Rants and Observations

cell phones and 8 year olds

“Adults — digital natives or not — can’t imagine what a childhood mediated by mobile, social technology that didn’t exist 10 years ago is actually like.” – Senior editor The Atlantic magazine

I admit.

Technology has created a significant new challenge to parenting. I struggle to think of anything since the printing press that would affect parenting as much as technology <smartphones, cell phones, i-pads, etc.> is doing.

Television was different (it’s not portable).

Cars was different (cannot drive until 16).

Anyway.

3rd grade children are, on average, eight years old.

20% of 3rd grade boys and 18% of 3rd grade girls already have a cell phone <2011 Massachusetts study of elementary, middle, and high school students>.

By the time children reach 5th grade, 39% of the kids have cell phones.

More than 83% of the students have a cellular device by middle school.

I have mixed feelings.

And frankly its not because of kids having access to this technology at too young an age … its more because of the quote I began with … we <older folk> cannot imagine a childhood mediated by technology.

And because we cannot imagine it … we have a propensity to limit it.

We all focus on ‘my kid is attached to their cell phone’ or ‘all they do is text’ or <fill in the blank>.

Is that wrong?

Geez. Parts of it doesn’t sound wrong and yet parts of it does sound wrong … because they are already living in a world I struggle to even imagine.

And <to increase the challenge> I cannot even come close to imagining what their adult world will look like.

Part of me thinks it is silly to restrict their usage of something that is already integral to today’s world.

Another part of me understands that we adults <including teachers and the overall education system> are not set up to manage their usage (unless we use guidelines from our own youth … which seems unbelievably silly).

Regardless.

I have another post where I will note the increasing % of children below the age of 5 using computers <there are even kindergartens that have this now> to learn.

I have had multiple debates with other TED participants with regard to the ultimate effect on cognitive learning <I am on technology’s side and I am in a minority>.

It is a whole new world.

And while we older folk may try and keep up with the technology we run the risk of not keeping up with our children’s’ world.

No. I don’t have an answer.

Yes. I do believe we adults need to come up with an entirely new set of ‘rules’ that will make us feel incredibly uncomfortable in dealing with our children.

Here is what I do know.

It will not be long before that 83% having cellular devices will be at the 3rd grade level.

It will not be long before over 80% of ALL children (any age … including less than 5) will have access to the internet.

We either need to accept it and do something to take advantage of it or we run the risk of creating the largest generational gap <and ensuing friction> since maybe age of the printing press.

observation of the day: people power

“A wave of shareholder activism is shining light on ….” – subhead in The Guardian

“A new kind of outrage: Investors kick out against inflated pay packages” – headline in The Economist

So.

The issues America (and many countries) is having at the moment are complex but I wanted to make an observation of one thing … how everyday people can make a difference.

The topic? Leaders pay is out of whack.

I believe since the 70s the pay discrepancy between the top, middle and bottom has increased exponentially while overall company performance has not matched the shift. In addition. There seems like there has been a mindset shift.  It is a little difficult to quantify but leaders in the 70s had a stronger philanthropic attitude as well as “taking care of others with my high earnings” attitude.

All that said … let me begin by defending leaders (a little).

First. The greater good.

While we would all like to believe we have an inner ethics compass we know for sure we all have an inner survival compass. Leaders are no different than the rest of us <albeit they earn exponentially more than us>  in that there is such a sense of job insecurity these days it is really difficult to look beyond “self” for the “greater good” when you don’t know if you have a job tomorrow.

Second. CEO (or leaders pay).

Look. I have managed a couple of companies and I have no issue with a leader getting paid gobs of money. Until you have been in the shoes it is difficult to understand the incredible day in and day out pressure (does anyone ever notice a president enters office with no gray hair and leaves with a head of gray hair) and the fact that while no matter how well you delegate responsibilities every day you are making at least one decision every day, yes, every day … that could impact the future of the company (impact being profitability to complete failure).

Oh. And if anyone truly believes that a leader doesn’t realize she/he are managing people and the hard decisions they make impact people’s lives, they are nuts. The truly callous leader is a small minority. The majority are constantly weighing the benefit of the many versus the pain of the few. And the few who get screwed stick with them in sleepless nights.

Okay.

Now that I have defended … the compensation  is out of whack.

But people can do somthing.

And, no, I don’t mean strikes or picketing.

The Guardian and The Economist have recently written articles on how shrehlders are stepping up and doing something.

In the past the majority of shareholders didn’t even vote. Didn’t need to. Why would they?  They were making money.

Now?  It’s a double whammy. Head and wallet.

Wallet they may not be getting the return they had before.

Head in that they realize the compensation is out of wack. So they are using their votes to reject the CEO/leader salary increase.

This is people stepping up and doing something and course correct.

compensation for executives is under scrutiny from shareholders, and investors, globally.

-          Aviva, a British insurer with a downwardly mobile share price, announced on April 30th that its chief executive would forgo a planned pay rise because of shareholder criticism. The head of the compensation committee for Barclays was heckled at the bank’s annual meeting in London on April 27th. Big American banks cleverly scheduled their meetings away from the clamouring mobs of Wall Street—Citigroup went as far as Dallas and declined to provide a webcast. But its efforts could not muffle the bang made by a non-binding shareholder vote against a ludicrous compensation scheme for Vikram Pandit, its chief executive.

