Enlightened Conflict

Tag Archives: attitudes

instinct

April 6th, 2013

 

“Ideas pull the trigger, but instinct loads the gun.” – Don Marquisinstinct collective_unconsciouness

 

This quote is taken from Marquis’ “The Almost Perfect State” which was written in 1927 as a series of sharp criticisms of the Progressive Era.

Ok.

I imagine a lot of people read this quote and wonder if the quote would work better … “ideas load the gun, but instinct pulls the trigger.”

But I believe that misses Don’s point <albeit I have not spoken with him on this topic … he died in 1937>.

The point?

Knowledge and experience can only take you so far.

It is the difference between being solely analytical and incorporating the intangible <the instinctual>.

What he is suggesting is that all the bright big ideas in the world don’t mean shit if they cannot be brought into being without a person who can originate the intellectual movement of action. This person requires a special character.

Ah.

Special character.

Instinct is one of those things people hate.

Because it is not tangible … and it always assumes some level of risk.

It is research of one <which scares the shit out of people these days>.

That means …

Collaboration? Well. Nope.

Consensus? Geez. Nope.

Extrapolation through the hypotenuse of multiple data points discussed ad nausea and plotted on some nifty white board? Sounds like fun … but … nope.

Instinct is gut … albeit typically great instincts have been honed by experience and knowledge.

But in the end … it is not tangible nor proven.

It is … well … just what it is.

Sure.

It can be cultivated.

And it can even be honed.

But I do not believe it can be taught.

Well. Let me take that back and try this.

Good instincts cannot be taught.

Good instinct is first and foremost an internal aptitude. We all have instincts … but some just have gooder instincts. Beyond that natural foundation it is probably a combination of experience and knowledge and ultimately a mindset.

I say a mindset because instinct is a feeling and not anything visible or tangible. You sense what to do and where to go and what to say.

And it often isn’t because your instincts are proven good … but just rather that you know what feels wrong.

 

“Every time I’ve done something that doesn’t feel right, it’s ended up not being right.” – Mario M. Cuomo

 

That said.

I know one of the most frustrating things I have heard in business decision meetings is “I am not sure what the right thing to do is … but … what we are discussing doing sounds wrong.”

And while frustrating … it also feels right.

We sometimes get so rushed to make a decision we grab one … anyone will do. And, yet, it feels wrong … okay … maybe not wrong … just not right.

That is instinct.

Not only knowing the path to success … but also recognizing paths to failure & disappointment <before you even take one step on that path>.

It is a true joy to be near someone with good, if not great, instincts.

They seem to be in an effective zone and not in a comfort zone. What I mean is that they have a habit of disregarding distractions … discerning the important from the unimportant  … and have a focus. That focus may not be the destination <it can be> but oftentimes their instincts are reflective of the journey to the destination.

They have a humble confidence … and sometimes are even slightly insecure <I imagine because their strength is in the intangible>.

 

“Trust instinct to the end, even though you can give no reason.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson

 

And they are rarely emotional in decision making.

instinct good or badNow.

Conversely, it is absolutely miserable to be near someone who has crappy instincts <but thinks they have good instincts>.

It is not only miserable because you end up going down lots of fruitless paths and waste a lot of energy but also because instincts are intangible.

There are no numbers or research or facts that can counter instincts and intuition. Therefore someone in a leadership position who has crappy instincts is unmovable. They are literally an elephant in the room.

That is misery.

Regardless.

Instinct is a natural aptitude.

Kind of like a knack.

An innate tendency or response to act in ways that, at its most base description, is essential to development, preservation or survival.

As Hayakawa suggests … instinct implies innate disposition rather than having a talent. It is not a gift, nor a talent or even an aptitude. It is more an inborn intangible. It could be called a ‘Knack’ but that has almost always been associated with social rather than intellectual causes & situations.

It is tough in today’s world for people with good instincts.

While intellectual in its strength it is not proven with any reason.

In an over thinking, over analyzing, over safe world .. ‘without reason’ doesn’t often gain a place at the table.

Instinctual decision making often requires having people follow with some blind faith. And in a world of consensus and collaboration … well … that ain’t happening much these days.

leaf without a tree

March 4th, 2013

So.things big or little

Studying history, and using what you have learned, is a tricky challenge. Often we study history, and the past, so that we can “not make the same mistakes.” Well. The attempt is one of valor <and good intentions> but most actions using historical learning are misused <as they are misguided>.

“If you don’t know history, you don’t know anything. You’re a leaf that doesn’t know it’s part of a tree.” – Michael Crichton

—-

“History is not, of course, a cookbook offering pretested recipes. It teaches by analogy, not by maxims.” - Henry Kissinger

—–

Henry <or Hank to his friends> also said  …

“The study of history offers no manual of instructions that can be applied automatically: history teaches by analogy, shedding light on likely consequences of comparable situations. But each generation must determine for itself which circumstances are in fact comparable.”

Now.

Studying history is always good <that is a Bruce postulate>.

How you use what you learned studying history is always a challenge <that is a Life truth and an ongoing Life debate>.

Too often people want to use historical “learning” as a literal guide for what to do now <or in the future>.

You cannot.

Sorry.

But you can’t.

I do not care if we are talking about business, life or economics.

You cannot <I apologize for repeating myself>.

Hank, discussing Foreign Policy, actually walks us through a nice way to think about this.

Intellectuals analyze systems & situations while statesmen build them.

And therein lays a vast difference between the analyst and the statesman. The analyst can choose what problem he wishes to study whereas the statesman’s problems are imposed upon him. The analyst can allot whatever time is necessary to come to a clear conclusion while the overwhelming challenge of a statesman is time. The analysts runs no, or little, risk. If the conclusions prove wrong he can rewrite and reanalyze. The statesman is permitted only one guess and his mistakes are irretrievable.

 

smashing rear view mirrorSure. Typically the future is simply a version of the past. But what makes it challenging is that what appear to be superficial changes, that sometimes make it easily recognizable, are the things that transform situations into unrecognizable changed situations. In addition … we tend to ignore the ‘collection of people’ variable <I will explain later>.

In the end? We wonder what happened <and why we didn’t learn from history>.

Well.

As Kissinger states … history teaches by analogy, not identity.

Unfortunately this means that the lessons of history are never automatic.

That they can be apprehended only by a standard which admits the significance of a range of experience, that the answers we obtain will never be better than the questions we pose.

Now.

