Adonis. When Adonis was dying, Aphrodite rushed toward him and stepped on the thorn of a white rose. Her blood stained the white rose completely red, and, according to the myth, this was the first red rose on Earth. That sounds a lot better that smearing dead goat blood on people.

Now you can open that card and the box of chocolates.

Have a happy Valentine’s Day, and thanks for reading. 

Shane Goodman
Editor and Publisher
Times Vedette digital editions
shane@gctimesnews.com
641-332-2707

Duck and cover may sound like a country music duo, but it’s not. At least I don’t think so. Those three words were a technique used in air raid drills that many of you who attended public schools in the 1950s and 1960s may recall. It was part of a preparation for U.S. citizens to survive being bombed by the Soviet Union. 

Students were instructed to get under their school desks or get on their knees and cover their heads. Mandatory drills were in place to have kids practice the technique, handouts were sent home with students, and President Kennedy was telling Americans to build nuclear fallout shelters in their backyards. Congress allocated $169 million to identify suitable public buildings, erect fallout shelter signs on them, and stock them with supplies. It was a time of immense fear about something we were told was deadly and imminent, and even the silliest of precautionary efforts that were promoted by the government were taken seriously.

The nuclear fallout shelters were to be stocked with water (at least one gallon of water per person, per day), canned food and a supply of potassium iodide tablets to help protect from cancer caused by radioactive fallout. We now know these shelters would have been mostly useless in cities that were attacked and of limited benefit in outlying areas. What were the survivors to do when they eventually had to leave the shelter after five days or 30 days or whatever the nightly news said and be exposed to the nuclear fallout? OK, so maybe all the details weren’t pieced together to survive a nuclear attack. They still aren’t, at least not for us commoners. But in the 1960s, President Kennedy was attempting to persuade the Soviet Union that we were prepared and indestructible. Do you think Khrushchev was convinced?

I was too young for the duck and cover drill. The practice, along with the stocking and use of nuclear fallout shelters, had mostly disappeared by the 1970s when I was in elementary school. But those nuclear fallout shelter signs with the three yellow triangles in a black circle were still posted, and my friends and I often wondered what they were for. A few of these signs can still be seen in banks, hotels, libraries, post offices, schools and hospitals. The fear of nuclear war subsided in the 1970s but reared its ugly head again in the 1980s. The threat will likely always be imminent, as long as war-mongering humans are on this planet. We tend to be slow learners — and, at times, a bit naive. Duck and cover.

Have a terrific Tuesday, and thanks for reading.

Shane Goodman
Editor and Publisher
Times Vedette digital editions
shane@gctimesnews.com
641-332-2707

I was changing a battery in a wall clock at the office this week, and I wanted to make sure I had the correct time. So I asked a handful of staff members, and they all responded at the same time… with the same time. You can thank cell phones for that incredible accuracy. 

It got me wondering when I last asked someone what time it was. Most people don’t ask; they just look at their phones. Studies show 97% of Americans now have some sort of cell phone with 85% owning a smart phone. In contrast, only about one-third of Americans wear wrist watches today. 

When I was in college, a large clock hung on the wall in the main dining room area. I would wait for people to be directly under it and then ask them if they knew what time it was. They would offer it… with a puzzled look on their faces as they walked away, looking up at the giant clock. I was clearly more amused than they were.

Asking for the time was once a commonplace request — even to complete strangers — and most on the question-receiving end were happy to share it. Some of us even used to call the operator to ask what time it was. Imagine asking an operator — or a complete stranger — for the time now.

I admit I am in the minority on the whole time-telling thing. I don’t always carry a cell phone with me, and my retro Timex doesn’t keep perfect time or automatically change with Daylight Saving Time. So, when necessary, I continue to ask people for the time. And they continue to oblige… with puzzled looks on their faces. 

Have a terrific Tuesday, and thanks for reading.

Shane Goodman
Editor and Publisher
Times Vedette digital editions
shane@gctimesnews.com
641-332-2707