All Starlings Must Die (My Day-After-Earth-Day Special)

April 23rd, 2009

Quite a few years ago, I was on a dinosaur dig in South Dakota. We stayed and slept on a local ranch at night and during the blistering hot days. There were about 30 of us from all walks of life. There was one lady that made a particular impact on me.

This lady, an older woman, was dying of cancer. I suppose that her being on a dig was something she had always wanted to do. She drove across the country in her VW Beetle to work on the dig. If I were in the same predicament as she, I would probably do the same thing if I felt it had gone un-done before I died. However, she made an impact on me in a different way…

She was kind of grumpy - not at all like you might imagine based on those made for TV movies where someone smiles all the way to their grave because they got to fulfill a dying wish. I am being nice when I say “grumpy”, because she was actually fairly mean. This leads me to the statement that she made which had a profound impact on my life.

We were sitting around one evening, avoiding the heat, waiting for a storm to come in. We were talking about nature, birds, etc. When she proclaimed, loudly, that “…all Starlings must die”.

Huh? Did she really say that? Was she joking or being sarcastic?

It was apparent that she really did mean it. She went on how she wanted them all dead. I can’t remember why anymore, but I remember being caught in the irony of her comments… How someone dying would want something else dead, let alone an entire species. It spoke to me about the nature of man. It helped me define who I am. I realized there that if I were ever to be on my death bed, that I would want to be like one of those made for TV movies. I would want to enjoy every last second of life that the planet had to offer.

I actually think of her comments so often that the vision of that day is emblazoned in my brain. I hope that I can continue to see nature and humanity for it’s beauty even at the worst of times.

I am a bad friend

April 22nd, 2009

I was recently told by a real-life friend of mine that also happens to be a digg.com member that I am essentially the Digg version of a bad friend.

What he pointed out was that, on Digg, I am moderately self absorbed, don’t contribute much and when it comes down to it, no one would want to be my friend. I pondered his comments and realized that he is absolutely right. But, why?

After a lot of thought, I realized that my digg.com actions mimic my real life actions.

I have never really been good friends to many people at any given time. I am basically just not good at it. I really like people as a whole and I enjoy communicating and collaborating all day long. However, when it comes to deep friendships, they are few and far between. This is how I have been my entire life. I’ve only had few people that I really consider “best friends” if I were to add them all up.

I rarely remember a time when I have not occupied my entire day from morning til late night with things to do. Because of this, I have a hard time fulfilling my duty of reciprocal friendship. It’s not that I don’t want to. I actually think about friends significantly more than they know. I just have this drive that makes me do other things. This is good and bad, of course, but it’s just part of my root personality.

There are 24 hours in a day and I find it necessary to fill up all of my spare time thinking. I know it sounds crazy, but that’s what I’ve always been driven to do. I like to invent things, develop ideas, wonder why things happen or why I might be doing something in a certain way. I think this is what lends itself to me seeming to be \ being self-absorbed. I find that as each day goes by I get a stronger and stronger desire to create things and my friendships might falter if left unchecked.

I am glad that he said something because I feel that I need to allow time for friends. I really like people, which may be a surprise to some personal friends. This not only includes my real-life, but also my online-life as there are many new experiences to be had by finding new people and cultivating friendships.

More importantly, it’s Earth Day. Please plant a tree or donate to a tree planting organization. If you aren’t up for that, maybe a walk outside to enjoy our planet might be a great way to spend the day.

The Marketing of “Revolution”

April 21st, 2009

I was enthralled at the Tax-Day tea-parties held around the country for a number of reasons.

One reason that this was interesting was due to something that I feel is happening more and more around the country - words and phrases have been inducted into marketing campaigns, often without regard for the true meaning of the words.

I want to focus on “Revolution is Brewing”, which I heard a number of times on April 15th, 2009. The word revolution is a strong word, probably one of the strongest words in any society. According to dictionary.com, the number one meaning is “an overthrow or repudiation and the thorough replacement of an established government or political system by the people governed.” Now, is that really what was happening? No. Is that really what was intended? Probably not. Some people may have felt that way, of course, but there is no accounting for every opinion.