I do believe no significant decisions are possible without at least an awareness of the historical context.

For everything exists in time more than they do in a moment in time. What I mean by that is an explanation of ‘context.’ You may not be able to completely replicate the exact time, place, situation and experiences of any & all affecting what you are studying <or even replicate a majority of those variables> however you can gain a sense of choices that were available and choices made. This is contextual learning.

Because people forget that what they are studying is a given moment which is simply a situation where it is not only a reflection of a collection of individuals <and their experiences> but that situation also achieves a unique identity through the consciousness of a common history <those individuals are studying that particular moment colored by,or driven, by perceptions of beliefs of that time>.

The only possibility of learning is studying history within the collective memory.

It is not often that we actually learn something from the past. And it is even rarer that we draw the correct conclusions from it.

Why?

The lessons of history <and Life experiences also> are contingent.

That means they teach the consequences of certain actions … but they cannot force a recognition of comparable situations.

Well.

That is a BIG thought right there.

One that many of us should think about more often.

 

Let me translate <for my own pea like brain>.life as a straight line

History is contingent upon a series of factors … and to make it exponentially more difficult … contingent upon a continuum <horizontally> as well as simultaneously <vertically>.

Yikes.

That means exactly replicating the situation in which you are ‘learning from’ is … well … pretty much impossible.

The variations and variables almost seem limitless <try pointing that out in your next business meeting when someone says “what did we learn from past experience”>.

And … well … gosh … doesn’t that kind of make you rethink every business book you have ever read?

Regardless.

History is just that … history. A series of factors & variables all aligned for one moment in time <vertically & horizontally>.

Therefore … change is not only the constant but it also possibly represents the only legitimate path to progress.

I say that to suggest that change may actually freedom from the past.

And to suggest that history, when one decides to live it and not learn from it, can cage you.

I know.

Learning to break free from the history that holds no value <or decreases value> is difficult. It is easier to simply use it as a handbook of ‘what to do.’

If we truly seek to learn <and teach> we cannot be subjugated to history.

If we truly seek to be better than what we already are … we cannot do simply as history ‘dictates.’

But all we really feel most comfortable with is remaking things in the image of historical learning.

Well.

I guess that means to remake things better we have to be … oops … uncomfortable.

I believe what I just wrote will make a boatload of people very uncomfortable <assuming anyone understands what I wrote>. Why? Well. This kind of thinking can drive you crazy … particularly if you want to simply study and create conclusions <rather than hypotheses>.

So. The how do most people, and businesses, get around this type of thinking?

thinking Dont-Believe-ThinkThey suggest that they have isolated the most important variables … and can draw a correlation to the current situation … draw some conclusive conclusions … and isolate the best plan of action.

Well. They are nuts <if not crackpots or liars>. I do not doubt 99% of the intent of these people but they are still wrong. History provides context not analogy. Now people <in general> do not like that. It makes them feel uncomfortable. They want to know unequivocally that they will not be ‘making the mistakes of the past.’ Sorry. Can’t happen. You may be able to reduce the odds but cannot unequivocally guarantee it. Oops. Big trouble in the working world if you say shit like that.

But it is Truth. Truth in a business world. Truth in Life.

Another truth? <and something that most people will also feel uncomfortable with>

Studying history will make the in-the-moment decision better. I did not say “using history to make the decision” but rather “people who have studied history will better be able to CREATE a unique decision in the moment.” Yup. I used the dreaded ‘unique’ word. Most decisions are discreet <unique to the moment>. That makes people feel very very <very> uncomfortable.

Regardless. It is a Life truth.

In the end?

“Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the men of old; seek what they sought.” – Basho

Well.

That is a nice uncomfortable thought to end on.

frightening Fructis fall fight

February 27th, 2013

So.fructis absurd

Fructis went with alliteration to name their new product … I just was alliterative to illustrate how frightening a recent television commercial I saw was.

Before I explain why their recent television commercial frightens me … a couple of caveats:

-          I have never worked on a shampoo product

-          Yes … I have worked on products in the health & beauty industry

 

That said.

Their ad frightens me.

Oh.

But first … “fall fight”?

Oh boy.

Here is a stretch.

“Notice strands in your bathroom sink or brush? Improve hair’s resistance to everyday hair-fall due to breakage.”

So this shit fights everyday hair falling out <is that an issue?>. Now. Some people may call this “going bald little by little” or maybe “everyday dead useless hair being eliminated so that newer fresher stronger hair can grow in.” But, as noted earlier, I have never worked with a shampoo brand … so what do I know.

Anyway.

While I was first surprised that Fructis was advertising a Fall <seasonal> product in the winter I was pleasantly <if albeit still confused> surprised to find the name had nothing to do with the season but rather your hair falling out <an annual issue … not a seasonal issue>.

Ok.

The execution.

 

Fall Fight ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=481l1HoRThQ

 

Let me run through the logic in what you just saw <I am writing as if I participated in discussion … but I didn’t really>.

She has to brush her hair inside … because that is where cool people brush their hair before they go out and do something cool. Oh. Plus. That is where hair falls out <at home>.

Whew. So … how do we show hair falling out?

A hair ball. That’s it. And if we have a hair ball we can have a cute kitten <because people like kittens>.

fructis fall fight kittenExcellent.

Oh. Does the kitten puke the hair ball? Oh. C’mon. That’s disgusting. The kitten is just playing with a disgusting tumbleweed of hair that is somewhere in the house.

Wow. Great idea.

Oops. But we have to go outside because that is ultimately where cool people hang out with other cool <good looking> people and do cool things.

What about the kitten?

Well. It has to stay inside because … well … it belongs at home <eating all the hair that has fallen out … and if it pukes it will be off camera>.

So. Now we are outside.

But now that she is outside we need to her to look smart <as well as having fun>.

Ok. Let’s put glasses on her. Lenses in or lenses out? Aw. Who cares? She looks smart and we want people to think that smart, fun, cool, good looking people <whose hair falls out> buy our shampoo.

<cut to putting glasses on her>

Hey.

She does look smart. Let’s actually make her smart. Let’s let her tell everyone about the key ingredients in the shampoo <which tells everyone that we were smart to create a shampoo that scientifically keeps you from going bald>.

But she is outside … how do we make her actually smart?

Aw. Who cares? Let’s have fun. Let’s give her a blackboard in the middle of a field and have her show some random molecular diagrams with the names of the ingredients next to them <is it really the right molecule structure? Aw. Who cares? What girl who buys our product really cares about that stuff … it just looks smart … and of course then they will think they are smart! … plus … we put the name of the ingredient next to it so they will think it is right>.

