Friday, May 18, 2007

Do you feel the same?

So, tell me something, do you feel this way too?

Every time I get in my car and drive somewhere, I feel like I'm helping to kill the Earth!!!!

When I see how much trash that we accumulate and throw out, all I can think about is 'where is this trash going to be put? How much trash can our planet deal with?' I have four trashbags in my living room right now, ready to be taken to the dumpster. Yeah….FOUR. AND my bathroom trashcan is full and needs to be emptied, as does my kitchen trashcan. So, actually, I have SIX. It's CRAZY. And, tonight, at home, I'm going to be decluttering 27 items that I no longer love or use (thanks Flylady), so that'll be even more crap. God, what is wrong with us? Why in the Hell do I have so much crap that I don't even want????? Must I fill every flippin space with something? Geez!!! Then we take the clutter to the Goodwill, and why do we do that? So someone else can bring our clutter home and clutter up their house??? What????

Then, when I buy gas, I think about, 'How much longer can our society sustain and survive such high gas prices, which are only going to get higher?'

What if gas gets to $4.00 a gallon? It would cost $60 to fill up my car. Which I now feel stupid for having bought, because it sucks gas! I miss the 30 miles per gallon that my crappy little Escort station wagon got. That rocked. It's kind of like breaking up with a guy…I have to keep referring to my, 'The Truth About That Car' list.

Soon, driving a Hummer will no longer be a badge of wealth like it is now. It'll be a badge of SUPER wealth. The social and economic status (and conspicuous consumerism) that the Hummer itself now represents will soon be represented by the simple fact of whether one can afford to drive or not.

Well, hey, if the world ends or it gets too expensive to drive, at least we know we'll lose some weight, don't we? I mean, the obesity epidemic might actually take care of itself. LOL. BECAUSE WE'LL BE WALKING EVERY_FRICKIN_WHERE!

Where is the cry in Omaha about improving mass transportation, hmmm? It sucks a$$ right now. Why is no one talking about this?? Pretty soon, we're going to need it.

And I don't mean the Hummer drivers…I mean the folks that work at McDonald's, the secretaries, the TEACHERS, the teenagers, the baggers, the cashiers, the cleaners, the babysitters. *They* are the ones who are going to desperately need improved mass transportation. Because, God knows, they are the people who can least afford to either convert their existing car to electric OR buy a brand spankin new $20,000 Prius or other small electric car. So, again, WHY is no one saying anything about about this? WTF?


Friday, May 04, 2007

GM Ads

Read this. It's flippin funny.

http://www.itnews.com.au/newsstory.aspx?CIaNID=31376

Coordinates of the Rich and Famous

She really makes some very good points. But I wonder if it has gone a little far. I do believe there is a fair bit of commercialism in celebrities and the paparazzi, and that there probably is a symbiotic relationship there.

However, why shouldn't celebrities get to control their image? Their image is what they parlay into a living. Do they really have more to offer than that? Why shouldn't they be concerned about their bottom line? If someone was doing something that was going to jeopardize how I make my living, I'd be p*ssy too. Except that I do that myself on a day-to-day basis. By posting to my blog from this computer. But at least I don't say anything nasty about the company…except for that RFP post.

Never mind!!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/04/opinion/04gould.html?th&emc=th

By EMILY GOULD
Published: May 4, 2007

WHEN I agreed to represent Gawker, the Web site I co-edit, on an episode of “Larry King Live” last month, I didn’t expect to be shouted at, cut off, talked down to and told that I was going to hell. But as everyone who caught the show — or has seen it since on YouTube — knows, that’s exactly what happened, courtesy of Mr. King’s fill-in, Jimmy Kimmel. If you saw the clip, you probably noticed that I looked sort of stunned. I even rolled my eyes a few times. Here’s why.

Mr. Kimmel’s real target was the Gawker Stalker Map, a regular feature that displays brief, user-generated celebrity sightings on a map of Manhattan. He especially took issue with an entry last summer, when a tipster had reported that Mr. Kimmel was “visibly drunk and talking loud.”

It’s hard to believe that Mr. Kimmel, a late-night talk show host who has made on-air inebriation a cornerstone of his public image, was truly upset that people knew he’d gone out drinking. So what was he really angry about?

More likely, Mr. Kimmel was trying to defend the symbiotic relationship that has existed between celebrities and the mainstream entertainment media since the dawn of Hollywood, and which the Internet is steadily eroding.

Mr. Kimmel pointed out that we “post things that simply aren’t true,” and he’s right: some sightings do turn out to be false. But his real problem may be that most of our sightings are the truest to be found anywhere.

