#12 DEC 12 2013: INFORMATION OVERLOAD

I’m quoting the following from a piece by Andrew Davis in Publishing Executive. He makes the point that just because there is more information available, does not mean that one can consumer more.

Now why didn’t I think of that!

An average of 17 webpages are published every single second. In the time it takes you to read this article 4,080 new webpages will be indexed, promoted, optimized, and set free on the world wide web. Every new article we publish contributes to information overload.

Unfortunately, he doesn’t offer a solution. He merely comments as follows:

I want you to challenge your team to create content your audience actually WANTS to consume. I want you to challenge the team to make an appointment with a specific audience on a regular basis with a piece of formatted content designed to drive value for the audience. Challenge your team to combat information overload.

Hard to argue with what he says, but it seems somewhat general to me. Where a writer is concerned, I suspect the solution is to ration input drastically—and write less but better.

Perhaps the writer of the future will merely meditate about writing. All roads lead to Zen.

I’m absolutely not a believer in multi-tasking. Though I love the radio, I switch it off when I’m really focused on writing—and am not yet in the clutches of a smartphone. But e-mail input remains a problem.

We’re going to have to do something about all this stuff, or we’re going to go nuts.

In fact, one could make a reasonable case that a fundamental cause of Congress’s current dysfunctionality isn’t just the Civil War being fought all over again (think about it) but the inability of both Senators and Representatives to focus. After all, they mostly don’t even read the bills they vote for.

Who would have thought it would be Facebook, and similar, that would be the cause of this Great Nation’s defeat? And we all thought it would be the Chinese except air pollution is so bad over there they can’t even see where they’re going. Why do you think they’re checking out the moon? True, there is no air—but at least they can see. But can they all fit?

But surely you’re joking, Mr. O’Reilly?

I’m far from sure I am.

I’m reminded of a great scene from a lesser known (but terrific) 1961 Billy Wilder movie, ONE, TWO, THREE! In it, Horst Buchholz is tortured to breaking point by the East Germans by having Itsy Bitzy Teenie Weeny Yellow Polka Dot Bikini played at him endlessly.

I guess I had better Tweet that. Being an author isn’t about writing these days. It’s about building your Social Media platform as high as you can.

And then you can jump! And you’ll want to!

#11 DEC 11 2013: IF YOU LIKE THRILLERS (AND WHO DOESN’T) CHECK OUT BARRY EISLER

It seems to me that I don’t write enough about books—which is odd because reading is one of my greatest pleasures, and has been so ever since I was taught reading by a certain Miss Johnston in St.Gerard’s School, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Ireland.

There is a back-story to how I learned to read. When I was sent to boarding-school at the tender age of five and a few months—way too young, but my mother could not handle me—few people realized my age, and it was generally assumed I was just small but could read. After all, the normal admission age was about eight and a half, and by that age every pupil normally could.

I couldn’t read because I had never been taught. Believe it or not, this lack of such a fundamental academic survival skill was not spotted for about a term (which says a lot about St. Gerards) but then Miss Johnston shrieked and revealed all (about reading).

Actually, she also said I was so cuddly (remember I was only five) that she would love to climb into my bed and hug me—and thereafter I lay there in dread every night, for some time, fearing she would make good on her wish. Eventually someone did climb into my bed, as I lay there petrified, but it was only another boy, all of nine, a habitual sleep-walker who was prone to wander—and, fortunately, he moved on after a few minutes.

Eventually (on another occasion) he wandered out onto the fire escape, fell about fifteen feet onto a compost heap, and I think that cured him. 

But I digress. The point is that Miss Johnson taught me to read and thereafter I was seldom to be found without a book or two at hand. And over 64 years later, I haven't changed.

So aren’t I writing more about books? I think because currently I’m reading some very serious stuff and haven’t yet reached the stage where I want to comment. As with a python, I take the process of digestion seriously so take my time.

But I do wish to bring Barry Eisler to your attention, He has an excellent and very generous web site at www.BarryEisler.com and is well worth your attention. He writes good escapist stuff—and was a former CIA operative.

 

 

#10 DEC 10 2013: MANY HAVE GIVEN CAPITALISM A THOROUGHLY BAD NAME. OTHERS, SUCH AS NICK HANAUER, SHOW THAT CAPITALISM CAN (AND DOES) WORK.

On more than a few occasions, I have had people say to me—as much as a boast, as a statement of principle: “I’m an unreformed capitalist” (or words to that effect).