What does it really mean then? It’s obviously a play on words - “tea” and “brewing”. Get it?

We say strong things these days without really meaning them because we are just so used to it. This is because marketing is prevalent in all areas of our lives - including everything from cola makers to political lobby groups. The words sound good. The words sound tough. Because of this, people use them with a certain abandon. Was a consensus really preaching a revolution? Or was it made to feel “old-timey”, complete with our forefather’s garb and ambiance to create a particular mood?

The point here is that this may be another case of manipulation of the market by a large organization with a particular agenda. The agenda is irrelevant and the organization is as well. This is not about any particular stance on politics - just an observation of the collective unconscious and it’s affect from marketing campaigns.

I feel that we need to step back, separate ourselves from advertising campaigns and slogans (really, they are everywhere) and learn to say things in our own way. Our collective conversational skills will hopefully grow to a place where we can communicate with each other with the respect that we all deserve.

Organic, Schmorganic

April 20th, 2009

Note: I welcome comments, re-posting of this document following the terms of my Creative Commons license, digg.com diggs or yahoo.com buzzes.

My family tries to eat organic food. I would say that we are in the 75% range of organic foods vs. non-organic. We aren’t perfect, nor are we doing all that we can. But I wanted to talk about something that recently bothered me regarding an “organic” item that I rather enjoyed.

I used to get these Chewy Granola Bars that were USDA organic. One day, they were taken off the shelf of our local supermarket. They were removed because of the recent peanut salmonella scare. I walked around the store to get my other items and I noticed something that I felt was strange - that many different products were removed from the shelves because of the Salmonella scare. This was due to the supposed deplorable conditions at the Peanut Corporation of America plants. Many of the other items that were off the shelves were not organic.

How could it be that organic and non-organic products would be using the same peanuts? Organic peanuts could end up in non-organic products, of course. But, why would they not label their products as containing organic peanuts, when it is such a marketable item these days? It just did not make sense.

I wanted to inquire with the company that made these granola bars. I found that the website for this company touted “Organic since 1972″ and “…is also a real place — a working, active, productive farm dedicated to bringing wholesome organic food to your table.” Now this at first led me to believe that the farm pictured in their advertisement was the actual farm to produce their product.

When I decided to email this company, I was taken to a huge company’s website contact form. Huh…

A little further research led me to the information “…said it has no reason to believe there is a safety issue with these products, but that it is taking the action, as a precaution, because peanut pieces in the products may have been sourced from the Plainview, Texas, plant of Peanut Corporation of America.”

Is this company that owned the Peanut plant really an organic farm? At the very least, is it a clean organic farm? Who certified this farm as organic? It has been said that the farm did not properly supply documents regarding it’s organic farming. And as the bottom line, aren’t the products from the farm listed on their website?

The response to me was essentially that only these few products were at issue and everything else was OK. Now, I want to point out that the few products at issue, were products that I consumed almost daily. I wonder if that counted as a bad thing in their eyes?

My point with this is that the term “organic” seems to have been diminished and compromised, especially by large corporations that generally care about their bottom line. If “organic” is fashionable now, then these companies may want to grab onto the term without really doing the leg-work involved in truly being organic.

I believe this to be one more account of marketing replacing truth. In fact I think that our country is slowly and systematically being conditioned into believing that “something” is actually “something else”. This is done, often enough, by creating laws, often through lobbyists, that dictate “truth”. In the example above, does the term “organic” really get us just that? Does the USDA standard of organics actually measure up vs. true organic farming? I fear, in the account above, it does not.

We, as a people, might do better if we start to understand the difference between “moral” and “legal”. “Legal” does not necessarily mean “good” nor does “good” always become law.

An SEO WhitePaper By a Friend

April 17th, 2009

Naveed, from the Usman Group has written a really nice, easy to understand white paper on Search Engine Optimization. I was impressed with the care he put into making the paper and I recommend anyone to download it from http://www.theusmangroup.com/publications/

If anyone else has an interesting paper they’ve written, please drop a link in a comment and I will be happy to read it.