(yell to some intern t go on wikipedia and get some molecular images to copy)

A blackboard in the middle of the field?

Sure. In fact. She is so smart she carries a blackboard in her car wherever she goes. Wow. Should we show the car? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … interesting idea. Shoot it. We will have it in the can and if we have the time we can put it in somewhere.

What about the kitten? Should it be with the blackboard she is carrying around?

Wow. That’s silly. It’s at home playing with the hairball … why would she be so mean to take it away from that? Don’t overthink. Your first idea was good. Put the blackboard in the car and get some footage <but we don’t want to pay overages>.

Ok.

Now we need to show that our shampoo is strong … but fun.

Ok.

Why don’t we have a boxing ring in the middle of this field and shadowbox with real looking boxing gloves to show strength?

Wow. Great idea.

Hey …. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … why don’t we also have one of those ‘high strikers’ you see at carnivals and not only is she smart but strong enough to show the shampoo is strong? <and that allows one of her good looking friends to box in the field so she doesn’t get sweaty>fructis fall-fight-tv-commercial

 

<high striker definition: A high striker, also known as a strength tester, or strongman game, is an attraction used in funfairs, fundraisers, and carnivals. It operates by utilizing the lever where one end holds a puck attached to the tower and the other end is struck by the person or contestant using a hammer or mallet. The aim of players is to ring the bell suspended on top of the tower. If the lever is struck with enough force, the puck will rise high enough to hit the bell, indicating a success. Modern versions use a spring-loaded version of the lever, others use an enclosed striking mechanism.

Operators entice people to try the high striker with phrases such as: “Step right up!”,”Test your strength!”, or “Who are the men out of the boys?”>

 

Wow. Excellent idea. A boxing ring AND a carnival.

A carnival in the middle of the field? No silly. Just the high striker.

Wow. That is brilliant <and fun>.

Ok.

Don’t forget.

We need to show some other people to show she isn’t some narcissistic self-absorbed hermit with a kitten. So let’s have some good looking people hanging out like they are wanting to hang out with the smart girl who is no longer going bald.

Excellent.

Go down the hallway to where I think they are doing the casting for the Calvin Klein ad campaign and see if you can grab a  couple of people.

Ok.

Where do we put them?

In the field stupid. That’s where all cool smart people who are not going bald hang out with their friends.

Should they have a blackboard too? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm … no.

If they do not have one that suggests our Fructis girl is smarter than they are because she buys our stuff … but she is an influencer! Everyone will assume she tells them about our shampoo and they will go out and buy it. Excellent. We have incorporated word-of-mouth into traditional tv advertising <tell the junior account person and maybe we can amortize the cost of production over this word of mouth thing>.

Oh.

And we need a cool song <even though the song is relatively meaningless to the execution communication> so let’s use something by the Ting Tings <Great DJ is the song>. I know their music is used on Gossip Girl so it will be perfect for us. Who cares how much it costs! Darn it … we are a fun cool brand and Ting Tings are a fun cool band <cut to senior management on both advertising and client side making a note to themselves, using a pencil, to find out who the hell the Ting Tings are>.

————–

Whew.

abandon shipThat’s it.

There is so much random stuff happening in this advertisement my head hurts.

Now.

Someone is going to argue I am not in the target audience and that it is a ‘fun’ ad.

On the first part? Correct. I am not.

On the second part? You can create a fun informative execution without having to resort to simple random shit. Yeah. I said random. There are so many little ‘bites’ of information and lifestyle cues I have this vision that there was a long checklist of things they wanted to say and show and then they figured out how to piece it all together <under a basic framework of ‘fun’>.

Look.

Developing ongoing campaigns is significantly more difficult to develop good stuff <technical word for ‘work’> than one-offs.

But confusing the two is bad … really bad. What do I mean? Well. It seems like in today’s business world of ‘what have you done for me lately’ brand managers are often suggesting ‘treat this as if it needs to be a standalone idea’ with the good intention to get a break through type idea/execution … but the bad intention of “I don’t give a fuck what has been done before me … I want to do something great!” <usually stated in front of their marketing/advertising vendors with not just one exclamation point>.

I imagine it is up to the partners/vendors to bring some logic, if not some rational long term perspective to the discussion, but I recognize it becomes tough to do so when you have a young, or semi young, client saying ‘give me something different <or else … threat in whispers …>. So what marketing/advertising partners do as they shift into survival ‘responsible’ mode is that they develop some broad strategic guard rails to work within.

For example … try out … ‘well … Fructis is a fun brand for fun people and fun events/life’ <note that ‘fun’ is the operative word>.

Honestly … that strategic direction sucks <because it is broad and relatively meaningless … and Disney is a fun brand> but it gives the idea developer <creative people> a virtually endless horizon of possible paths to pursue.

Regardless.

I get frightened when I see advertisements like this because someone actually thinks this is good for Fructis long term.

Short term? I may not have even invested the energy writing about it <although it is a wacky configuration of stuff in an advertisement>.

Actually I get frightened on a variety of levels.

Hair falling out shampoo? <and calling it Fall Fight>

The advertisement? <actual execution>

The development? <how the idea was actually developed>

 

In the end.

Is the advertisement really bad? Of course not. It is kind of a wacky semi likeable ad.

I just cannot envision it being in the ‘good’ category in terms of execution and strategic.

Plus.

It gave me something to write about.

pressure doesn’t gain time

February 13th, 2013

Ok.and time is all there is

I almost called this “our obsession with time.”

And because of this obsession … procrastinators, who have always been crucified, are being verbally harpooned day in and day out in books, businesses and everyday life as “time wasters” <which is metaphorically making those people as bad as smokers, litterers and communists or, in general, inferior flawed people>.

Yup.

In my eyes procrastinators have a tough life these days.

 

Employers are getting better at squeezing any ‘time wasting.’

And peer pressure makes any time wasting become the equivalent of having a post-it note super glued to your forehead with lazy/inefficient/nonproductive/etc. <choose one or all> on it <or just a poor employee>.

Even compensation is becoming more short term.

Almost 60% of Americans are paid hourly.

And even if management isn’t tracking hours, paying people by the hour, demanding meeting effectiveness by the minute or utilizing time efficiency models to squeeze every productive minute out of you … you are putting pressure on yourself with to-do lists, calendar updates, scheduled sex events with your partner and “family time” <limited to maximize 15 minute increments to insure you get everything done you need to get done>.

