But why oh why oh why oh why oh why do stock business pictures always always always feature nothing but gleaming smiles—people just delighted to distraction over the piece of paper they’re reviewing together. You can’t use photos like that without screaming “This is a con.”
I love The Wire, the HBO series, and I love watching great series on DVD, but I’m compulsive and once I get started, I can’t stop. Also it gets me talking like Bodie.
This is a problem near the end of winter in Chicago, permapiles of black snow dotting the parking lots and the hope of spring not quite evident. Start watching a depressing (though wonderful) collection of stories and you can get caught up. It gets embedded in your brain, in your whole way of thinking.
It’s easy for me to slip into the world, since I operated on the periphery of one a lot like it 30 years ago as one of those dreaded community organizers in St. Louis, a city very like Baltimore: old, a little southern, beaten-down. I was a community involvement coordinator for the St. Louis Public Schools working in the voluntary desegregation program, part of a consent decree that preceded court-ordered busing in 1980. The Magnet School District office was located in an old elementary school at Pendleton and Enright, something like the cast-off digs of the major case squad on the show.
I had to do an intervention on myself on Sunday after a 12-hour streak. I made myself get up, and I ran through some of the things I should be doing around the house. Talking to myself, I said, “OK, I need to take the clothes out of the washer. Then I gotta dry that shit up.”
Count on the blogosphere to remark on interesting errors. Here’s the blog reaction to the MSBNC host or producer whose mic was open as Bobby Jindal was strolling into the shot for the Republican response to the president’s address to Congress last night. It is output from a Google blog search feed.
Later: The next day it came out it was Chris Matthews. Gotta say he voiced my own thought on the staging.
I am sarah-palin-ignorant when it comes to the economy. So are most media talkers and politicians.
The talkers and politicians pretend to know; you can tell how hard they are trying to sound schooled and certain by the way they thrust out their chins. TV talkers have to sound confident if they want to be invited back to the show. Politicians have to sound confident if they hope to take advantage of the crisis so they can trot out longheld political ideologies and try to get them implemented. Both parties are doing this.
Few are admitting we’re through the looking glass now, and I’d like to see a little more of what the philosphers union was calling for in Hitchhikers: some admission that there are broad areas of doubt and uncertainty. I’d trust them all more.
The president and the treasury secretary are allowed one measure of over-confidence each, because it’s actually part of their job descriptions to boost consumer confidence—“only thing we have to fear is fear…” and all that rot.
Think about it. Even the real experts have to question whether it’s possible to predict the outcome of any given countermeasure when there’s no exact case study to draw from.
I picture the policymakers as engineers seated before a giant economy console. The main big fader in the center is the Federal Reserve interest rate control and it’s already been slid all the way to zero. They might as well just snap the knob off so they can concentrate on blindly fiddling with the other controls, see if one of them has some interesting effect one way or another.
I think that’s what’s happening, and I’d actually feel a little more confident if the experts would admit it. As for the cock-sure amateurs, I’ve resolved to chalk them up as trolls, especially those still holding on to deregulation after all that’s happened.
Afterthought:Jay Rosen said something on Bill Moyers’ show two weeks ago about how the media prides itself above all on savviness. Knowing the score is the currency of pundits and politicians, too, especially if it’s predictive. Watching everybody claiming to know What Will Work when it comes to the economy reminds me of everybody knowing for sure What Would Work concerning the surge in Iraq, too. Nobody really knew that either.
After that: Robert Reich doesn’t think anybody knows what to do either.
The Wall Street Journal columnist Steven Pearlstein tears into Wall Street, saying it refuses to be pleased until the government sends tractor trailers full of cash to their loading docks.
I think it is about time to stop watching the ticker as politicians are talking. We’re relying on it, thinking of it as that CNN audience pulsometer shown during campaign debates and it won’t do.
Full clip at MSNBC.com (If your patience will hold out past the 30-second ad. Why don’t advertisers see that the difference between a 10-second and a 30-second pre-roll is an eternity to an online video viewer?)
Loved the last part of this story in The New York Times about the new climate in the White House.
The rug is still there, as are the presidential portraits Mr. Bush selected—one of Washington, one of Lincoln—and a collection of decorative green and white plates. During a meeting last week with retired military officials, before he signed an executive order shutting down the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Mr. Obama surveyed his new environs with a critical eye.
“He looked around,” said one of his guests, retired Rear Adm. John D. Hutson, “and said, ‘I’ve got to do something about these plates. I’m not really a plates kind of guy.’ ”
In an odd sort of way I think a lot of us feel the same way about the president that Sarah Palin supporters felt about her. We identify with his vibe. I know exactly what he meant by not being a plate person. I might have said it myself, and I’d hazard a guess he doesn’t care for pillows embroidered with homilies either.