Citi is not alone. FirstMerit of Ohio also lost a shareholder vote in April, having granted its chief executive a steep rise despite single-digit returns on equity and a depressed share price. Three other large American financial firms received less than 65% approval on pay-related votes, a symbolic if not actionable threshold, according to Semler Brossy, a consultancy that began last year to collect data on these votes

Shareholder meetings used to be routine now they are becoming events for people to speak out.

When shareholders (a majority) vote then you know they are actually paying attention … and they actually believe they can do something.

Oh.

Hmmmmmmmmmm … on a separate note …

We have an election coming up. Maybe more than 40percent of all registered voters will actually vote.

Isn’t that why shareholders (citizens) get a vote? To course correct?

comment of the day: elections and governing

I saw this comment in The Guardian:

The French elections lasted for what? A month and a half, now they have a new President. Our elections begin 2 years in advance and don’t end until super tuesday which sounds like a sporting event. Our leaders cannot function because they are always fighting for their jobs from every special interest group in the world. – The Guardian: commenter commenting on The US election

I agree.

build to burn

So.

I have been thinking of writing about Linkin Park for some time.  They have a new song called Burn it Down that actually got me thinking this is the time.

They are the band I should hate but I love.

I should hate them because they scream a lot <instead of singing> and the music is not the most well written music.

But I love them because, first and foremost, they captured the voice of a generation.

Old people probably call it angry music. Old people call it noise.

I tell old people that it is the voice of their children.

When they began they were about self doubt, self esteem, fear, pain, and insecurity … all typical things found in teens.

Their songs captured how young people felt. While others may have written about love and heartache they wrote about love and insecurity. They wrote about “why don’t you listen to me.” They wrote about growing up and the dance between “I know what I am doing” and “I don’t know what I am doing.”

And their music captured the feeling of “I have something to say” in every note and chord.

I am not sure any band of that time captured the softer “I am talking to you” and the angrier “you are not listening to what I have to say and it is important to me” sense better.

Somewhere I belong, In the End, Numb, One Step closer … if you wanted to know what your teen was thinking they were saying it.

In the end: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVTXPUF4Oz4&ob=av2e

Numb: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXYiU_JCYtU&feature=relmfu

One step closer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qlCC1GOwFw&feature=relmfu

Now?

As older more thoughtful young men … they are the voice of a generation’s social conscious. They began with personal issues and have evolved into social issues <without ever losing sight of the personal aspect>.

Their music is questioning the why and what aspects of all that is happening in the world today. And they continue to do it in their powerful rock riff chords balancing the talk rap and Chester singing thoughts and screaming questions.

Burn it Down is all about building it … only to burn it down. And trust … and the failures of the ones you trusted. And the power to burn down what you have enabled to build. The power of a generation to … well … actually do something. The power to build. And the power to burn it down.

The thing I love? It could be social awareness. It could be personal awareness. And that is life these days. What is personal is also part of what is happening socially.

Their new song “burn it down” is the best of what Linkin Park is best at. It is powerful to listen to … musically and lyrically.

Burn it Down: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgEKLhvCCVA&ob=av2e

Old people ignore Linkin Park as noise.

And because of that they don’t listen.

And that is a mistake <if they want to understand this generation>.

Linkin Park has something to say.

They had something to say ten years ago. They have something to say today.

Their music is not for everyone … but their message is worth everyone listening to.

“I’m fine”

“I’m fine.”

How many times have we heard those two words?

How many times have we accepted the response and moved on?

Oh.

And how many times should we not have moved on?

So.

I have had this post in my draft folder since mid March. It just didnt seem done enough to post. Like it was missing something. And then the news about Junior Seau’s suicide came out yesterday. Not everyone will know Junior <a great USC football player and NFL linebacker> and that is okay … the point is he was 43. And successful. And his friends and family had no idea he had thoughts of suicide.

I am sure they all heard “I’m fine” numerous times.

Two things hit me hard when the story came out. First. His mother <and please don’t get me started on who the idiot was who thought it would be a good idea to put a grieving mother in front of a microphone only hours after learning her son had died> saying “who would do this to my son?” It was not even in the realm of possibility in her grief stricken state to consider he was suicidal. Second. An ex-teammate holding back tears onscreen describing how Junior would get injury treatment in private so his teammates never saw him ‘less than.’ And how that same teammate broke down admitting he never thought that would translate the same way into personal life … and the pain in his voice when he said “if only he had told us … any of us would have been there for him.” (note: I am not sure anything is a stronger reminder of how suicide impacts anyone and everyone than watching a massive man who has singlehandedly destroyed other very large strong men on the football field sob over the helplessness of not being able to do anything … or being given the chance to do something)

We should not be fooled into thinking this is just about sports concussions or athletes who strugle with life after sports. Yes. These men are well oiled competitive sports machines who are ‘wired’ to be that way. But. We would be foolish to not believe that there are also well oiled competitive life machines.