The stalker map sightings aren’t verified or vetted by publicists, and we won’t publish sightings that seem to come from publicists, though we receive many. Our posts are written by ordinary people with no obligation to tone down their insults in order to maintain access to a celebrity, as gossip reporters must — a recent sighting describes Hilary Swank as resembling “JonBenet Ramsey, but prettier and not dead,” a characterization that would probably never find its way into Us Weekly.

Is there anyone who reads the Page Six column in The New York Post or Star magazine credulous enough to believe that starlets are really “spotted” enjoying, say, a specific brand of vodka? Those glamorous sightings, flattering both celebrity and product, are the antithesis of Gawker Stalker, which often captures stars in quotidian, boring moments. Our sightings anger the rich and famous because it’s impossible for them to control their coverage by an unlimited number of anonymous writers the way they can with the smallish cadre of reporters in the mainstream news media.

Another canard that Mr. Kimmel dug up was the supposed threat to celebrities’ safety posed by the stalker map. Since the sightings aren’t posted in anything like real time, it would be a ludicrously ineffective tool for “real” stalkers.

When I mentioned this, Mr. Kimmel changed his tack, deploring the invasion of celebrities’ privacy. But why do celebrities find this “invasion” so much more reprehensible than the “invasion” represented by the carefully posed pictures and meticulously constructed narratives that we see in celebrity weeklies and newspaper society pages?

Imagine, for a moment, that you’re a celebrity who wants to show off a new hair color, is trying to land a coveted role or needs to drum up interest in a new movie or TV show. You, or more likely your publicist, call up some favorite photographers and tell them in advance where you’ll be clubbing that night. You work hard to make sure that people are going to see you exactly the way you’d like them to — and whether that’s panty-less or picture-perfect depends on what you’re selling.

But the Internet, instead of relying on the expertise of an incestuous network of reporters and managers and publicists and photographers, gets its information from an army of anonymous strangers. And no matter how long and hard celebrities work to get the well-timed, utterly staged attention that’s going to be most profitable for them, the Internet can circumvent those efforts in a heartbeat. Celebrities like Mr. Kimmel who pretend that this new generation of gossip is hurting their feelings are covering up their real concern — that it’s hurting their bottom lines.

The effects of Internet-based, user-generated gossip aren’t limited to the stars themselves, of course. Publicists’ jobs are made more difficult when clients blame them for not being able to manipulate coverage by controlling access. And celebrity lawyers find themselves confused, to say the least, by the flexible, ephemeral nature of blogs: if a cease-and-desist order arrives, the remedy’s usually as quick and simple as taking the offending post down. Also threatened — though less so — are the paparazzi. True, their services are more in demand than ever. But the near-instantaneous diffusion across the Internet of celebrity images damages their ability to charge magazines and newspapers insane prices for their photographs.

Certainly, the stalker sightings invade celebrities’ privacy. Because of the Internet, they can no longer demand attention only when they’ve got something to promote, and are subject instead to constant scrutiny. But these stars deserve only as much sympathy as the people who get fired because their employers discover a “my boss is awful” blog posting. There’s just more information available to more people, about more people, than ever these days.

Supermarket tabloids and gossip columns still sell the illusion that stars live in a different world from the rest of us; but the Internet has created a new reality, and we’re all living in it together.

Emily Gould is the co-editor of the Web site Gawker.

A Discussion that Wasn't

So I've been seeing A (Mr. Exclusivity…we shall now give him a real name…A) for about a month now. I can't remember what I've posted about him, but he's really nice, it seems, and he's cute, and a bunch of other good stuff too. Anyway, we met on this dating site (of course…you know I'm no bar fly lol…or charity work fly…or program fly…) (potential other blog topic 'how dating websites are really the technological equivalent of a barroom'…ok, moving on…).

We had lunch on a Friday, then dinner and a movie that Sunday perhaps, then not that week but I think the next one, he came over on a Wednesday night and he said that he wanted to see me exclusively. Well, ok. I liked him, he liked me, seemed like an ok thing to do, though I really had a hard time taking it seriously. It seemed way too good to be true. Too easy, for one thing. I actually didn't expect him to call me back after we met for lunch on March 30th. So when he proposed this, I explained what I expect in an 'exclusive' dating scenario. Basically, I expect him to not date others. He said that was ok, but wanted to make sure it was ok for him to still go out with friends and whatnot, including women, but not with an emotional attachment to them. I said, yeah, of course, I'm not a psycho hosebeast. He said something about American women being a little crazy and possessive. Well, honey, if American men weren't such sh*ts, we wouldn't be. Just kidding. Sort of. Not really…my experiences have sucked. But they are only mine…

Anyway, I was going to delete my profile from that site the other night and of course, as distrustful as I am, I elected to check on his and see what's up. Well, it's been f*ckin TWEAKED in the past 36 hours. Yes, TWEAKED, to make it more attractive and expansive. My reaction to this, of course, was WTF? And I resolved to speak to him about it next time we spoke.

