It’s Origins, Solutions. And Consequences

By Katherine Fry, CEO/President Mediafy Communications Group

The Emerald Ash Borer is an insect native to North East Asia, that is now steadily migrating across the United States. In doing so, it has affected tens of millions of ash trees in its devastating wake. The insects lay eggs on the bark of ash trees, followed by larvae then burrowing its way into them. Ultimately, in doing so, they steal the tree’s vital nutrients. If not treated promptly, tree death will most certainly occur. These little beetles have caused billions of dollars in damages to the forestry industry. Urban arborists have been reeling for years on how to adequately protect ash trees from this foreign infestation.

The Emerald Ash Borer made its first appearance in the US during 2002 when a crate, comprised of infested wood, arrived in Michigan as a delivery from Asia. Today, it is found in thirty-five states, as well as a few Canadian provinces. As a result, one can argue that they are quite the little travel bugs. However, all joking aside, these insects travel, multiply, and have the capability to wipe out mass groves at a time. The removal of these beetles, and the treatment of the ash trees, need to be taken seriously.

Ways to help prevent the ongoing spread of the Emerald Ash Borer include:

Do not move firewood of off your property, as they are often harboring the Emerald Ash Borer.
Do not purchase firewood from out of state, as doing so could potentially bring more Emerald Ash Borers into your state.
Keep a lookout for D-shaped holes, measuring one-eighth inch across, in the bark of your ash trees. This is the tell-tale sign of adult Emerald Ash Borers.
If you find the signs of the Emerald Ash Borer on your property, contact a certified arborist for assistance.

Ash trees provide urban environments with both shade and aesthetic benefits. Additionally, Ash trees comprise one of the primary components of everyday wood-based products, including furniture and baseball bats. The Emerald Ash Borer infestation has devastated the timber industry and robbed countless neighborhoods of the desired shade. As of today, the Emerald Ash Borer has killed tens of millions of ash trees and threatens to kill the majority of what is left!

Help us save the trees by having your property inspected for an Emerald Ash Borer infestation!

Call Arbor Art Tree Care, Inc. at (615) 299-9999 to set up an appointment today.

More information about the emerald ash borer, please visit us at


Why Believing in One Concept is not Necessarily Contrary to Another

By Katherine Fry, CEO/President Mediafy Communications Group

“Speaking as a Catholic here…please don’t donate money to help Notre Dame. The church is worth $300 billion. Donate to help Puerto Rico recover. Donate to get the people of Flint clean water. Donate to get kids out of cages. Jesus didn’t care about stained glass. He cared about humans.” (1)

As a citizen of the world, I am absolutely appalled by this misguided statement made by author Kristan Higgins. Why am I appalled? I am appalled because Notre Dame is a symbol of not only the Catholic Church, but of a millennium of culture. It is essentially a living, breathing historical monument that gives its own unique perspective on the French Revolution. It holds countless forms of priceless art, not to mention a plethora of religious relics including the purported crown of thorns that sat on the head of Jesus Christ during his crucifixion. This monument to French history is appreciated by millions of individuals around the world, of different faiths and different values. It is a timeless gem, and the loss of Notre Dame, or the lack of its restoration, is arguably truly devastating for all of humanity.

This leads to the next question. Why would someone make such a careless statement? In essence, Ms. Higgins has fallen prey to the misunderstanding brought upon us by false dichotomies. False dichotomies advocate, what some call, “the either-or fallacy,” also referred to as “black-and-white thinking.” (2) For example, individuals offended by the “Black Lives Matter Movement,” argue that “All lives matter.” However, simply because a movement advocates that the lives of African Americans in the United States matter, does not mean, or in any way advocate, that the lives of white, Asian, or other ethnic groups do not matter. Advocating for one group does not mean advocating against others. Similarly, simply because a person is pro-choice, does not mean they are against, or in any way opposed, to women choosing to continue with their pregnancies. On the whole, the pro-choice movement advocates the introduction of choices to young women, and the provision of assistance to them, regardless of what personal choice they make.

The false dichotomy advocated by Ms. Higgins argues that if you give money to a cause such as Notre Dame, you inherently do not care about people suffering around the world. This is not the case. One can care about restoring Notre Dame, and allocate money toward this cause, while still caring about “kids in cages” or people having clean water in Michigan. One must not care about one cause, to the exclusion of the other. Perhaps Ms. Higgins made her statement simply to be inflammatory and to start a dialogue on this matter. However, it is also very possible that Ms. Higgins believes what she stated, and in the process of taking her stance, ultimately misdirected funds that could have gone to help restore this timeless symbol of our humanity. Either way, it is important for individuals to understand the fallacy of false dichotomies, and not to fall prey to individuals making “either-or” arguments.

I am honored to have had the privilege of seeing Notre Dame twice before it burned. I am also thankful that my nine-year-old niece, who is well on her way to being a citizen of the world, also experienced the privilege of seeing and learning about this glorious cathedral. Contributing to its restoration, in any way one can, is a worthwhile endeavor, and it is not to the exclusion of other worthwhile causes around the world. In essence, one can care about the poor, and the restoration of Notre Dame, at the very same time, without degrading the value of the other. I implore you to give, to whatever cause moves you, without hesitation. Quite simply, in doing so, one can never go wrong, and, in the end, all of humanity ultimately benefits.