People who go through life … well … just fine <thank you very much>. They look smooth and seamless in life. They take bumps and bruises from life in stride and inevitably shrug them off and keep on playing the game of life at a highly competitive level.

Ah.

But. (Yeah there is a but).

Behind closed doors.

I go back to the two things that struck me the most in the Junior Seau aftermath.

Mother. Disbelief “who would do this to my son” (never crossing her mind it could be suicide). Athlete friend. He always took treatment in private so that in front of us he was always the best he could be.

And that same friend saying that no one would have hesitated to be there … if he had let them in.

Well oiled Life machine people are always “fine.”

“I’m fine” is one of those evasive phrases we use when we have no intention of elaborating.

Ok.

Maybe think about it this way.

“I’m fine” may be the single most common lie.

You know what I mean.

Someone asks “how are you?” and you say “I’m fine.”

And you aren’t. It sucks at that moment. And maybe not normal sucking … maybe some big time sucking at the moment.

It happens. Just as Life happens. And because you are a ‘well oiled life machine’ you know people see you as ‘fine’ so … you use the words to confirm it.

Some thoughts. What do we do when “I’m fine” is simply camouflage for some private and intensely personal material that because we never <or very rarely share> is next to impossible to say out loud?

First. Think about the material that is really ‘not fine.’ And maybe redefine it in your head so that you can actually get to ‘second.’

Second. This is the easy answer <for me to say> … talk. Speak. Say something.

Simply say “well … not fine.”

I say that and I purposefully put <for me to say> because I could just as easily have put ‘this is the hard part <for me to do>.’ And I honestly believe I am not that different with regard to this as others.

The simple act of talking can be incredibly important … and incredibly difficult. Talking openly about emotions and feelings is a good thing … and incredibly difficult. Issues should not go unnoticed … and is incredibly difficult to be noticed for something like this.

Hmmmmm …. incredibly difficult. So what do we do? <the truth> … we would rather lie.

This ordi­nary lie is in every­day life.

And just as lying, in general, is not a good thing in this case if you are not paying attention … really paying attention … this lie … unattended … will keep the indi­vid­ual from chang­ing for the bet­ter … and actually will keep the person from being fine at some point … and, at its worst, will reach a Junior Seau level.

Ok.

“I am fine.” This may not be a lie for you … but <this I guarantee … unequivocally guarantee> someone within the next week who says “I’m fine” is not.

Because I don’t think that most peo­ple are “fine” most of the time.

Most of us have prob­lems. And many of us have seri­ous prob­lems … phys­i­cal ill­nesses, addic­tions, emo­tional strug­gles, marriage stuff, real finan­cial difficulties, inordinate job stress, and par­ent­ing chal­lenges … or any number of real Life issues that can keep us up at night.

That’s life.

We have all faced some of these prob­lems in life and when we do … we are not ‘fine’.

We are … well … just ‘dealing.’

But that is not fine.

Not fine is being con­fused, sad, hurt, scared, lonely, angry, lost. All of which different people deal with differently <and obvisously everyone has a different capacity for ‘not fine’ stuff> but dealing well or not dealing with … it is all in the “I am not fine” category.

This is tough stuff. This is personal stuff. And for most people it’s not easy to be hon­est and truth­ful about our trou­bles. It is part self reflection struggle and part ‘strength of character’ struggle <makes me look weak>.

But I believe more people need to be honest. Because I honestly believe it is the only way to get the help to get bet­ter.

But that’s me.

Many peo­ple would rather just answer “I’m fine.”

Too embar­rassed to share their prob­lems, maybe even to them­selves, they lie.

Lying to themselves. Lying to someone else. Doesn’t matter. It’s a lie.

And within the lie they remain trapped.

Trapped in situations that often go from bad to worse.

And worse leads to the worst <which in most minds is ‘unsolvable>.

If you’re anx­ious and wor­ried all of the time, you’re not fine.

If you’re stressed and angry all the time you’re not fine.

If you’re fight­ing with your spouse/parents all the time, you’re not fine.

If you’re drift­ing through life with­out a pur­pose, you’re not fine.

But. Here’s the good news.

It’s okay not to be fine.

It’s okay to talk about it.

It’s okay to acknowledge that your mind can have issues just like any part of your body.

Acceptance is half the battle in my opinion.

Everyone has their weak spots.The one thing that despite your best efforts, will always bring you to your knees, regardless of how strong you are otherwise.
-Sarah Dessen

However, in my experience even the smartest strongest people fall short of accepting anything other than “I’m fine” even when confronted with glaring in-the-face facts about illogical and irrational behavior. Those well oiled Life machines cannot envision not being well oiled. To them it is all or nothing with very very little inbetween.

Anyway.

Why did I write this?

Well.

Because I like writing about the truth.

Because Junior Seau, a 43 year old man, who to his friends was “fine.”

Because I was also just reading about some really jarring truth in Amanda Beard’s memoir. A young woman who has, what, 7 Olympic gold medals? Posed for magazines?  Yet … Beard kept her physical and emotional turmoil <including cutting, bulimia, depression, massive anxiety> all hidden behind a beautiful smile and an incredible athletic talent. She revealed little, if nothing, to her family, friends and coaches.