We are so obsessed with time and maximizing it … all of it … each and every minute … and we are being pressured <by others or by ourselves> to do so all the with the intent to ‘gain time.’

<side note: this, to me, falls into the same category as ‘giving 110%’ in terms of absurdity … I can’t gain time or ‘free up’ time … I gots 24 hours no matter how I manage it>

Anyway.

We are constantly seeking to maximize moments under the guise of ‘not procrastinating’ or in harsher words … not wasting … our time.

Maslow suggested we should seek, and encounter, “peak moments of clarity.”

Some bonehead called Eckhart Tolle <who is considered a very smart bonehead in some circles> wrote an entire book expounding on living a life in the ‘now’ (Power of Now) which was slightly absurd.

A company I worked at, JWT, even wrote a trend white paper called “Time is the new Currency” <in the early 2000’s I believe>.

 

stopThis is crazy.

First of all obsessing over anything, let alone time, is not and never will be … healthy.

And secondly it will never increase efficiency, nor effectiveness, when all time is said and done.

Thirdly, pressure, especially on an ongoing basis, is never a good ingredient in the formula for happiness.

All that said.

 

I would like to reference an obscure article which can be found in the Academy of Management Journal <Brian Gunia & 3 co-authors of Johns Hopkins> and a book “Wait: the art and science of delay” <Frank Partnoy>.

Let me begin with one of my favorite topics – doing the right thing <ethically>.

I found it really interesting that in a series of experiments slowing down actually makes us more ethical <I had to reread this several times because I guess in my own head I would have thought our initial knee jerk reaction to a decision situation would have been us at our most ethical … but I was wrong>. When confronted with a clear choice between right and wrong, people are 5 times more likely to do the right thing if they have time to think about it rather than if they are forced to make a snap decision. In addition they studied businesses and suggest organizations with a ‘fast pulse’ <like banks> are more likely to suffer from ethical problems than those who move more slowly.

Say what?

Yup.

Time pressure enhances the odds someone will make a less ethical, less right, decision.

Beyond that … the books and research suggest that delaying decisions <not yielding to time pressure> actually enhances the quality of the decision.

Sure. There is a ROI on time and delay and decision making … I imagine if I were smart enough I could draw out a decision utility graph with time and quality of decisions but I am not only not smart enough but I cannot draw.

Suffice it to say these relatively smart guys say that in their published papers.

Look.

Maybe because of the business I am in I get asked a lot about family time (or diminishing of family time) and not having enough time to <fill in the blank> or managing time.

Beyond the fact I have either seen or have done so much research on how people actually USE their time … I have found that we invest so much time trying to manage time … or worry about how to alleviate the pressure time seems to put on us … we actually waste a shitload of time <which actually creates a doom loop of pressure to use and maximize time>.

There is so much discussion and pressure on what to do with time I see diminishing results.

The pressure to maximize time is actually leading to minimizing time (go figure)

So.

I remind people that we all have the same amount of time … which usually draws some evil looks … but its true … it’s what you elect to do with it and, maybe more importantly, your approach toward time.

I tend to believe we forget, or undervalue, the fact that it is less important to do things first then to do things right.

And I have someone on my side … Warren Buffett … who has said … “lethargy bordering on sloth remains the cornerstone of our investment style.”pressure and time

<and he has made a BOATLOAD of money>

Me?

I worry that our obsession with time <speed> has a negative effect in business and at home <basically … in our lives>.

The secret to an effective brain is a combination of fast and slow <and there is research to support this>.

Procrastinators get a bad rap … yet this is exactly what they do.

A fact.

If you leave something to the last minute you only have a minute to do it.

Sounds obvious but it is a truth.

Procrastinators are actually the ultimate non procrastinators.

They utilize their time the most effectively.

The research shows that procrastinators actually use the time while putting things on hold thinking and evaluating and assessing different shit. Some relevant shit and some non relevant shit … but it all goes into our mental gourds … rattles around … and when the time comes when the decision/action trigger needs to get pulled … the majority of the time the action is a well rounded ‘right’ decision.

And if that just isn’t you?

Think about this … I found this thought from a mother … or maybe call her a ‘home manager’ instead.

“When you don’t know what to do next, just do the thing in front of you.”

Ok.

If you can live with that kind of thinking I actually believe that not only alleviates pressure <because you just say ‘screw it … I am just doing something’> and you are actually ‘doing’ inseatd of planning or thinking or worrying.

Ok <part 2>.

But I admit it certainly helps if you have more of an idea of what’s the most important thing to do next.

Because these days it seems like too many of us respond to the tyranny of the urgent.

One of the characteristics of an adult who has their shit together is the ability to recognize the difference between the important and the urgent.  And, ultimately, refuse to be tyrannized by the urgent … refuse to manage by crisis … refuse to waste time under the pressure to not use time wisely.

Sure. Easier said than done.

Who hasn’t struggled to start something ‘important’ but can’t seem to find the time because of an exploding diaper, an urgent business email, the ringing telephone, or whatever the crisis du jour may be in your own little world?

But as time managers we must recognize the difference … and disregard not only the pressure of others … but the pressure of the moment.

We cannot operate solely in response to the pressure of urgency for long … or we will go nuts.

Well.time persepctive

Time is not about pressure … it is simply about choices <which I fully recognize creates a different type of pressure>.

And choosing what is most important.

When we’ve made deliberate decisions about what’s important certain choices become a no-brainer.

You’re at peace with the choices you make, because they align with your priorities, and they just make sense.

Regardless.

If time is about choices … and under pressure we tend to make poorer choices … it kind of seems like that equals something to the effect that pressure loses time.

Go figure.

But I was never good at math.

temporary advantage

January 9th, 2013

“Every advantage is temporary.” ― Katerina Stoykova Klemer

And.

“… the only true advantage is knowledge.” – <someone I cannot find at the moment>

So.

This thought of temporary advantage, and knowledge, is easy for business but it is also relevant to Life.

Let me begin with business <because, frankly, it is easier>.

Businesses are always seeking an advantage.

And they should.

I imagine the point I am going to make <in the end> is that most businesses don’t consider ‘advantage’ as temporary. When it actually happens … they treat it as sustainable and want to ride it all the way into the sunset <or as far as the horse will carry them toward it>.

And ultimately that becomes their downfall.