Then they act as if such a statement gives them the right to behave in any way they choose—which, all too often, is badly.

This may be naïve, but I rather like the notion that you can be a capitalist and behave decently—because the truth is that capitalism is like ice cream: it comes in many flavors. Some are objectionable. Others are very good indeed.

The most popular flavor in the U.S. right now (let’s call it “Shareholder Capitalism”), which is based on the strange notion that management’s sole obligation is to maximize shareholder returns—so to hell with workers, suppliers, the local community, the natural interest, and any kind of moral code—is not serving this nation well, and hasn’t for decades. It has led to:

• Outsourcing of well-paid jobs
• Exporting of industrial expertise to our competition
• The decline of the well-paid job
• The rise of the badly paid service job
• The decline of the Middle-Class
• The decline of real earning power for most of the working population
• The economic destruction of numerous communities
• Ever increasing income inequality
• Excessive CEO & Senior Executive salary packages.
• The active undermining of democracy
• Regulatory capture
• Under-investment
• Monopolies (or near monopolies)
• Short-termism
• A decline in the corporate contribution towards the tax base
• A decline in infrastructure maintenance and investment
• A consistent trade deficit
• The financialization of the economy
• A rise in corporate welfare
• Corporate extortion
• A pattern of malfeasance particularly in the financial sector
• The Great Recession

The above list of negatives is far from complete, but the negative pattern is clear. Meanwhile our competition, particularly in Northern Europe, has practiced a very different form of capitalism (“Stakeholder Capitalism”) with superior results over an extended period of time.

Fortunately, not all American businessmen practice Shareholder Capitalism or have thrown their moral code out of the window. One example of a businessman articulating a very different set of values is the highly successful entrepreneur, Nick Hanauer, who has not only demonstrated his practical skills as a capitalist, but who is going to great lengths to communicate his ideas.

Hanauer is worth reading up and following. He is a proven performer (something of an understatement) and his ideas are very attractive.

His web site is at nick-hanauer.com

Entrepreneur, Venture Capitalist, Author, Civic Activist, Philanthropist.

Nick Hanauer is one of the most successful Entrepreneurs, investors and managers in the Northwest with over 30 years of experience across a broad range of industries including manufacturing, retailing, e-commerce, digital media and advertising, software, aerospace, health care, and finance.

Hanauer’s experience and perspective have produced an unusual record of serial successes. Hanauer has managed, founded or financed over 30 companies, creating aggregate market value of tens of billions of dollars. Some notable companies Include Amazon.com, Aquantive Inc., (purchased by Microsoft in 2007 for $6.4 billion), Insitu group (purchased by Boeing for $400 million), Market Leader (purchased by Trulia in 2013 for $350 million). Some other companies include Marchex, Newsvine, Qliance, Seattle Bank and Pacific Coast Feather Company.

Hanauer is a co-founder and partner in Seattle-based venture capital firm, Second Avenue Partners. Second Avenue provides management, strategy, and capital for early stage companies.

Hanauer is actively involved in a broad variety of civic and philanthropic activities, In 2000, he co-founded the League of Education Voters (LEV); a non-partisan statewide political organization focused on promoting public education. He currently serves as Co-President of the LEV. Additionally, Hanauer serves or has served a broad range of civic organizations including the boards of the Cascade Land Conservancy, The University of Washington Foundation, The Seattle Alliance for Education, and The MT Lemmon Science Center. He currently serves as a Director for The Democracy Alliance and as a board advisor to the policy journal DEMOCRACY and recently founded Washington Alliance for Gun Responsibility. He also co-manages The Nick and Leslie Hanauer foundation with his wife.

In 2007, Hanauer published the national bestseller in politics “The True Patriot” with co-author Eric Liu. In 2010 Liu and Hanauer published their second book, “The Gardens of Democracy”, also a national Best-seller in politics.

Hanauer has been featured in a variety of publications and is a frequent commentator on politics and economics in the media. He has appeared on the Charlie Rose Show, Fareed Zakaria, National Public Radio, Ed Schultz Show, The Lawrence O’Donell Show and others. He was recently featured on the cover of the National Journal. His TED speech on the true job creators went globally viral in 2010. His opinion pieces have been featured in the New York Times, Bloomberg Business Week, The Atlantic, Democracy Journal and other publications. He has been featured in two documentary films on economic inequality, American Winter -which premiered on HBO, and Inequality for All which was theatrically released in fall 2013.