I envision they both had mastered the art of “I’m fine” responses.

That kind of truth behind an ‘I’m fine’ is unsettling.

But possibly it is only truth that can finally set you free from the ‘not fine’ category.

Oh.

Because I want to just remind everyone.

Pay attention.

Sometimes “I’m fine” is truly a lie.

And someone needs help.

And sometimes those who need the help the most just do not know how to ask for it. And they really aren’t asking for help … they are simply asking for hope. And anyone one of us is qualified to give that.

finagle’s Law

Well. I imagine I am way behind the rest of the cool people <who already know what finagle’s law is> but I just discovered it. Maybe because I had always known it as Murphy’s Law.

The generalized or `folk’ version of Murphy’s Law, fully named “Finagle’s Law of Dynamic Negatives” and usually rendered “Anything that can go wrong, will” (source: Urban Dictionary)

Finagle’s Law comes from science fiction author Larry Niven who, in several stories, depicted a frontier culture which celebrated a religion <or a running joke> which involved the worship of the dread god Finagle … and his mad prophet Murphy <hence the source of ‘murphy’s law’>.

Ok. About Finagles ´Law <before I get to the point of this little writeup>. It is an amazingly cool extraordinary mixture of cruel logic … as well as somewhat scarily indicative of everyday life. Just in case you didn’t know here is Finagle’s logic:

-          What we have is not what we need.

-          What we want is not what we need.

-          What we need is impossible to get.

-          You can get hold of this information for a much higher price then you are prepared to pay.

Ok. Here is the coolest thought. One of my favorite blogs, 50topmodels, actually wondered if Finagle´s Law got it all wrong and reexamined it as … Yhprum´s Law (Yhprum is Murphy backwards).

They actually analyzed it under the theory that ‘everything that can work, will work’ quoting Richard Zeckhauser <Harvard> “sometimes systems that should not work, work nevertheless.“

Ok. It is that last thought that made me sit up and think and decide to write.

Why?

Well. “Systems that should not work …do.” How often do people design perfect systems in the workplace, under the guise of ‘this is the way its done’ and, ultimately, it is just another inefficient process & system? Or maybe it is easy to do so everyone just does things going through the motions? Or the perfect system is <gasp> measured on its efficiency and therefore everyone simply tries to ‘hit the measurement numbers”?

On the other hand.

Someone else builds a system and has everyone working within this system that has those ‘people who designed perfect systems’ scratching their heads and saying that will never work … and, uh oh, it does work.

Yhprum´s Law. Huh? Well. Organizations are living organisms.

And just as placebos can work (lets call that the power of the mind) … a system that should not work … well … does. Why?

Because whether things work or not is often up to the people. And people are inconsistent in that they consistently do unexpectedly great things. In addition sometimes mistakes become stepping stones to blinding success. Oh. And the systems that shouldn’t work gain significant improvements thru some trial & error while the perfect systems remain … well … stagnant – never improving. Maybe it is that last thought that is so controversial in my thinking.

Perfection is often a thief. It steals fresh thinking.

Business, in general, like life, is messy. Sure. We seek perfection. It is kind of like the holy grail of ‘job well done.’

Here is the funny thing about attaining perfection.

Realistically we should be seeking to immediately change, rather than replicate, if we actually stumble upon it. ‘Doing it right’ is simply a level. And attaining levels of ‘perfection’ is good but also breeds an aspect of complacency or rote. And unless you are putting together a car, or a bomb <as an example>, in my mind we should always be aware the process is a means to an end.

Another sad thing about perfection. Nothing is ever really perfect. So when we put the label on something we are already in a bad place. As noted in alternative phrases for Finagle’s Law … let’s maybe call it “not quite the right thing.” It seems to me that systems & process reside most often closest to that phrase. And to a perfectionist that is bad and to others it is just not quite the right thing.

Ok. As for systems that shouldn’t work? the imperfect systems? The power of the mind suggest that everything that can work will work … sometimes better than others.

Oh.

And if you have that attitude .. an attitude to, rather than finding the flaws, instead focusing on the mistakes made … in my mind you end up seeking to better the system.

Ok. Moving on.

There is another aspect to Murphy’s Law … “If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those ways can result in a catastrophe, then someone will do it.”

Now. If you think about that from a logic perspective …  this suggests <for example> that if someone plugs in a toaster backwards and it fries itself, the problem isn’t just that some idiot plugged it in backward, but that it was able to be plugged in backwards in the first place.

In other words … the flaw isn’t in the person … but rather the design. And people just make mistakes <and are not flawed>.

If you believe that … then maybe when mistakes are made we shouldn’t be blaming people but rather seeking to design a better system. Not ‘perfect’ systems but systems with the minimum opportunity for flaws. Call it constant improvement.

If you don’t believe that then you end up simply assuming people will make mistakes, some big … some small … some stupid <or some derivative of stupid> … some smart <yeah … you can still do something really smart and make a mistake>. As I stated earlier … systems are a means to an end therefore using Finagle’s Law everyone should be focusing more on the people aspect. And not in a “you suck” perspective but rather a deeper understanding for why  and how mistakes are made.

Mistakes are part of life.