Couple of thoughts.

First thought.

Most often all energy is invested in developing a distinct product, or service, or some tangible advantage.

In fact gobs of money is spent against this objective.

Definition of gobs? Lots of money & time & intellectual energy. And this typically leads to some type of patent <if you are smart> or, at minimum, something different enough you feel it is … well … different <you may actually convince yourself after eating a pound of M&Ms in focus groups and multiple cocktails staring at your navel that it is “unique”>.

Now.  Let me tell you a business truth.

Product advantages are actually fairly easy to attain. In fact … they are a dime a dozen. Yup. Sorry about that.

Here is the other business truth.

The majority of product advantages are indiscernible to anyone but the one who developed it. I call it ‘dancing on the head of a pin’ differentiation.

Frankly? It is all wasted energy <mostly>.

Personally I prefer to aim for a competitive parity product that has enough meaningful benefits that it can compete over time <in other words … it is a sustainable product> … and use knowledge to be an advantage.

Sound crazy? Maybe.

Sound painful to say to management? Yes. Trust me … I have the scars to prove how painful.

But if you can keep your head out of your egotistical ass you actually have a chance to see this idea through to a very profitable, sustainable profitable, conclusion.

This translates into the ability to keep the product competitive but limit the amount of investment you have to invest to update/improve/trash & reinvent.

And use knowledge to sustain advantage because knowledge is a changing environment … never stagnant.

Next.

Second thought.

Sustainable advantage.

Sustainable advantage is really rare.

Extremely rare <unless you define ‘sustainable’ as ‘we did it for a week’>.

And, frankly, many businesses are actually too slow to take advantage of their … well … advantage. The window of advantage does not stay open long.

Businesses work to gain it <the ever elusive ‘advantage’>. They get it. They build plans to take advantage of the advantage. They go and do … and … well … their advantage is not only as advantageous as it used to look … but in many cases it is no longer even the advantage that you thought it was. The window is closed. Oh. Maybe worse? To your dismay you look around the room and another frickin’ window is open.

Damn. Wrong window at the wrong time.

That’s my quick acerbic soundbite for businesses on temporary advantage.

Personally I believe many businesses mismanage ‘advantage.’ Mismanage through incorrect attitude and in incorrect behavior.

Not only do they typically think incorrectly they also implement too slowly … and ultimately they do not know when to ‘abandon ship.’.

Regardless … now that every business person wants to send me a scathing personal email I will move on to the next topic.

Life.

Yup. I will discuss Life and temporary advantages.

We all know Life is challenging. And that is so mainly because it is always changing.

Just when you think you have at least one thing figured out Life moves the thing <hence the term “life sucks” was created>.

To even have a chance to be competitive with Life you have to continuously gain knowledge and adapt. There is no formula for gaining knowledge … sometimes you read something, meet someone or see something that changes your knowledge.

That is self stimulated gathering of knowledge … and it takes some fortitude and self desire to do so.

Therefore thank god for kids (youth in general).

They are a natural incentive to stimulate knowledge growth to maintain advantage. I worry about people like me, who does not have children, as well as those who ignore the knowledge, and stimulus to learn, young people offer. I guess my point is that we should use kids as a knowledge stimulant <rather than ignore them or subjugate them to our past tense type knowledge>.

I thank god I am a reader. It permits me to at least maintain a competitive place in a restless world. Notice I didn’t say competitive advantage.

Just be competitive.

I say that because I fully understand I will never find a competitive advantage against life. Well. Maybe I get a glimmer of an advantage on occasion. But it is fleeting.  I keep a constant eye on the fact you gain knowledge to try and keep up. And every once in a while you get really lucky and dash ahead for a second or two.

Two things about that ‘glimmer of the advantage.’

First.

Some silly people delude themselves into believing they have a competitive advantage in life. And, yes, they are delusional. People like this don’t seem to understand that Life is like a river constantly flowing. They quit paddling to rejoice in their ‘advantage’ and … oops … all the crap in life not only feverishly paddles by to get ahead <and lay some traps> but some of Life’s crap may actually slow down and do their best to smack you around a little <because a moving target is harder to hit so when you stop paddling you are easier prey>.

These people confuse ‘glimmer’ with ‘this is my new home.’ That is why they are delusional … because normal people could never get confused by those two things.

Second.

I worry about the people who never even gain one glimpse of the advantage. Because a glimpse gives hope you can win … at least on occasion in life.

No glimmer? No hope?  That worries me.

How can anyone, even the strongest of the strongest, keep going on without hope for something better?

I am fairly sure I couldn’t.

I struggle to see how anyone could.

Anyway.

I now envision someone cranking up an email with a thought on “hey, hold on a second, you seem to be suggesting becoming a chameleon … and don’t you always talk about being true to yourself at all times?!?” <please notice I used a rare exclamation point just for emphasis>

Despite the fact I will give that someone cranking up an email major points because that means someone actually has read some of my drivel in the past … I will quickly go to this quote:

“Adaptability is not imitation. It means power of resistance and assimilation.” – Mahatma Gandhi

And then I would answer this way … in business and in life … the core is the core.

That core is the “me inside” and that is the sustainable competitive product. And by product I mean a product being a manufactured product or simply you <or me>. Anyway. That competitive core probably doesn’t have any advantage … it is simply able to go on day after day, year after year and … well … continue to ‘be’ … to exist. It <you & I> compete in Life <or with Life> because of a good steady core.

Adaptability through knowledge leverages your core … and means possible temporary advantage.

That’s it.

That’s my point.

indifference

December 28th, 2012

“The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it’s indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it’s indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it’s indifference.” ― Elie Wiesel

Ok.

While I believe life, in general, is indifferent to our fate in life … I believe we should not be indifferent to our fate.

In other words … because Life is indifferent to us … it is up to us to actually make something happen … to not be indifferent.

In other words …

If you do nothing … you will gain nothing.

Well.

Actually. If you do nothing you will get less than nothing. Mostly because life is … well … indifferent. It will not pay attention to you unless you pay attention to it.

I say that because I think some people believe if they knew there would be no consequences for their actions they would lead a fuller life. They would have the courage to do more and take some chances.

Maybe have the courage to let themselves go forward. Maybe take some more risks <risks sometimes simply being things that move you even slightly out of your comfort zone … not big hairy audacious actions>.

And those people do nothing because they fear the consequences.

They have forgotten that Life is indifferent.

Here is the tricky thing about life.