The Role of A Furry Feline in an International Arrest

By Katherine Fry, CEO/President Mediafy Communications Group

Julian Assange lived as a guest of the Ecuadorian embassy for more than seven years. Running from various charges, including a rape accusation in Sweden and an espionage charge by the United States, the embassy encompassed his last stand at resistance. Admired by some, and reviled by others, he attracted international notoriety and guests from around the world, including Amal Clooney as well as Pamela Anderson. Nevertheless, as time dragged on, and the presidency in Ecuador changed, the Ecuadorian government began to lose their patience with this famous visitor. Why? Well, at least one of the reasons included the fact that he did not properly care for his cat.

Through natural selection, cats have evolved into our nearly perfect companions. Left with the most basic of provisions, they can seemingly be left alone unattended for days. However, having a cat does take some effort, regardless of how self-sufficient they may seem. For instance, kitty litter must be provided and changed, as well as food and water. Without the supply of these essential items, cats will devolve into the angriest of creatures, often using the entire house as their litter box and meowing until, at which time, they feel properly attended.

In the absence of any specific reports, we are only left to guess how Assange neglected his beloved feline. One can imagine an Ecuadorian ambassador walking through the hallways of the embassy saying, “Is that cat pee I smell? Julian, this cat has destroyed our carpeting! Change its litter box, now!” Furthermore, one can also imagine the feline, pawing and begging at the office doors of the embassy employees, begging for food, because Julian, so caught up in international intrigue and the releasing of classified documents, forgot to feed his baby kitten. Repeated infractions would lead to Julian being branded as, not only a bad kitten father, but also a bad houseguest.

Now, it is imperative to understand that Assange did not view himself as a houseguest, but instead as an asylum seeker. After all, he was subsequently granted this status under the rules of diplomatic asylum. However, one can fairly say, especially in light of recent circumstances, that the rules of pet caretaking overrule the rules of diplomatic asylum when our feline friends are involved.

In November 2017, the Ecuadorian released a nine-page document regarding behavior requirements for Julian Assange. The rules included, amongst others, taking care of his cat’s “well-being, food, and hygiene,” or risk losing the rights to having a cat. (1) In response, Assange released pictures of himself and his beloved feline to the media, showing how much they adored one another. Apparently unable to live according to these unbearably harsh guidelines, Assange eventually released the cat to a local shelter, allegedly for the sake of its own well-being. One can just as easily argue that Assange embarked upon this act for his own well-being, considering his hosts had become arguably disgusted and tired of dealing with their long-standing infamous houseguest.

On the morning of April 11, 2019, London police pulled Julian from his Ecuadorian refuge. In response, hundreds of individuals came forward offering to adopt Assange’s cat, apparently unaware it had already been given away. While escaping to the embassy encompassed Assange’s last stand at resistance, the giving away of the beloved feline arguably represented his last stand at attempting to become a good houseguest. But, alas, Assange had acted too late, with the damage already done, leaving his hosts searching for a humane and legal way to get him removed from their premises. Releasing classified documents is forgivable, but apparently, neglecting a cat is not.


Why Maintaining the Trust of Subjects or Clients is Paramount to Business Success

By Katherine Fry, CEO/President Mediafy Communications Group

Honesty and accountability are two characteristics required for a business to succeed. Boeing and the Kingdom of Morocco have recently devolved into chaotic situations, betraying the trust of their clients or subjects.

Once a beloved figure of Morocco, King Mohammed VI is now the focus of his subjects’ anger and bewilderment. His wife, the first and so far only Princess Consort, Princess Lalla Salma, has disappeared from public life, simply abandoning her charities and constituents. The Moroccon people are wanting answers, but the King and his court are suspiciously quiet. This is driving a wedge between the King and his country’s trust. Will their disrespect influence the countries with which Morocco does business?

The Boeing Corporation is an American favorite airplane manufacturer. The American government, its people, and other countries around the world, have trusted Boeing completely and rooted for its success. So powerful is this trust, that the Federal Aviation Administration has allowed Boeing to certify its own airplanes, absent the FAA’s final seal of approval. This once beloved company arguably betrayed this trust when they continued to fly the Boeing 737 Max, after two fatal crashes killing every person on board, and one more close call. Their silence and complicity regarding the reasons for the crashes as well as their possible role in it’s occurring, has frightened individuals around the world. Has Boeing’s drive for profit ultimately put its clients at risk? If so, are they willing to stand up and take responsibility?

These situations are similar in the sense that both King Mohammed VI and Boeing are essentially self-regulating entities, entrusted to keep the best interests of their constituents at heart. Their reputations are critical to the success of these “entities,” and a loss of trust will then lead to a lack of sales and/or trade agreements on both accounts.

In essence, a great deal of trust has been put into King Mohammed VI and Boeing. But just as easily as trust is given, it can be taken away. Princess Lalla Salma, once a feminist icon in the stifling Middle East, has simply disappeared from the national stage. The world press has resorted to frantically searching for the missing princess, as the royal court has refused to comment on her whereabouts, or whether she is even dead or alive. On the same token, Boeing made such substantial changes to the 737, that its newest incarnation, the 737 Max, barely resembles its parent, in either form or function. Despite this unsettling fact, Boeing has made no changes to the 737 Max training manual or checklist. Additionally, Boeing has offered its pilots no additional training or preparedness for the plane’s substantial changes. As a result, two horrific crashes have ensued, and the plane has subsequently been grounded by the FAA.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and there are no better examples than King Mohammed VI of Morocco and Boeing. Honesty and accountability are required for any entity to have the trust of its people. A lack of accountability has led to the possible murder of a princess consort, and the untimely deaths of many airline passengers. Businesses and governments must remain accountable and honest, or risk losing their reputation and trust in the ensuing chaos. Once trust is gone, it is very difficult to regain.