I actually believe more managers should have the chart above in their offices and when mistakes are made identify which aspect the mistake characterizes. It may make us better managers and it may make for better systems (and certainly better managers of people).

Anyway.

The true Finagle’s Law is much more twisted than “anything that can go wrong will go wrong.” The Law also allows for things going well. It’s like as if the universe is merely lulling you into a false sense of security before proceeding to screw you. It also allows for things that can’t go wrong … going wrong <and within Finagle’s Law this counts as Gone Horribly Right.>

Regardless.To end this I wanted to share some last thoughts on Finagle’s Law. The law owes its existence more or less entirely to the Rule of Drama, and is especially common in Crapsack Worlds where things that do go wrong tend to go wrong in the worst possible way.

Finagle’s Law also suggests that Life has a pretty warped sense of humor in that it is obsessed with making your life as difficult and humiliating as possible.

On a slightly serious note … I imagine the potential for danger in everyday Life, within the Law, can do one of two things:

- make you scared to do anything

- make you assume that you cannot ever do anything right

I could write gobs about both of those but instead I am hoping that what I have written about Finagle’s Law suggests that successfully navigating Life takes some flexibility. If perfection is your thing … well … Finagle will be your constant companion and friend.

Take Life with a grain of salt. Things go wrong. Even when they aren’t supposed to. And things go right. Even when they aren’t supposed to.

Last. And just so you are fully aware of ‘the Law’ here are optional expressions of Finagle’s Law <so you recognize them>:

-          A Simple Plan

-          Butterfly of Doom

-          Consolation Backfire

-          Cosmic Plaything

-          Disaster Dominoes

-          Destructive Saviour

-          Deus Angst Machina when taken Up to Eleven

-          Everything Trying to Kill You in videogames

-          Failsafe Failure

-          Failure Is the Only Option

-          The Fun in Funeral

-          Gave Up Too Soon

-          Law of Disproportionate Response

-          Inverse Law of Utility and Lethality

-          It Got Worse

-          Magnum Opus Dissonance

-          Mistimed Revival

-          Murphy’s Bed

-          Murphy’s Bullet

-          My Car Hates Me

-          Not Quite The Right Thing

-          Out with a Bang

-          Phlebotinum Breakdown

-          Ashes to Crashes

-          Doomed New Clothes

-          Watch the Paint Job

-          The Precious, Precious Car

-          Random Number God

-          Retirony

-          Springtime for Hitler

-          Tempting Fate

-          Unspoken Plan Guarantee

-          Useless Superpowers

-          What Could Possibly Go Wrong?

-          You Can’t Thwart Stage One

-          Your Princess is in Another Castle

Anyway.

Finagle’s Law. Murphy’s Law. Or. My favorite? “Not quite the right thing.” Life is perfectly imperfect. You can either accept it or end up in a loony bin some day.

the flaw in creativity collaboration

Ok.

This is not a popular point of view these days.

I am a firm believer, that in the creativity business, collaboration isn’t good.

Well. “isn’t good” is like saying “never” or “it always sucks” or something like that.

Let’s just say creativity isn’t about collaboration.

And I found a quote that says it perfectly:

“Art is I; science is we.” – Claude Bernard

I didn’t know who good ole Claude was until I found this quote … he was a man of science … in fact .. among many other accomplishments, he was one of the first to suggest the use of blind experiments to ensure the objectivity of scientific observations.

Anyway.

He says it best.

Art, and true creativity, is really an ‘I’ business. Ideas generated from an individual.  Where creativity is sparked within.  Look. Others can stoke the fire but an individual has to provide the spark. There you go … an original idea originates from an individual,

And let me dig myself into a deeper hole … in addition … by including others the original idea is rarely sharpened but rather dulled.

Ok. Science on the other hand is about We.

A confluence of factors & minds each sharpening that type of idea.

Ok.

He also said:

“The living body, though it has need of the surrounding environment, is nevertheless relatively independent of it. This independence which the organism has of its external environment, derives from the fact that in the living being, the tissues are in fact withdrawn from direct external influences and are protected by a veritable internal environment which is constituted.”

Once again.

A science thought … but a good life thought.

And a nice thought to complete the thought on creativity and collaboration.

Original creativity in thinking is relatively independent from the external environment. In the end an individual can absorb, can discuss, can incorporate as much of the ‘external environment’ that is necessary to feed creativity … but the idea resides within the individual.

That’s it.

That’s my thought.

lighting the way

“As we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automatically liberates others.” - Nelson Mandela

So.

I began with this quote and then kind of got pretty passionate about this topic the more I thought about it (that is a warning).

We all have things that matter to us.

A big or small issue that kinda gets the heart pumping a little bit.

The difference between people is that even though we all have something that gets us ‘going’ (heart pumping, anger, heartache, whatever) some remain silent, some speak softly and some speak loudly (or shine a light as it were) on what matters to them.

And while I abhor loud bombastic people … what I do give many of them credit for is the fact that by shining their own light (albeit a frickin’ spotlight) they have unconsciously liberated the rest of us to take whatever wattage our light is and bring it forth against some pretty dark things (if we elect to).

There is no shortage of issues that deserve some light.