It is kind of a trap.

Doing more, taking some chances, means more responsibility for actions.

It is simple math.

The more you ‘do’ the more shit you can be blamed for … or … given credit for <that is a Life formula I believe>.

Life is built to be stimulated. If you do not stimulate it … it is indifferent to you.

By the way.

Elie didn’t mean that when he said this.

While I may have made some valid life points … he was speaking about standing off to the side in Life and allowing bad to succeed over good.

And while being indifferent with regard to ourselves is a shame. In general it is harmless to anyone excepting ourselves.

But. If we are indifferent to life outside of us … and what is happening … you should be aware that bad, or evil, is not indifferent.

It is always active.

It is always opportunistic.

And in the end maybe that last point really is the big point about our Life.

Indifference permits that which is bad, which is always active, to win.

If you are indifferent hate, ugliness, heresy and despair … it will run your life. It will win.

Doing nothing means you lose.

That means that doing nothing, being indifferent, is not really taking the safe path … although it may feel so at the time. By being indifferent you permit all that is ‘not good’ to surround you … and smother you.

My point?
If we all did this, be indifferent, evil wins.

Heck.

If the majority of us did that, bad wins <in the bigger scheme of things>.

Frankly, I believe many of us think we are not indifferent … and yet we are.

Ok. Maybe selectively indifferent … but indifferent nonetheless.

I know I am <when I don’t pay attention>.

We should all pay a little more attention to indifference.

I know … I know. It can be difficult. Rightfully so we tend to focus on our lives and what is happening day to day. And I am not suggesting we shouldn’t. Because most of that is important.

But that may mean we become indifferent to other, pretty important things, swirling around us.

And maybe we do so assuming someone else is not indifferent.

And that is where I believe “bad” <ugliness, heresy, evil, etc.> is crafty. I believe they whisper in our selective indifferent ears suggesting “don’t worry, you don’t have time but someone else is not indifferent … THEY will make time.”

Bad is good at this. Bad is good at convincing us to let some responsibility slip to others.

Evil is everywhere and sly and relentless.

Sure.

It may seem tiring to know you cannot be indifferent … but for what is right, what is good, to win … we cannot let down our guard and be indifferent.

Even if you are indifferent personally you need to recognize Life needs people who are actively involved.

exercise in the north

November 26th, 2012

fact: people who live in colder states exercise more than those who live in warm ones

bruce conclusion: there are more couch potatoes in warm areas than cold areas

Ok.

This factoid surprised me.

In fact … I can further show research that suggests people in colder countries exercise more than warmer ones <in industrialized countries versus countries dependent upon agriculture & labor based lives>.

Go figure.

The people who live in locations where it is actually easier to be more active more hours of the day … more days of the year … are less active.

First.

A study from Brazil’s federal university of Pelotas measured the physical activity in 122 countries (89% of world population).

Here is some not so new news:

-          rates of exercise have declined since industrial revolution as technology has replaced labor.

Overall 31% globally do not get enough exercise.

-          Rich people (richer countries) are less active than poorer countries.

-          Women tend to exercise less than men (34% inactive to 28% of men) except in Croatia, Finland, Iraq and Luxembourg where apparently women are more active than men < I cannot even speculate why>.

-          If you are a couch potato, move to Malta … you will have plenty of company on the couch.

Malta is the worst (72% getting too little exercise) with Saudi Arabia (69percent) close behind.

Interestingly United States <with its well known reputation for obesity> is actually better than what is perceived … with over 60% of the people sufficiently active.

Here is an interesting thought from the study:

“… the high rates of inactivity are worrying. Paradoxically human beings seem to have evolved to benefit from exercise … while eschewing it whenever they can. Insufficient activity has nearly the same effect on life expectancy as smoking.”

I will come back to that thought because not only are people exercising less … but in areas where it is actually easier to exercise year round those people are the worst exercise-avoidance offenders.

Second.

Back to the United States.

Now. The US being the US … while the Brazilian study suggested a positive spin on activity levels … the CDC suggests that the activity level sucks <maybe they didn’t compare globally?>.

A report by the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention declares that only 64% <versus .. over 60% …> of Americans surveyed can be described as physically active (defined as over 150 minutes per week of moderate exercise or half as much vigorous activity).

Almost a quarter get no exercise at all outside the workplace.

In a breakdown of states it seems that people who live in cold states like Alaska are more likely to get their weekly work-out than those in sunny Florida.

The biggest exceptions from this correlation are Hawaii, where 70% are energetic, and Tennessee, which has the lowest percentage of active people despite a lower average temperature than several other states.

Okay. Like I said upfront … it surprised me … so I did some research.

And there is plenty of research to show that your body will respond very differently to the same program of diet and exercise in the summer than it does in the winter.

First.

The temperature in which you exercise affects the number of fat calories your body burns for energy. Some evidence for this comes from a trial published in the journal Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise <subjects cycled for 90 minutes in several different temperatures – 14degrees, 32, 50 & 68 degrees Fahrenheit … the study was actually done in Celsius>.

The number of fat calories burned for energy was reduced at colder temperatures <although previous research at Kent State University also shows an increase in protein breakdown when you exercise in the cold>.

So … that actually means you may exercise more but burn less fat in colder weather.

How much does that suck for people in cold geography looking for results despite exercising more than their warmer friends?

Now.

This is not the only study to look at the effect of cold air on fat metabolism. And the results are far from conclusive. But regardless … people in warmer geography exercise less than colder geography.

What a waste of good weather.

I guess my biggest conclusion is that there are more couch potatoes in warm places than cold places.

Anyway.

How do you know if you are a couch potato?

-          You hate the idea of outdoor activity. Heck. The thought of any activity makes you break out in sweat. You figure why bother when you can watch activity on TV.

-          Your life revolves around television & computers … call it the doom loop of inactivity as it cycles 24/7.

-          How you eat is out of your control … your body demands intake <of whatever it wants>. You are at the mercy of yourself <if that explains itself>

-          Nobody else around you is active … heck … why do it if no one else is?

-          You prefer relaxing after a hard days work … all the time … and you even like relaxing after relaxing.

-          You just can’t find the time … in fact … how can you find the time when you don’t even have enough time for your tv shows?.

-          You are in denial about any issues you may have with weight. Other people are too skinny any way.

-          You are obsessed with your spot on the couch. It has a special cushion. You have a special place for the snack bowl and drink. And you get grumpy if anyone takes your spot or screws with it in any way.