So he came over and we watched Phantom of the Opera last night. But before we watched it, I had a couple of little tasks to finish around the house and I of course noticed that he was dressed really nice, which I commented on.

'You look nice. What's the occasion?' No, I didn't sound nasty. I was sincere.

'Oh, I had another date tonight.' Then he added, 'Here comes the drama.'

Ha. Ha. Ha. So f*ckin funny.

'No, no drama. I'm 30, not 18. If you don't want to be exclusive anymore, you can just tell me. It's ok. I just need to know is all. Just be honest.'

I can't remember what he said next, but it was sarcastic.

'Have you ever seen Hamlet?'

'The play. Yes, I've seen it.'

'Do you remember the part where Hamlet puts on the little play for his mom and stepdad, and he asks his mother what she thought of it, and his mother says, 'Well, the lady doth protest too much?' '

Oh he caught on to that one right away. 'You are really stretching it too far now.' IE, I am starting to get insulted so please stop. I didn't apologize, but I did stop talking about it, we watched the movie, and it was pleasant.

I don't know what to do. God is telling me, 'don't fixate on it. What's going on in the rest of your life? Work on that and let this be what it's going to be. Don't pour too much of yourself into it. But do clarify what this actually means to you and what his expectations of you are and whether you're willing to meet those. Try not to get too attached.'

And I'm also starting to get that this might be what I thought it was going to be - the new 'relationship' that might blossom into Something Wonderful. Sure, it is something nice in my life, but it's not necessarily going to be that Something Wonderful. Perhaps I really read too much into it and jumped the gun. Perhaps my idea of what the start of a relationship is is completely wrong and I put too much emphasis on it in the beginning and have too many expectations. This would not be a surprise.

My pattern when it comes to relationships is to basically put my life aside when in one and put all energies into the relationship. That's not healthy. I usually forsake my friends and ignore their existence. So I am going to change this. And not think so much about the d*mn relationship or lack thereof. Who cares? I don't NEED him. Crikey, it's only been a flippin month. I guess I do need to ask him some questions and talk with him some more about it, but I don't need to obsess.

The Necessity of Skutwork

Skutwork -- boring, meaningless work that nevertheless must be completed.

I'm lazy. In this job. I just can't think of another word for it.

Someone ordered some collateral from me about a month ago. Being the collateral order taker/fulfiller person was a duty that I volunteered for when I first started working here a four years ago. At the time I volunteered for it, I had blocks of time the size of four hours to fill. As time has gone on, I have stuff to do now and I hate doing the collateral.

Now the problem is that I have work to do, and I also have non-work to do. Like writing in this blog. I found ways to fill my time. And now I hate sending out collateral.

And I can think of no good reason why. I'm just lazy. That's it. When it comes to certain things in this job, I just don't like doing them because they take more effort, or I have to get off my a$s, or I just don't want to stop what I'm doing, or I just think I'm too d*mn good for that kind of skutwork.

Which is ridiculous. This is the job I am paid for - whether it's complicated skutwork or non-complicated skutwork, that is what I'm paid to do…skutwork. Work that is routine, orderly, mundane, could-do-it-with-half-my-brain-tied-behind-my-back, and boring, but completey and totally necessary. This person really needed the stuff she ordered and I pretty much ignored her for a month until Supervisor came to see me today with the emails in hand.

'Do you know how old it is?'

'Um, no.'

'It's over a month old. Why do you do this stuff? You wouldn't like it if she did that to you.'

Of course, I don't answer that question. If there was a real answer for that question, I still wouldn't answer it. It's just like, why CAN'T I just put paper in the copier? What is the big deal? It's not complicated enough? It's not prestigious enough? Can't I just be helpful? Supervisor is so nice, she says that question is such a nice, motherly tone, like she truly doesn't understand. She probably doesn't. Because she IS the epitome of helpfulness. I wish I could come up with some good snark for this post, but I am kind of disappointed in myself this morning. I'm not depressed or anything, but I just wish I hadn't been such a clod about this thing that will take me all of ten minutes to complete.