-          Statistics show that a woman is battered every 15 seconds in the United States by an “intimate.” That’s two million women annually who are battered or abused by their partners. Even more frightening is that every day (yeah … I just typed every day) 4 women lose their lives to violence … an estimated 1/3 of the women who are abused. Oh. And those 4 women are murdered by a husband or a boyfriend (not some stranger).

One in four women who commit suicide is a victim of domestic violence.

And. If that bothers you think about this … there are 3 times more animal shelters (approximately 4300) than battered women shelters (approximately 1500). <and I like pets but this seems kind of insane>

Here is a staggering number.

1 in 4 women will fall victim to Domestic Violence in their lifetime. 1 in 4.

Uhm. How about I make this personal.

That means that 1 of 4 of your female friends/relatives/neighbors is a potential victim.

Or.

-          115+ million kids globally not in school. More important than domestic violence? Yikes. It is all important stuff.

Or.

-          In 2009, US child abuse involved an estimated 6 million children.

One in 4 girls will be sexually abused.

One in 6 boys will be sexually abused.

The numbers are stunning.

Stunningly horrible.

Dark numbers.

Or.

-          There are 1.4 billion people globally living in poverty – under $1.25 a day.

Or.

-          925 million people are hungry. Every day, almost 16000 children die from hunger-related causes. That’s one child every five seconds. Hunger and malnutrition are the underlying cause of more than half of all child deaths, killing nearly 5.8+ million children each year.

Or.

-          Women’s rights (which isn’t just about ‘the glass ceiling’ gentlemen). Women’s rights around the world are an important indicator to understand global well-being. Despite the fact a major global women’s rights treaty was ratified by the majority of the world’s nations a few decades ago … numerous issues still exist in all areas of life, ranging from the cultural, political to the economic. For example, women often work more than men, yet are paid less; gender discrimination affects girls and women throughout their lifetime; and women and girls are often are the ones that suffer the most poverty.

Gender equality furthers the cause of child survival and development for all of society, so the importance of women’s rights and gender equality should not be underestimated.

Or.

-           Contaminated water. Bad water is still the primary cause of death in the world today. Each year, it leads to deadly illnesses like cholera, typhoid, malaria, etc., in some 8 million people, including 1.5 million children.

Ok.

I could go on but if you have any hesitation with regard to where you shine your light I suggest you begin here … with the UN The Universal Declaration of Human Rights which begins with these words:

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml

Pick any article & issue from the Declaration and think about it. You don’t have to address it globally … it could be locally or it could be in your community.

Unfortunately … I can guarantee you one thing … while you will be tempted to think “oh, that’s not an issue we have ..” … well … do not fall into that trap.

Every issue resides in your community and in your neighborhood. Things like this are sneaky. And hide in dark corners.

Hence people need to step up and shine a light on these things.

Me?

I use words.

Others use pictures.

There is no one way to shine a light …

I call it enlightened conflict.

Frankly I don’t care what I call it, you call it or what anyone calls it.

Everyone can make an impact.

Even if you only carry a 15watt bulb. It is light.

In the end maybe think about it this way … by lighting the way you are removing some darkness … the darkness of ignorance … the darkness that maybe stops someone from seeing a way out of their situation … the darkness of hopelessness.

Yep.

Anyone one of us can provide some light if we choose to.

So.

This is one of the few times you will ever hear me recommend speaking out – being vocal. I typically don’t like people on a mission with a cause. I tend to believe if you speak softer more people will actually listen – and believe. But in this case I will err on the side of I don’t care if you whisper .. croak .. or shout.

Speak. Each word is a light shining on a dark spot in humanity (or the shadows that are a reflection of lack of humanity).

Choose to speak out.

Think of it as shining a light on some darkness.

And maybe, if you are really really lucky, it will light the way for someone out of the darkness.

spinal tap marketing

Ok.

This is about the senseless marketing inflation that is becoming prevalent in the marketing world and I am going to use the movie Spinal Tap to show how bad it is.

Just in case you don’t remember the movie Spinal Tap, or the moment I am going to reference, here it is:

“Our speakers no longer just go to ten … they go to 11! Well, it’s one louder, isn’t it? It’s not 10. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at 10. You’re on 10 here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you’re on 10 on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?”

<Nigel Tufnel, explaining why his amp goes up to 11>

Here’s the deal. Look around at some marketing these days. If you are kind you will call it ‘value inflation’ … if you aren’t kind it is puffery.

And good ole The Economist actually gave me some great fodder in a recent edition (so I am going to steal some of their words shamelessly).

Their article showcased an aspect of how marketing is inflating everything.

Marketing inflation?

-          Take the grossly underreported problem of “size inflation”, where clothes of any particular labelled size have steadily expanded over time. Estimates by The Economist suggest that the average British size 14 pair of women’s trousers is now more than four inches wider at the waist than it was in the 1970s. In other words, today’s size 14 is really what used to be labelled a size 18; a size 10 is really a size 14. (American sizing is different, but the trend is largely the same.) Fashion firms seem to think that women are more likely to spend if they can happily squeeze into a smaller label size.

