4.26.2009
4.23.2009
Is everybody crazy, if only God is sane?
"You'd have to be crazy to be so sane," said the Evil Banshee of Change,
"but lucky for you that really everybody is crazy, because only God is truly sane."
"What do you mean by sane?" asked the Crazy.
"By truly sane I mean 'all-knowing' or omniscient, and of course rational,"
replied the Evil Banshee of Change, "Nobody is sane by those standards."
"Oh," said the Crazy, "Well now I don't feel so alone!"
"but lucky for you that really everybody is crazy, because only God is truly sane."
"What do you mean by sane?" asked the Crazy.
"By truly sane I mean 'all-knowing' or omniscient, and of course rational,"
replied the Evil Banshee of Change, "Nobody is sane by those standards."
"Oh," said the Crazy, "Well now I don't feel so alone!"
4.22.2009
Quick Restructuring of J-Schools Reaffirms Total Failure of Mediastablishment, Need for New Leadership
Here's an excerpt from something I wrote during April 2008:
"The options in the new media route allowed me to study and prepare for print, radio, broadcasting, and web journalism all in one degree. I think this is essential, to prepare for any kind of media route. Media is converging.
I also minored in Entrepreneurship because I anticipated the collapse of the industry. Business classes I took that I think should be incorporated into journo programs include:
Advertising
Marketing
Economics
Entrepreneurial Business Management
Personal Finance
Accounting
Business and Professional Speaking
Business Law.."
***
As of more current..
“J-Schools Play Catch-Up”
By BRIAN STELTER, Published April 14, 2009
Excerpt:
The changes are forcing colleges and universities to rethink what a journalism education should look like. The perennial debate about journalism programs — theoretical teaching versus professional skill building — has been displaced by more urgent questions: How can you help students find sustainable business models, while introducing the formerly verboten subject of the business side? What are the implications for the craft of journalism in the shift to digital? And how do you position students for an uncertain future in the media?
“I don’t know a journalism dean in the country who knows what the solution is, or where the journalism industry is going,” says Christopher Callahan, the dean of the Cronkite School. “I am convinced that those answers are going to come from people of their generation,” he says of the students. “Not my generation.”
To raise its national profile, Arizona State has invested heavily in its journalism program. In a new curriculum, Mr. Callahan is trying to instill an ethos of innovation — a sea change for an industry that has acted for decades like a slow-moving train, with J-schools the caboose. “Newsrooms have tended to be highly inflexible; innovation was not encouraged,” says Mr. Callahan, former associate dean at the University of Maryland’s journalism school. Deans across the country say they can’t afford to be the caboose anymore.
The new forward-thinking approach is to bracket traditional journalistic values withWeb classes and an entrepreneurial spirit. Take the weekly entrepreneurship course at Arizona State taught by Dan Gillmor, a former columnist for The San Jose Mercury News, in which students create products for news consumers — last fall, a team built a site for local filmmakers. The purpose of the course, Mr. Gillmor says, is to learn to “invent your own jobs.” (Because they may have to.) Mr. Gillmor also runs the Knight Center for Digital Media Entrepreneurship, a catalyst for the student projects; that the center even exists is a testament to the changes that are afoot within journalism education.
First-year students at the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University now take “Multimedia Storytelling” and “Introduction to 21st-Century Media.” In the fall, the school of journalism at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, will be adding an immersion experience in “communication, business and entrepreneurship.” With $8 million from the former newspaper executive Leonard Tow, the graduate schools at Columbia University and the City University of New York are creating two centers for new media innovation.
Rich Beckman, a professor of visual journalism at the University of Miami and a guru of new media education, confirms the evolution:“There were deans all over the country saying, ‘We’re never going to teach computer programming in J-school.’ Well, now they are.”
***
Oh, how the stale cookies of the mediastablishment continue to crumble..
"The options in the new media route allowed me to study and prepare for print, radio, broadcasting, and web journalism all in one degree. I think this is essential, to prepare for any kind of media route. Media is converging.
I also minored in Entrepreneurship because I anticipated the collapse of the industry. Business classes I took that I think should be incorporated into journo programs include:
Advertising
Marketing
Economics
Entrepreneurial Business Management
Personal Finance
Accounting
Business and Professional Speaking
Business Law.."