-          You make sure that all the accoutrements are always available and accessible … the multiple remotes … the food supplies … the necessary comfort pillows/cushions/stuffed animals or blow up dolls … oh … at the spot.

-          You preempt distractions. All phones are off the hook. Your cell is on silent. The door bell is disengaged. The curtains are pulled so no one thinks you are home.

<be scared of you scored anywhere over 5 out of ten>

Seriously though … the most shocking finding from the Brazilian study is that insufficient activity has about the same effect on life expectancy as smoking.

So.

If you meet the couch potato criteria and have attained sloth status maybe it is time to think about exercising <or moving to the north apparently>.

You don’t need to be running marathons.

150 minutes a week.

2 ½ hours a week.

½ hour 5 days a week.

21.4 minutes a day.

It ain’t much.

And it seems like a pretty simple thing to do to begin addressing the worldwide obesity crisis. Small steps contribute to large results.

logan’s answering machine

November 11th, 2012

“a long time ago, we used to be friends . . .” – Dandy Warhols <Veronica Mars theme song>

Ok … while this is about Logan’s cell answering messages <and teen Life lessons> … Logan was a great character in Veronica Mars. And Veronica Mars was a great show. I am relatively sure Kristen Bell <who was Veronica Mars> is a good actress … but her Veronica character was the PERFECT role for her. Really smart, in-your-face quick witted soundbite driven communicator, strong but sensitive … all the while balancing being a teen, a girl and a sense of maturity.

And while the show’s various mysteries and crimes were fairly well plotted <some stories were a little far out there> it was some great quick dialogue writing and some unbelievable soundbite moments that makes the show really work. For me? I struggle to remember long monologues <except maybe West Wing> but I constantly remember the short back & forth smart dialogue.

Anyway.

Veronica was not the only great character … there was Logan. A counterpart in quips.

High school Vice Principal: Mr. Echolls, may I have a word?

Logan: Anthropomorphic. It’s all yours, big guy.

The show was filled with little moments like this.

But.

Logan’s cell phone answering message. One of the really fun aspects of the show was how this  tortured rich kid <Logan Echolls> used different quotations in a tongue in cheek way on his cell’s answering machine that he likes to call “inspirational messages.” They were delightful in that they were delivered in a slightly sarcastic tone but also as true insight into how he felt <or what he … or any typical teen … was dealing with>. You were never really sure he was pulling your leg or trying to share a helpful thought. The writers treated it as an intermittent  running gag. It was awesome … funny … a little wacky … and always relevant to the situation. It was real wisdom but dropped into the real life situations Logan seemed to constantly find himself in. And, frankly, as good TV shows do … they parallel our own Life situations on occasion.

Here are a few <and remember that he is quoting as a high school junior or senior guy>:

“The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams.” -Eleanor Roosevelt

-          Teens are in an odd, uncomfortable position in that almost their entire life is ahead of them … all their dreams remain on the horizon … and yet they are crossing into adulthood where reality has a nasty habit of forcing you to better assess your dreams maybe before you would like to. High school is a great place for dream building. And at exactly the same time … Life, in general, is a tough place for those who have dreams. This is where I really feel like teachers are in a very tough position in today’s society. Their real job is almost equally balanced between pragmatic teaching and hope building. They balance the possible and the impossible in almost every kid’s head. And, yet, parents are constantly pounding them on “why are you filling my kid’s head with all that nonsense … he doesn’t need to be dreaming … he needs to be thinking about doing.”  Teachers are getting squeezed. And teens are getting confused.

Look. High school kids clearly understand reality. They know they will need a job. They know they need to be ‘good at something.’ And they know they need to do some  things to insure they are prepared. We adults are smoking the wacky weed, or taking too many of those  calming pills, if we do not believe that. We also are foolish if we do not understand that any Life transition moment <any … even as an adult> is challenging … and a little scary … as you leap from one spot to another. It drives me crazy that adults forget that shit.

Anyway. What makes Logan and Veronica Mars kind of special is that Logan knows all of this … and is going into adulthood kicking & screaming … while Veronica <who he loves> cannot wait to be an adult. The lesson to us adults? They both have dreams. And Veronica is no more valuable, better or exemplary than Logan because of this. People find their own timing with regard to knowing what they are going to do in Life.

“Adversity is the diamond dust with which heaven polishes its jewels.” -Thomas Carlyle

-          We adults have a habit of scoffing <I just wanted to type that word> at what teens believe is ‘adversity’ in their lives and say things like “wait until you get into the real world” or “wait until you have the responsibilities of a family.” We are silly to do so. Adversity is relative. And, to a teen, adversity is often uncomfortably out of their control <because it more often at the mercy of their parents’ lives>.

So while there are some things they can control … there is a lot that is out of their control.  And that is a maddening type of adversity. I surely don’t like it as an adult … and as a teen, when you still have all your dreams in front of you, it is also a little scary <and a LOT aggravating>.  You know … the truth is that the significant majority of the time teens are doing the best that they can. Life and adversity is grinding away at them and they all pretty much believe <at that time in their life> that there really is a diamond somewhere inside them.

I wish more adults would remember that more often <and I wish more adults told teens there is a diamond in there>.

“To love and win is the best thing. To love and lose: the next best.” -William Thackeray

-          Of course, as a teen, this is said sarcastically. Oh, and painfully at exactly the same time. Your first love is always that … the first. Trying to convince yourself that ‘losing a love is the next best’ is a losing battle. Almost everyone learns the truth of this quote at some point in their lives … but … the first is always the first.

This is one of those thoughts that sounds awesome theoretically but is a painful reflection of Life trial & error. I think this thought is even more powerful because it is being said by a teen guy … okay … a tough guy teen. Being a teen boy is a tricky balance. Lots of balancing in fact. As you wander from boy to young man there are some toughness, ‘manly man’ expectations involved … and emotions are an interior thing at a time where much of high school life is an exterior thing. The brilliance of Veronica Mars?  Logan gets to maintain his exterior tough guy and decided to share the interior emotion via this faceless piece of third party technology … the cell phone answering machine.

We should remember that even the toughest appearing kids need some outlet for their interior thoughts. We can either give it to them … or they will find it for themselves.

“Life’s tragedy is that we get old too soon and wise too late.” -Ben Franklin

-          When I heard Logan say this I almost laughed out loud. Teens collect experience moments at an amazing pace. And it is still not fast enough. While we old folk always joke that ‘kids always think they know everything’ … we are wrong. Very very wrong. They don’t. And they certainly don’t think that.