Why can't I just be that person that wants to be helpful and useful and just puts a smile on her face and says, 'Yes, I'll be glad to help.'? The one who doesn't have uppity, snobby thoughts when asked to do simple, simple things that take less than five minutes? Ugh, what is WRONG with me?

I think this might be a job for God. I think I just need to ask God for help with my attitude problem…it's a character defect, actually. It's my arrogance, which is one of the Big Three (dishonesty, victimhood, and arrogance). All my life, I've been told how smart I am, how well spoken I am, how talented I am. And my ego has gotten way out of hand. That is the problem. I think I really believe, to some extent, that I am better than other people, when the fact is that I certainly am not. And what an isolating thought that is, anyway. If you think you're better than others, how can you really create true relationships with them, how can you actually relate to them? You can't.

I will ask God today for some humility and to help me be a support to others.

Thursday, May 03, 2007

Young, Gifted, and Not Getting into Harvard

What a great article on accepting our children as they are and not as we would wish them to be.

I remember when I was an elementary student and I thought the only way out of my 'OPPD is here to shut us off, hide behind the couch, kids!' life was to go to an Ivy League school, become a lawyer, and make tons of money. Then I grew up and realized there are many paths to success. And that success doesn't mean a huge salary - it means happiness and, honestly, a very simple life. Right now, I'm considering whether I really need cable Internet. I was also recently considering whether we really need cable at all, but I think we should probably stick with that one.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/29Rparenting.html?em&ex=1178337600&en=e5abb3dab4effa8e&ei=5087%0A

Young, Gifted, and Not Getting Into Harvard

By MICHAEL WINERIP
Published: April 29, 2007

ON a Sunday morning a few months back, I interviewed my final Harvard applicant of the year. After saying goodbye to the girl and watching her and her mother drive off, I headed to the beach at the end of our street for a run.

It was a spectacular winter day, bright, sunny and cold; the tide was out, the waves were high, and I had the beach to myself. As I ran, I thought the same thing I do after all these interviews: Another amazing kid who won’t get into Harvard.

That used to upset me. But I’ve changed.

Over the last decade, I’ve done perhaps 40 of these interviews, which are conducted by alumni across the country. They’re my only remaining link to my alma mater; I’ve never been back to a reunion or a football game, and my total donations since graduating in the 1970s do not add up to four figures.

No matter how glowing my recommendations, in all this time only one kid, a girl, got in, many years back. I do not tell this to the eager, well-groomed seniors who settle onto the couch in our den. They’re under too much pressure already. Better than anyone, they know the odds, particularly for a kid from a New York suburb.

By the time I meet them, they’re pros at working the system. Some have Googled me because they think knowing about me will improve their odds. After the interview, many send handwritten thank-you notes saying how much they enjoyed meeting me.

Maybe it’s true.

I used to be upset by these attempts to ingratiate. Since I’ve watched my own children go through similar torture, I find these gestures touching. Everyone’s trying so hard.

My reason for doing these interviews has shifted over time. When I started, my kids were young, and I thought it might give them a little advantage when they applied to Harvard. That has turned out not to be an issue. My oldest, now a college freshman, did not apply, nor will my twins, who are both high school juniors.

We are not snubbing Harvard. Even my oldest, who is my most academic son, did not quite have the class rank or the SATs. His SAT score was probably 100 points too low — though it was identical to the SAT score that got me in 35 years ago.

Why do I continue to interview? It’s very moving meeting all these bright young people who won’t get into Harvard. Recent news articles make it sound unbearably tragic. Several Ivies, including Harvard, rejected a record number of applicants this year.

Actually, meeting the soon-to-be rejected makes me hopeful about young people. They are far more accomplished than I was at their age and without a doubt will do superbly wherever they go.

Knowing me and seeing them is like witnessing some major evolutionary change take place in just 35 years, from the Neanderthal Harvard applicant of 1970 to today’s fully evolved Homo sapiens applicant.

There was the girl who, during summer vacation, left her house before 7 each morning to make a two-hour train ride to a major university, where she worked all day doing cutting-edge research for NASA on weightlessness in mice.

When I was in high school, my 10th-grade science project was on plant tropism — a shoebox with soil and bean sprouts bending toward the light.

These kids who don’t get into Harvard spend summers on schooners in Chesapeake Bay studying marine biology, building homes for the poor in Central America, touring Europe with all-star orchestras.

Summers, I dug trenches for my local sewer department during the day, and sold hot dogs at Fenway Park at night.

As I listen to them, I can visualize their parents, striving to teach excellence. One girl I interviewed described how her father made her watch the 2004 convention speeches by both President Bush and Senator John Kerry and then tell him which she liked better and why.