Bad Clients, Better Contracts

March 26th, 2009

What do we do when the client \ company relationship falls apart?

Sometimes, the issue is bad communication, sometimes a client or the company does something incorrectly or takes too long on a project. This causes tension and it can usually be alleviated by (drum roll please)… a conversation. Yes, just talk to each other and try to work it out - apologize. Just be nice to each other.

After it’s worked out, try to have realistic expectations about hours, pay and service.

If that fails and the deal has gone sour, it is important to have solid contracts to rely upon. Without bad-mouthing anyone in particular, my design agency was zinged for a significant amount of production hours by a client that was essentially leading us on. Now, we should have seen this coming and demanded payment before any additional work continued. We like to give the benefit of doubt to our clients. Sometimes, this gets taken advantage of. We lost approximately $20k worth of production time because of our bad judgment. We should have done things differently.

What should we have done?

For starters, we needed a better contract, with stronger stipulations on time and payment. We should have made additional entries on the contract when new items came up. In this case, our communication was daily at the least, so that is not an issue. Secondly, we shouldn’t rely on a client’s “good nature” to mean that we will get paid. If they don’t have the money or want to get work for free, then their “good nature” can be a put-on.

I don’t want this to sound bitter - as we assume the responsibility for allowing extra production hours without a proper contract. It’s a lesson learned. We hope that other design firms stop relying on handshakes, promises, etc. and start relying on good contracts, solid due-dates with production work as well as holding clients to their payment schedules. If modifications are to be worked out, both parties should get them in writing to protect themselves.

Strengths and Weaknesses

March 23rd, 2009

I have a close friend and colleague that has been asking me to do a strengths \ weaknesses analysis of my company for months. Since the economic climate is changing rapidly and starting to affect the lives of all the web developers that I know personally, I have been trying to determine what we do best and what we do horribly. After we find a strength and weakness we make a change in order to help us keep up with what the future may hold.

One thing that I think we do well is give advice based on our experience as well as manage projects well when we have no stake in the development or design. We created a web project management division at http://www.thewebadvocates.com/ and we essentially become the best friend of a web development project for any given amount of hours.

I feel that pre-planning for web projects is something that we can help small through large companies with. It’s an exciting thing to be at the birth of a web project. We enjoy it and hope that our experience can help even the smallest company succeed with their web launch.

This seems like an advertisement, I know. But I want it to be a nod to my friend that pushes our companies along through tough times (and easy times), with good ideas and a bright outlook. Thanks…

Girl Science

February 25th, 2009

If you haven’t guessed by now, I have issues with marketing that is used to subjugate or diminish the inherent possibilities of something that might be classified as good for the world. Science is good for the world.

“Girl Science” is a class offered by our local park district for young girls in the community. “Girl Science” is not good for the world.

Now before anyone goes crazy and thinks the people behind this are evil, let’s take a step back and realize that it is probably done with the best of intention and they shouldn’t be demonized in any way.

With that said, the idea behind “Girl Science” is to learn about and produce one’s own cosmetics. This is for grades 3 to 8. Let’s leave marketing make-up to third graders for another post.

Why is this even a class? When it comes down to it, this is a class that promotes make-up for young girls, differentiates between real science and “Girl Science”, and is in general an instance of pandering to women. The idea that girls \ woman cannot be interested in actual science is absurd. If we train our children that nothing is interesting unless it comes with a ribbon on top and covered in pretty things, then that’s how our children will develop.

If you haven’t had a good luck at toys \ apparel \ merchandise in general that is marketed to children, please take a few moments to do so. You might find that a boy might get a mural of the planets, while a girl gets a mural of a unicorn. You might find that a boy has a t-shirt with the saying “Science is Awesome!”, while a girl gets a shirt that says “Princess”. You might find that a boy gets a book about outer space from Santa, while a girl gets a book about a bratty group of girls that go night-clubbing.