I do occasional maintenance on this widget because it has a couple hundred installs, so I should. Its value decreases when it doesn’t include enough timely searches.
(Click on “Search this” to refresh the widget and try another search.)
The rotating content leans heavily to Twitter Search because I think it’s such a fascinating way to get something of a handle on the pulse of opinion. To update it I add searches, and I also check the current searches to see if the results still show recent activity. (See the archive of currently rotating searches as well as retired searches. Note to Expression Engine heads: that archive page shows open entries for the active searches and closed entries for the retired ones—so easy.)
I’m getting to it now; thank you for your patience, just had to set it up. I’ve been surprised that interest in certain search terms has not waned as much as I would have expected. For example, “auto industry” and “iphone+storm” are not in the news as much as they were a few weeks ago when I added them, but they persist in racking up a lot of current results.
A slightly different sort of custom tool that tracks persistence of interest could be useful for research conducted by media outlets, and maybe other types of businesses, but I’m more tuned in to media and think of it first. Examples:
- Mainstream media, like monthly print magazines, having longer lead times, to see what people are still interested in.
- Even for more instant media, like TV or blogs, it could be handy for planning more-produced, better-researched features. If there’s no longevity to public interest in a given topic, it might not be worth the investment.
Of course this assumes there is a spot of value in the idea of enduring interest, and not just in the latest thing. Sometimes I despair of our “newest is all there is” way of looking at news and everything else.
If you wanted to go all radical, you might even say that sustained public interest in a topic maps to its importance and consequence. Nah…
Mr. President, I heard you didn’t care for the news about Merrill Lynch chief John Thain’s profligate decorating. Neither did millions of us.
What would be wrong with placing random unscheduled phone calls to some of the Wall Street bankers once in a while? Start off with “So, tell me a little about how you’re spending our tax money.” Use the silence. Let them spin, but follow up with specific questions. Depose them in a pleasant way. (Depose in the verbal examination sense—not remove them from office!)
Convention says you “can’t” do this, but we’ve come to expect that you’ll pull off some unconventional and unexpected feats. In fact we’re counting on it.
Update: Excellent! On Monday Citigroup was stonewalling on the planned purchase of a $47 million corporate jet using some of my money. Then a U.S. treasury official ”reached out” to the bank. Now Citgroup says it won’t take delivery. Nice one.
I was struck by a remark on Chris Matthews’s syndicated show yesterday. Katty Kay, a Brit reporting on U.S. politics for the BBC, talked about the positive world opinion of Barack Obama and how his background and understanding of other cultures is viewed as such a welcome break from recent history. It made me feel warm and proud of what we did in electing this guy.
Then I tried to put myself in the shoes and mindset of a typical Fox News watcher listening to the comment and realized that this big-picture way of operating and thinking breeds suspicion and fear among that set. I imagine they’ve been conditioned to reason that if foreigners think it’s a good thing, Americans need to be wary. Isn’t that a rotten shame? God forbid we should look at things from anybody else’s point of view.
The good news is that reason defeated the narrowminded crowd this time; about time. Can the factions get closer on this score? I’m not sure. I mean, it’s not a thing you can compromise about—either you operate in a spirit of being open to possibilities or you don’t. Would we wish for this smart cool new president to meet the closedminded halfway? Maybe the best we can wish for is that, in a new political climate, rigid neo-con views gradually will be viewed by moderates as out of touch and old-fashioned.
I think that’s already happening. When you hear GOP leadership hopefuls talk in generalities about the future, it’s all about opening up, not about closing ranks. What I hear between the lines is “Not what Sarah Palin represents—if your only solid base is the white south, that’s not enough to be a national party.”
As you might know, I’ve been obsessed with widgetmaking. The inauguration countdown widget that I put in the wild back in December 2007—when the idea of tomorrow’s transfer of power to Obama was wishful thinking—has been converted to a countup widget celebrating a new day. I love seeing it displayed with pride on African-American social networks and on blogs like Sicily Scene written by a woman from Wales living in Sicily.
Hey world, we’ve returned to the international community. It feels good to be back. Want to grab a cup of coffee?
I’m half watching Dick Cheney being interviewed by Wolf Blitzer, and you know, I find I can’t believe a word he says.
You should read Matt Taibbi‘s The Great Derangement. I thought the account of his infiltration of John Hagee’s church would be the part I’d relish most, but it’s all really good. How is it related to this blunt assessment of Cheney’s credibility? Taibbi, after meeting with 9/11 truthers, after ridiculing them in print, comes to a conclusion that it’s only natural after being spun so often and so violently that we’re falling-on-the-floor dizzy. We start making up our own truth.
It’s nothing Twitter is not aware of, I’m sure, but here’s a further anecdote.
I’ve been doodling around with a widget that rotates a number of what I think are interesting timely searches, mostly on Twitter search, but including some others.