Hanauer had a degree in philosophy from the University of Washington. He lives in Seattle Washington and is married with two children.

By the way, I don’t know Nick Hanauer. Simply put, I research the U.S. economy every day—reading much that is disturbing—so I was agreeably surprised when one of the good guys showed up. I’m sure there are others.

But, I’m not absolutely certain.

 

 

#9 DEC 9 2013: THE CURE THAT KILLS YOU—HOSPITAL ERRORS KNOCK OFF ABOUT 440,000 OF US EACH YEAR

I don’t have TV these days—and mostly don’t miss it. This doesn’t mean I work until I go to  bed—I enjoy my relaxation time.

Instead, I’ll watch a movie on Netflix, listen to NPR or read. Indeed, I may talk to a real live human—or go out to dinner with friends.

We writers spend a great deal of time in solitude, but that doesn’t mean we’re all inherently anti-social. Mind you, some of us are pretty weird.

From the days when I did watch TV, I recall falling in love with Tina Rosenberg. I think she was on Book TV. Either way, it was love at first sight, and it has remained a perfect relationship, perhaps because I have never met the woman. But she writes for the New York Times, and never fails to come up with a topic that doesn’t get my attention.

Her NYT article of Dec. 4 caused my eyebrows to levitate:

“Going to the hospital is supposed to be good for you. But in an alarming number of cases, it isn’t. And often it’s fatal. In fact it is the most dangerous thing most people will do.

Available statistics on hospital safety don’t tell the public what they need to know to make informed decisions.

Until very recently, health care experts believed that preventable hospital error caused some 98,000 deaths a year in the United States — a figure based on 1984 data. But a new report from the Journal of Patient Safety using updated data holds such error responsible for many more deaths — probably around some 440,000 per year. That’s one-sixth of all deaths nationally, making preventable hospital error the third leading cause of death in the United States. And 10 to 20 times that many people suffer nonlethal but serious harm as a result of hospital mistakes.”

Do the math. 10 to 20 times 440,000 dead equals 4.4 to 8.8 million in the serious but not lethal category for which we pay nearly twice as much in healthcare as just about any other developed nation.

And we’re worried about terrorism!

#8 DEC 8 2013: THE STRANGE SHAPES OF OUR DEMOCRACY

I realized when I was looking over yesterday’s blog, prior to publishing it that, that its header could be read two ways—both about our general tendency to preserve the status quo (even when better alternatives are widely known about) or as a criticism of my own actions.

I considered changing it, because I normally aim for clarity—as being fundamental to good writing—but then decided that I rather liked the joke being on me. Somehow it seemed to go with that magnificent Don Quixote illustration.

My basic point is that U.S. society seems remarkably resistant to structural change even when both the defect and the solution are widely known about.

A case in point is gerrymandering. It is clearly the antithesis of democracy that districts should be fixed so that, in effect, they belong to one party—yet gerrymandering continues apace. Yes, I know that both parties are guilty of it, but that doesn’t mean it should be allowed to continue.  Yet it does.

If memory serves, without blatant gerrymandering during the last re-districting, the House of Representatives would have gone to the Democrats after the last elections—and by 1.5 million votes at that.

#7 DEC 7 2013: WHY DO WE DO THINGS THE WAY WE DO WHEN SO OFTEN THE CONSEQUENCES HOVER BETWEEN MEDIOCRE AND CATASTROPHIC?

There are many in life (arguably most of us) who accept things for being the way they are—albeit we may grumble a bit – and just get on with the business of survival. In fact, most of us, whatever about our limitations in other ways, are remarkable good at feathering our own nests. We justify such behavior by talking about the importance of having a career and being properly rewarded—and our actions may be disastrous to society as a whole, and epitomize greed, selfishness, and short-term thinking (and destructive of the environment) but, if such behavior is the cultural norm, who are we to change the system?

It’s hard not to respect such practicality, but I confess it is not the way my mind works. In truth, I spend a great deal of time both researching and thinking about matters which bring me no personal benefit at all—except intellectual satisfaction. Even then, it doesn’t make me feel superior in any way—I have no wish to score points (though I certainly did when I was younger)—but instead, these days, I’m quite satisfied with the exhilaration that comes from the process itself. It’s detective work—and it’s fascinating.