They are just doing the best they can with what they have. Sure. They may bluff through some moments <which is mostly a “I don’t want to look stupid” action rather than a real belief they know everything>. Sure. They wished they knew more and had more experience and were ‘wiser’ … but I don’t know one teen who didn’t wish he/she had some more knowledge. That doesn’t mean they believe all older folk know more than they do <would you as you look around at how some of us old folk actually act?> but they certainly recognize that they have a shitload more to learn. And they certainly wish they knew what they really needed to know to deal with some of the crap they have to deal with. We old folk need to remember that Life’s trial & error gauntlet, particularly at that age, ain’t fun.

Anyway.

And the last dose of wisdom, inspiration thought for the day, Logan will share with you today:

“If you dig deep enough, you’re going to find that everyone’s a sinner.” – Logan Echolls

This is a pretty thoughtful thought. Sin covers a lot … envy, greed, lust, etc.

and the real thought behind this is the true fact … no one is innocent … the only question is … how will you bear the guilt? Yeah. This thought is not really about ‘sinning’ or being a sinner but rather acceptance.

We all have flaws. We all make mistakes. We all have done some thing we are not proud of. The real question alll of us face is not whether we have sinned in some way or not but rather how we accept that which was done. In the show Logan was extremely flawed <as kids trying to figure things out typically are> but at his core he was a good ‘man in the making’ …

If you dig deep enough inside, you will find everyone is basically the same … we all have hopes & dreams & good intentions … and insecurities intertwined throughout. And we all work our way though our high school years hacking our way through all of them. And we do <and think> some stupid things at that time in our lives. Heck. Life bombards you with so many different challenges from so many different directions all at a time when you are trying to define your own character and establish whatever version of self esteem you will carry with you moving forward … it would be exceptional if you made no mistakes.  If you dig deep enough into your memory banks for that time in life … we all have sinned in some way.

Give kids a break. Of all the times in a Life I cannot think of another when insecurities are as tangled up with good intentions … and ‘sin’ behavior. And we should give them a break because of what I typed earlier … ‘how will you bear the guilt.’ As a teen shapes themselves into young adults I tend to believe we would like them to use as little guilt as possible as they shape themselves for the future.

Anyway.

Veronica Mars is a smart show. And Logan is an added bonus. Maybe just as sharp as Veronica with a similar slightly cynical view of life. The combination of the two makes for an introspective look at the teen/young adult mind <in a pretty entertaining show>.

And the inspirational messages are a nice <sarcastic> reminder of the stuff teens deal with.

electronica as a commodity & zedd & kerli

October 7th, 2012

As the technology has developed in music it has became possible for individuals or smaller groups Well. While I do love the fact electronica <dance beat, club tempo, whatever you want to call it> has finally made the prime time playlists … I fear it is becoming almost commodity-like. Because of technological advancements almost anyone can produce electronic songs and recordings in small studios or even their basements. At the same time, computers facilitated the use of music “samples” and “loops” as construction kits for creating songs. This is the basis of this thing on today’s radio called electronica <which includes a variety of styles including ambient, downtempo, house and trip-hop>.

I really do like this kind of music. I always have … European dance clubs have been playing this stuff for years.

But … in doses.

But I will also admit that the advancement of all this technology makes it difficult to figure out who can really sing.  And the issue gets compounded by the popular dance-techno (what I call euro dance hip hop) sound. In this genre there are a bunch of really good songs where singers don’t sing songs … they provide well planned song bites. Listen to them … very very rarely does someone sing all the way through … they are given sections to sing somewhere between some amazingly danceable music bridges. Here is a thought.

Maybe we should think this generation is creating a contemporary version of the torch singer. And while it is a different time and place I tend to believe the rules are the same – singing in doses and complimentary.

Therefore. Someone like David Guetta <or any traditional dj/mixmaster> doing a cd and inviting Sia and Nicki Minaj or even a Pitbull to sing is perfect.

Now. Nicki or Pit doing their own cd? Crazy <meaning … “they shouldn’t”>. They’re not full singers who can carry an entire album <at least to my mind … and ears>.

Here is some further musical heresy. Here is today’s ultimate contemporary torch singer. Rihanna. Huh? Well, I am not really sure she can sing a song. But I am sure she can sing <I love her voice resonance>, and exceptionally deliver … the song-bite. That’s the way they produce her songs. That is the way she sings her parts. Now. She may be a very good singer but for now she is an electronica torch singer.

And this means we should look backwards for some awesome singers … Nadia Ali. Vanessa van Hemert <4 Strings>. Sophie Barker <Zero 7>. Thievery Corporation, Chicane, Wax Poetic and Delirium have been doing this for years … quite well I may suggest.

Now here comes the commodity thought.

All the dj/mix masters are putting out songs. But it just has officially become ludicrous. Let me give you examples (using songs I happen to like and have on my running mp3 player>.

This song is awesome techno. By a dj guy named Zedd < Anton Zaslavski known primarily by his stage name Zedd is a German electronic dance music producer and DJ from Kaiserslautern, Germany> and the song is called Spectrum.

Spectrum: http://thissongissick.com/blog/2012/zedd-spectrum-ft-matthew-koma-music-video/

And then there is Kerli <from Estonia> who sings something she calls “bubblegoth”  <I don’t remember where I heard it but she gave a delightful interview explaining it>. She is also a songwriter … she wrote Demi Lavato’s “skyscraper.”  Her song Zero Gravity is another very good electronic song but it sounds an awful like Spectrum:

Kerli singing Zero Gravity: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEkS_mQ0GlI&feature=related

Here is the crazy part.

It is a guy singing the Spectrum song <Kerli is definitely a girl though>.

Yikes.

Supposedly he is dating Carly Rae Jepson <of “ call me maybe “ fame>.

Oh. And then there is Eva Simons “I don’t like you” which also kind of sounds like Spectrum and parts of Zero Gravity <but Eva is a dutch gal>.

I Don’t Like You: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ngzOj2zATM

Look. I actually like this music … but this has become slightly absurd. It is all almost exactly the same song with different singers singing different bridges and soundbites. The only thing that may save the genre is i-tunes/amazon ability to buy one song at a time. As long as these musicians can afford to produce people will buy one song at a time <but never really be sure who is singing what>.

Good songs though.

Enlightened Conflict