-          Inflation is also distorting the travel business. A five-star hotel used to mean the ultimate in luxury, but now six- and seven-star resorts are popping up as new hotels award themselves inflated ratings as a marketing tool. “Deluxe” rooms have been devalued, too: many hotels no longer have “standard” rooms, but instead offer a choice of “deluxe” (the new standard), “luxury”, “superior luxury” or “grand superior luxury”. Likewise, most airlines no longer talk about “economy” class. British Airways instead offers World Traveller; Air France has Voyageur. Sardine class would be more honest. The value of frequent-flyer miles is also being eroded by inflation: it is increasingly hard to book “free” flights; they cost more miles, and redemption fees have increased. This was inevitable: airlines have been issuing so many miles (for spending on the ground as well as in the air) that the total stock is worth more than all the dollar notes and coins in circulation.

-          Food-portion inflation has also made it harder to fight the flab. Pizzas now come in regular, large and very large. Starbucks coffees are Tall, Grande, Venti or (soon) Trenta. “Small” seems to be a forbidden word.

I believe this shameless hyperbole has become a plague in marketing. It is puffery at its worst.

And it is shameful for 2, among many, reasons:

-          It inspires confusion.

Confusion in that the value equation has been disrupted. Marketers have assumed we will value a ‘7 star’ over a ‘5 star’ because … well … it has more stars. Instead marketers have simply devalued an individual star to a point people are so confused they simply assess value on their own. Oh. And by doing THAT people will inevitably focus on the wrong things (commodity attributes & price). Confusion is bad in marketing.

-          In inspires distrust.

Because in the act of building false value <under the guise of differentiation> we are discrediting what we actually do. Inevitably this makes people basically lose trust in what we say. With the lack of trust marketers have no value to people … leading to simply ignoring or tuning out any messaging. Oh. And if marketers have no value then why have them? Regardless. No one is clear what is the ‘truth.’ And when that happens they disregard what is being said and simply ignore it. And ignore it for what it really is <as a truth> hyperbole.

Oh.

And it is shameful because it is lazy. Yes. Lazy. I fully admit that it is significantly harder to discern what is really true in today’s world. But that is no excuse for marketers. In fact rather than try to take the ‘easy road’ <albeit the road with some horrible long term repercussions> marketers should be focusing on the more difficult road – truth.

Anyway. Back to the spinal tap marketing issue. The Economist suggests it is a form of inflation.

I am less kind.

It is hyperbole. And the worst kind. Because we are trying to skew what people think by stretching the truth <is that lying?>.

Lying sounds harsh but what else do we call it when we ‘create’ differentiation.

I fully understand that marketers need to respond to the market in order to help ‘sell their stuff.’ In this case this bad marketing behavior was exhibited in response to a couple of trends as identified by trendwatching – Mass Class and its opposite trend Massclusivity.

Increasing general prosperity spawned millions of new consumers interested in copying the tastes and preferences of the ‘rich & famous.’ This meant that manufacturers jumped on the enormous economies of scale as represented by this new mass of consumers by imitating the best of the best with lower cost alternatives. In some cases they imitated well. in other cases they simply imitated … with a lesser product. Regardless of their true quality, or non-quality, they imitated. And in doing so ultimately lowered the value of that which actually deserved the value.

This trend also spawned the next level called Massclusivity. Offering a level of privilege or status to the masses. Unfortunately it most likely offered neither privilege nor status to the traditional old style upper middle class.

So. In order to try and solve the problem marketers started ‘creating value’ in these absurd ways. The real problem? The imitators did it as well as the ‘real quality value’ providers. The imitators, in their falseness, blurred value.

It is too late but one would have wished that marketers would have been strong enough to stand up to the false imitators and stopped the problem before it began. But I imagine that means the marketing ‘hacks’ would have left money on the table and missed out on their opportunity for personal prosperity.

Oh well.

Marty DiBergi: David St. Hubbins… I must admit I’ve never heard anybody with that name.
David St. Hubbins: It’s an unusual name, well, he was an unusual saint, he’s not a very well known saint.
Marty DiBergi: Oh, there actually is, uh… there was a Saint Hubbins?
David St. Hubbins: That’s right, yes.
Marty DiBergi: What was he the saint of?
David St. Hubbins: He was the patron saint of quality footwear.

An entirely different level is of absurdity is that marketers also create spokespeople for random products & services hoping that they embody some type of credibility. In the attempt at borrowed interest the marketer simply gains a lack of believability. Ok. Good intentions … bad result.

Hopefully it never becomes as absurd as a ‘patron saint of quality footwear.’

And, yes, even beyond the spokespeople endorsers … it all becomes absurd at some point.

And in its absurdity it actually devalues everything it come in contact with <the second most disturbing would be the devaluing of trust>.  The foremost disturbing is that it distorts behavior because so many people are confused they aren’t sure what is actually the best thing to do <because inflating thru marketing suggest there is no real ‘best’ alternative>.

I imagine to be fair to those in marketing it appears this senseless inflation is prevalent throughout society.