What kind of kid doesn’t get into Harvard? Well, there was the charming boy I interviewed with 1560 SATs. He did cancer research in the summer; played two instruments in three orchestras; and composed his own music. He redid the computer system for his student paper, loved to cook and was writing his own cookbook. One of his specialties was snapper poached in tea and served with noodle cake.

At his age, when I got hungry, I made myself peanut butter and jam on white bread and got into Harvard.

Some take 10 AP courses and get top scores of 5 on all of them.

I took one AP course and scored 3.

Of course, evolution is not the same as progress. These kids have an AP history textbook that has been specially created to match the content of the AP test, as well as review books and tutors for those tests. We had no AP textbook; many of our readings came from primary documents, and there was no Princeton Review then. I was never tutored in anything and walked into the SATs without having seen a sample SAT question.

As for my bean sprouts project, as bad it was, I did it alone. I interview kids who describe how their schools provide a statistician to analyze their science project data.

I see these kids — and watch my own applying to college — and as evolved as they are, I wouldn’t change places with them for anything. They’re under such pressure.

I used to say goodbye at my door, but since my own kids reached this age, I walk them out to their cars, where a parent waits. I always say the same thing to the mom or dad: “You’ve done a wonderful job — you should be very proud.” And I mean it.

But I’ve stopped feeling bad about the looming rejection. When my four were little, I used to hope a couple might go to Harvard. I pushed them, but by the end of middle school it was clear my twins, at least, were not made that way. They rebelled, and I had to learn to see who they were.

I came to understand that my own focus on Harvard was a matter of not sophistication but narrowness. I grew up in an unworldly blue-collar environment. Getting perfect grades and attending an elite college was one of the few ways up I could see.

My four have been raised in an upper-middle-class world. They look around and see lots of avenues to success. My wife’s two brothers struggled as students at mainstream colleges and both have made wonderful full lives, one as a salesman, the other as a builder. Each found his own best path. Each knows excellence.

That day, running on the beach, I was lost in my thoughts when a voice startled me. “Pops, hey, Pops!” It was Sammy, one of my twins, who’s probably heading for a good state school. He was in his wetsuit, surfing alone in the 30-degree weather, the only other person on the beach. “What a day!” he yelled, and his joy filled my heart.


Tuesday, May 01, 2007

RFP Irritation # 33

I hate RFPs, for starters. Today, I hate just about everything, actually.

But right now I hate RFPs.

Soooo, anyway, we have a pretty nice RFP format. It looks very professional and all that happy stuff.

Right after the cover letter, we have a page of graphics. Unfortunately, because we print this page on regular paper and the color printer, though it's expensive, cannot print all the way to the edge, we don't get a full bleed effect on the 'cover'.

So, Marketing, in all their creative glory, has decided to single out this one page in RFPs to make a big deal out of. They are creating a page on 11x17 paper that we will then cut out and put into the RFPs.

RFPs are usually about 50 pages each. And there is a ton of requirements for them too. They have complicated, bullsh*t requirements for printing and assembly and sh*t. So much stuff can go wrong with RFPs, but Marketing wants to focus on this one page.

I can't say enough what a stupid, wasteful idea this is. I'm trying soooooooo hard to not be a complete naysayer. Really. Seriously. I guess Marketing's been going back and forth on this for months. Ugh.

So we're going to do this extra work for how much effect? Does anyone *really* give a sh*t that the 'cover' (which doesn't even appear as the cover; it's behind the cover letter, which is bound into the whole thing) isn't full-bleed? Does anyone even notice besides the anal retentive executive (I mean, thorough, yes thorough is the word…) and his graphic artist minion? Hello, these flippin things usually go out at the last d*mn minute!

I guarantee, the recipients of these things have no flippin idea that this is even an issue. I bet they look at the cover for all of two seconds before they flip to the table of contents or something. If you received an RFP and had to evaluate it, would you critique the cover that's not even a cover, or would you get right to the explanation of how the vendor is going to do its job and how much they're planning to charge for it? As the reviewer, you'd have a job to do, and you'd have a certain amount of time to do it in, and you'd have several other RFPs to evaluate also. Heck, they probably take the electronic version of the document, cut and paste the info into a database or spreadsheet, and then use that to compare vendors! Then they might even ditch the hard copy altogether or just file it away somewhere. They probably don't even look at it.

Unless, like my supervisor, they're from an altogether different century.

Which is rude of me to say.

I will stop complaining now.

No I won't.

That's what this d*mn blog is for.