Early last week the web was abuzz with rumors about a $99 iPhone offered by Wal-Mart, so I make it one of the widget’s searches. Each day there was more spam in the stream. I tried my best to filter it with minus switches, and finally had to give up.
I expect I’ll have to abandon the gas+price search soon for the same reason. I added another three switches today, but I have a feeling it’s just a matter of time before I won’t be able to manage it that way.
Craftier developers will know better ways to filter out certain users based on their tweet patterns and put them in 3rd party apps or in Twitter search itself. On the other hand, not putting the controls in Twitter’s public search might be a way to create value for a corporate product. But that would be scarcity thinking.
I often feel like making something on holidays (you know, like something besides pies). It seemed like a good time to give my Obama countdown widget a new look.
Mommy bloggers, who tend to hang out on Twitter, were offended by the video’s copy, and the tone of the narration, which implies that wearing a baby in a sling or other carrying apparatus amounts to an affectation. It offended me, too, even though I wasn’t a baby wearer as a young mom. (I tried it, and it didn’t suit me, but not for any lifestyle reason—I just never felt I had the proper purchase on my baby; I liked belonging to the constant contact species, and carried my kids around a lot.)
Telling the folks you’re trying to persuade that their preferences are an affectation is the dumbest aspect. Think about it. It’s like trying to sell Visine to iPhone users by helpfully informing them they only bought their phone to look cool, but there’s help for you dumbasses. Visine can save you from yourselves, save you from the eyestrain you were dimwitted, vain and phony enough to inflict on yourselves.
A few commenters—looks like mostly guys and controversy trolls—are eyerolling or belittling the outrage. In which camp are the people at Johnson & Johnson’s agency who cooked this thing up? I do think there are culture camps here, and it’s because babywearing is still seen as a ”hippie thing”—not so much now as it was 20-30 years ago, but the perception lingers.
So, when the voiceover talent seems to curl her lip in derision at women who want to look like good moms, I gotta tell you, coming off the culture wars fought during the election campaign, it feels to me like Sarah Palin or Ann Coulter is talking to me in that video. And she’s saying “I’m so sick of your hippie shit—your latte-drinking, hybrid-driving, baby-slinging ways. Why don’t you go live on a commune and stop influencing normal heartland moms to adopt your godless ways.”
Sound like a stretch? Maybe, but you really can’t argue with perceptions, and that’s how the read struck me. Which is why, as so many bloggers have pointed out, J&J should have tested the tone with the target audience. Who approved that voiceover anyway? That’s who I’d blame, and send the agency’s creative staff to tonedeaf school.
When Barack Obama sent a thank-you text message to supporters—on his way to the victory speech—saying he couldn’t have done it without us, I thought that was nice to address us first. I replied “You’re welcome, buddy. Keep us involved.”
Wired Obama supporters have been thinking a lot about how the power of his online communities might be harnessed to do some good beyond getting him elected.
What would you think about bringing public hearings into the online world? It wouldn’t have to be exactly like Capitol Hill hearings. Hearings have taken to the road for a long time, but they tend to keep to the same formal rules.
A different kind of supplementary input might be put in place so that testimony could be given via one of the live video services, in shorter chunks, and by a different class of witnesses—more ordinary citizens, more front-line experts, fewer heads of agencies and heads of interest groups. (The higher you climb on the title ladder, the less you learn about what’s happening and the more you learn about what the establishment wants you to think is happening.) It would be less formal than hearings held in Washington, but more official than a town hall.
Live commentary on the testimony could be mined not just for reaction to the testimony but also for ideas. It could shape the direction of the hearings in real time.
I don’t believe anybody thinks Joe citizen should vote to decide things like how to fix the economy. But swarms do one thing very well: they ferret out the important, consequential bits of an issue, situation or conversation. When this happens in real time, we’re saying “Yes, more of that, please. Now.” We’re like players in a game of hide the thimble, telling the hunter if she’s hot or cold, closer or further away from the prize, or the essence of a thing.
If our representatives in government take the trouble to listen, and if they are canny about it, they’ll use that power to navigate the issue terrain.
Later: Brian Solis pens a good roundup of Obama’s use of social media during the campaign and and floats ideas for using it for governing. The stat that popped out at me:
YouTube also swayed towards Obama with a network of 358,000 to 191,000, with the Obama camp posting over 1,800 videos compared to McCain’s 330. These videos accounted for 110 million views.
While the ratio of Obama-to-McCain subscribers was about 2:1, the video posting ratio was more like 5:1. So, it’s not just that the McCain campaign was stuck in the 20th century in terms of thinking of the electorate as an audience; McCain supporters thought of themselves as the audience.
I am sarah-palin-ignorant when it comes to the economy. So are most media talkers and politicians.