I don’t know why this is – there is not obvious clue in either my background or upbringing – but I have been questioning the status quo since I was very small. Frequently, I have been right, but I will admit that this tendency has got me into considerable trouble on more than a few occasions – especially since I have rarely been deterred by the power and status of whoever I was up against, or by the all too predicable consequences.

Strangely enough, you don’t need to say much, if anything, for the conventional to detect contrarians like myself. The conventional seem to have highly effective built-in detector mechanisms to filter out those of us who are disinclined to “go along to get along.” 

But perhaps “disinclined” is the wrong word. The real reason why contrarians and iconoclasts like myself behave the way we do is because our natures drive us to do so. Many consider us trouble-makers, and government institutions, corporations and academia go to great effort to keep us out, but, for all that, we are necessary to society because we drive change—and without change society atrophies.

Institutions know this, and their leaders regularly make speeches about the importance of innovation and the absolute necessity of encouraging creativity, but they lock shields and become defensive when faced with the reality. After all, the status quo has elevated them to where they are, which—by definition—reflects well on the status quo, so why change it?

Where the U.S. is concerned, it seem to me the need for fundamental change is self-evident. On the other hand, I don’t yet detect the kind of massive groundswell of public opinion which could push such change through. Indeed, a rising stock market, a healthy housing market, fast food, meds, and the distractions of the internet seem to be all that is required to keep “We the people” adequately supine.

True, there is much dissatisfaction with Congress, and a significant proportion of the population is financially stressed, but the primary concern seems to be to return to the good old days prior to the Great Recession—and business as usual.

I feel like Don Quixote, and that arguing for fundamental change in the U.S. is about as futile as tilting at windmills.

On the other hand, one of the interesting things about societal change is that it has a tendency to happen when you least expect it.

Let me state for the record that I expect it.

Now let me find my horse and lance—and get back to tilting.

 

 

 

 

#6 DEC 6 2013: DOES TENACITY BEAT TALENT? IN THAT CONTEXT, A BETTER WORD FOR IT MIGHT BE ‘GRIT’

Creativity fascinates me, though I don’t pretend to understand it. Just for starters, it’s such an all encompassing word. Essentially, it’s about using human ingenuity – your mind, if you will - to add value in some way. I don’t think that value has to be monetary. It merely has to change the status quo.

I was going to write: “Advance the human condition…” but you can be pretty damn evil and still be creative—or your creativity can have terrible consequences (regardless of your intentions). Those who developed nuclear weapons displayed remarkable creativity, but it is hard to deny that the consequences are a mixed blessing. In fact, if I may slip into thriller-writer mode, I hold the view that it is only a matter of time before one, or a  number, of nuclear devices will be set off by people who do not wish us well. In fact, I have incorporated that probability in several of my books.

But, I don’t wish to cause you to lose any sleep (right now)—so let me return to the subject at hand.

The enemy of creativity is the status quo—and it is hard to imagine a more formidable foe. Just for starters, it is everywhere, and it is virtually immune to reason. Facts just bounce off it. All it knows is that it has a vested interest in opposing any and all change, and it is determined to do just that. It excels at the task. In a word, it is obdurate (though some might call it ignorant).

Creativity alone is rarely sufficient to defeat the status quo, but when teamed up with grit, the odds tilt in its favor.

MacArthur genius psychologist, Angela Duckworth, has studied all this, and divides the mechanics of achievement into motivation and volition. Motivation is self-explanatory, but volition requires some interpreting. Essentially, ‘volition’—in this context—refers to self-discipline (or character). Beyond that, her research shows that grit—defined as “the relentless work ethic of sustaining your commitments towards  a long-term goal”—is the best predictor of success. In short, talent, or creativity, without grit, just doesn’t cut it.

Her insights don’t stop there. Duckworth, and her colleague Chris Peterson have developed THE GRIT SCALE test based upon twelve simple questions. Apparently, it works remarkably (frighteningly?)well.

Would taking the test help or hinder? I don’t really know. I’m aware I’m creative, but I have strong doubts about my own grit at times. That said, it is in the nature of most creative artists to be troubled by such thoughts—which are then exacerbated by the innate instability of the typical creative artist’s existence.

But for all my faults, I do seem to have fortitude—with the help of good friends—and I like to hope that combination will compensate.

As for the test, I am living a real life version of it right now. Difficult thought it is, I can’t imagine a better life than that of a writer. It’s a fine thing to do what you really love to do.