There is grade inflation, the tendency for comparable academic performance to be awarded higher grades over time. In Britain the proportion of A-level students given “A” grades has risen from 9% to 27% over the past 25 years. Yet other tests find that children are no cleverer than they were. A study by Durham University concluded that an A grade today is the equivalent of a C in the 1980s. In American universities almost 45% of graduates now get the top grade, compared with 15% in 1960. Grade inflation makes students feel better about themselves, but because the highest grade is fixed, it also causes grade compression, which distorts relative prices. This is unfair to the brightest, whose grades are devalued against those of average students. It also makes it harder for employers to identify the best applicants.

There is job title inflation, where a fancier-sounding title is cheaper than a pay raise. Companies now have an excess of chiefs and directors. Job title inflation has economic costs if it makes it more difficult to assess proper compensation for skills.

Anyway.

Now that I have been fair to marketing people I will suggest it is no excuse.

I have already mentioned the professional laziness.

But, the bigger issue is that marketing, in many ways, can influence society and attitudes and ultimately behavior.

Marketing can lead.

Marketing has in fact a responsibility to lead society. Inflation is ultimately a value equation. If marketing establishes non-absurd value equations attitudes are established.

I know it seems absurd that I wrote a serious piece about marketing using Spinal Tap.

But it moves beyond absurdity with me when I realize I can write a serious piece on marketing using Spinal Tap as an example.

It disturbs me.

Which leads me to the close:

“It does disturb me, but I rise above it. I’m a professional” – Nigel

Trying to inflate value simply means we devalue what really is.

And if marketing does it ultimately it establishes a devalued benchmark. Yeah … yeah … yeah … some smartass is going to suggest that marketing is establishing a ‘new value economy.’

Baloney.

It is simply devaluing the existing one.

et le gagnant est

<and the winner is>

Ok.

Let’s say the people won today. If I were to tell you over 81% of all adults actually voted … and at least 4 candidates had over 11% of the votes (and the 4 of them had about 85% of all votes) you would tend to believe the process is working.

Well.

Today in France this is what happened.

The French people were involved. And a diverse group of candidates split the votes. The incumbent, Sarkozy, is in second place with 25% of the votes. A socialist candidate received the most with 28%.

Their process is a little different than America’s. Now they have a run off <until someone receives over 50% of the votes> between the top 2.But. The battle for France has just begun. With such a vote split between some really different perspectives someone will have to do some significant  political direction horse trading to win. The scariest, to me, is the fact the far right candidate <Le Pen> who  called for “economic patriotism” and vowing to leave the eurozone and taking a stance against globalization <an isolationist perspective> and a strong opinion on the dangers of the  “Islamisation” of France gained a significant percentage of the vote and will now have the ability to influence future policy. Oh. Interesting because France has about a 10% unemployment and interesting because we often hear the same rhetoric from some of our own American candidates.

But. Let’s stick with over 80% involved.

Some perspective. In 2008 American presidential election was a 64% turnout rate. That was the highest turnout rate since 1908 (about 66%).

Maybe America can reach a 80+% turnout in the next election.

Anyway.

To give at least a little glimpse to the election. Here are the last live Guardian blog entries with regard to the French elections today.

10.38pm:

Reuters are reporting that with 79% of the vote counted Hollande is on 28%, Sarkozy on 26.9%, and Le Pen on 19%, according to the Interior Ministry.

10.29pm:

Marine Le Pen is really letting her hair down at the Front National after party. There are some shapes being thrown to some terrible French disco.

10.23pm:

According to an Ipsos Mori poll carried out for France 24, the Socialist candidate Hollande looks set to win the next round convincingly, with 54% of those questioned intending to vote for Hollande and 46% for Sarkozy in the second round.

10.13pm:

Updated results for tonight’s presidential election are in – suggesting that Le Pen has not quite taken 20% of the vote.

Here are the most recent results:

Hollande: 28.8%

Sarkozy: 26.1%

Marine Le Pen: 18.5%

Mélenchon: 11.7%

Bayrou: 8.8%

Joly: 2.3%

10.05pm:

Ian Trayor, the Guardian’s Europe editor, sent a European perspective of this evening’s results in France.

It is, he thinks, “a very bad weekend for Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin.

We have seen two triumphs for the Europhobic far right against “Brussels” and Germany’s domination of the response to the euro crisis – Marine Le Pen in France as well as the, albeit different, counterpart, in the Netherlands, Geert Wilders. The rightwing Dutch government, particularly its voluble finance minister, has been among the loudest of preachers for the past two years on what the Greeks, Irish, Portuguese etc have to do.

In addition, François Hollande’s overall victory in France spells more trouble for Merkel since he is pledged to challenge German prescriptions on the single currency’s rescue.

Le Pen’s performance – one in five French voting for the National  Front – is another thumbs down to Merkel, eurozone fiscal pacts, and surrendering national sovereignty over budgets and fiscal policy.

Hollande will be a cannier navigator of the contest over European economic policy-making – the tide is turning his way. But Germany is bigger, stronger, and much more successful.

Elections are interesting.

And even more interesting given the fact that so many countries, affecting a large percentage of the world’s population are occurring here and now.

For now?

Putin is leading a rejuvenated Russian motherland patriotic focus.

France appears to be moving in a socialistic direction which means that  maybe the political and the economic governance of Europe are heading in two opposed, contradictory directions.

And America? Well. We shall see.