On the flip side, there are educational and fun things for boys and girls out there, but just step back and look at the overall picture of what is really being marketed to our children, especially young girls. It’s just scary. If we keep on going in this direction, we are going to have real issues with getting our daughters (and sons) into science, math or anything else that might make the world better.

The Failure of Reality

February 23rd, 2009

Since I was a teenager, there has been much debate about the role that video games and violent television has played in a general undermining of our social values. The general point being that violence in games, movies, television, etc. plays a role in aggressive behavior or an unrealistic view of right and wrong.

In my opinion, the issue is that our reality has been invaded by pervasive marketing.

What does that mean? Well, if we take an objective look at our current “reality”, we can see very little realism in it. From news programs to “reality” television, what we see is often fake, staged or filled with product marketing. People have been saying for years that there is very little news on the news. It is incredibly difficult to find solid, unbiased news sources that actually show bad things that happen along with the good.

But this isn’t really an article about truth in news. It is an article about the marketing of goods and services in the news and reality television. More importantly, it is about how this might be psychologically destructive for us all.

Why would this be destructive? The issue is that we as a people can have a hard time doing what is right and wrong. But to look at that further, I think we are losing the ability to differentiate between what is fake and real. I don’t mean to say that if see a purple dinosaur on television, that we all think we are being attacked by one in real life. I do mean to say that if we only see fake reality such as social devastation, fictional violence, war, etc. and do not see real life tragedy such as killings, what really happens in war, etc. that we can only further our apathy towards things that are truly bad.

Taken to an extreme, I believe that when a teenager kills his entire family because his video game was taken away, that the issue might not be video game “violence”, but a lack of understanding of real violence and it’s effect on life. This probably happens at a young age and I fear that my young daughter will grow up in a world that does not embrace the good AND the bad things that happen in life.

So why does this happen? Marketing over long periods of time can have lasting psychological effect on what we believe to be good and bad. Television, including the news, is often programmed around products or services that are being sold. We are marketed drugs that allow us to always feel good, sleep perfectly and to cure all instances of uncomfortable life. We are led to believe that happy people are only created through the deprivation of sadness, hostility or anything resembling discomfort. This is all marketing. People have been happy for thousands of years without any of this. When I say “happy”, I mean in the generalist of sense. Because this marketing is actually embedded within our reality shows and news, it is hard to know the difference between what is really “real” and what is essentially an advertisement.

I wonder if we need to learn how to cope with reality, rather than to pretend it is different than the actual truth. I believe that we need to allow all forms of emotion into our lives. This includes complete devastation as well as uncontrollably good happiness. I come from a place of many good things in my life as well as some that were straight-up awful. I identified my brother after he was killed in an automobile accident, was there when my mother died, my grandmother as well. I saw at least two dead bodies in the street, was in an induced coma for a few days, was in a few car wrecks of my own, one of which I came very close to seriously hurting someone because I was too tired one Sunday evening. I was also there when my daughter was born, got married to someone that can keep me on my toes, got to see my mom go on for years after they said she wouldn’t and so much more. I would of course want the lost people in my life forever, but it can’t be the case. With that said, I could not and would not change these experiences that I’ve had.

Without balance, it’s not much of a life. Without allowing reality in, I don’t think I could have ever learned how to cope nor get back to being happy after bad things happened.

The White House Website

February 23rd, 2009

This post has nothing to do with politics.

It has to do with the beautiful new website at www.whitehouse.gov. To say that I am impressed with it is an understatement. I happened upon the old website days before President Obama took office. For no reason what-so-ever, I just visited the site. I exclaimed out loud about what an embarrassment it was. Seriously, it was awful.

A few days later, I checked again and was I ever surprised. The coding is excellent, it is handicapped accessible and, as all websites should be, is about quality content. I certainly have never seen a government website of this caliber. The ancillary sites do a great job as well. There is good video usage, solid content and coding.

Kudos to the development team that is working on this family of sites.