***
As of more current..
“J-Schools Play Catch-Up”
By BRIAN STELTER, Published April 14, 2009
Excerpt:
The changes are forcing colleges and universities to rethink what a journalism education should look like. The perennial debate about journalism programs — theoretical teaching versus professional skill building — has been displaced by more urgent questions: How can you help students find sustainable business models, while introducing the formerly verboten subject of the business side? What are the implications for the craft of journalism in the shift to digital? And how do you position students for an uncertain future in the media?
“I don’t know a journalism dean in the country who knows what the solution is, or where the journalism industry is going,” says Christopher Callahan, the dean of the Cronkite School. “I am convinced that those answers are going to come from people of their generation,” he says of the students. “Not my generation.”
To raise its national profile, Arizona State has invested heavily in its journalism program. In a new curriculum, Mr. Callahan is trying to instill an ethos of innovation — a sea change for an industry that has acted for decades like a slow-moving train, with J-schools the caboose. “Newsrooms have tended to be highly inflexible; innovation was not encouraged,” says Mr. Callahan, former associate dean at the University of Maryland’s journalism school. Deans across the country say they can’t afford to be the caboose anymore.
The new forward-thinking approach is to bracket traditional journalistic values withWeb classes and an entrepreneurial spirit. Take the weekly entrepreneurship course at Arizona State taught by Dan Gillmor, a former columnist for The San Jose Mercury News, in which students create products for news consumers — last fall, a team built a site for local filmmakers. The purpose of the course, Mr. Gillmor says, is to learn to “invent your own jobs.” (Because they may have to.) Mr. Gillmor also runs the Knight Center for Digital Media Entrepreneurship, a catalyst for the student projects; that the center even exists is a testament to the changes that are afoot within journalism education.
First-year students at the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University now take “Multimedia Storytelling” and “Introduction to 21st-Century Media.” In the fall, the school of journalism at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, will be adding an immersion experience in “communication, business and entrepreneurship.” With $8 million from the former newspaper executive Leonard Tow, the graduate schools at Columbia University and the City University of New York are creating two centers for new media innovation.
Rich Beckman, a professor of visual journalism at the University of Miami and a guru of new media education, confirms the evolution:“There were deans all over the country saying, ‘We’re never going to teach computer programming in J-school.’ Well, now they are.”
***
Oh, how the stale cookies of the mediastablishment continue to crumble..
4.20.2009
Payment Model for An Ultramodern Media Publication of the Future
Angry Journalist #8554:
#8551: Talk up a decent paycheck and maybe you’ll get names.
***
AJ 8554:
Here's what I'm thinking in terms of compensation..
Base pay would be about $52,000 a year per full-time employee, with four weeks paid vacation for each employee. That's about $1,000 per week, or $200 per day of work per full-time employee.
Every employee would receive the same base pay, however, each employee would receive ad revenue profit-sharing for any exclusive content they create that is published through this publication or syndicated via iTunes. For example, say you write a story that has ads running with it, you would get a cut of that revenue in addition to your base pay. If you produce better content that gets more views (or more downloads from iTunes) then you get more pay, in addition to your base pay.
As for what percentage this will be, that has yet to be determined. However, I believe it should be at least 20 percent. This will provide more merit-based compensation to employees that perform better.
If the content you produced was co-produced by others, that cut of the profits must be divided between the contributors. This process will all be automated by computers and the royalty checks will be automatically printed every week, with no room for mistakes or inefficiencies that are the result of human error.
In addition to producing news, this publication will also produce music, entertainment, humor, cartoons, educational programming, iPhone applications, advertising production, et cetera. Larger revenues made from music and iPhone applications will go towards subsidizing the production of other media such as news production, which may not earn as much revenue as other media.
This organization will adopt more of a newer, matrix-type organizational structure rather than the traditional top-down hierarchical structure. This matrix-type structure will allow for more adaptability than is normally allowed through more traditional business models, as well as increase productivity and decrease inefficiencies. I can't go into more detail about this particular organizational structure here, however, because it is the secret to this organizational model that I have developed that will essentially drive the success and profit of this hypothetical publication.
I would also like to provide benefits to full-time employees, but the range and scope of these benefits would be completely dependent upon how much startup capital I could acquire for the initial formulation of this company, as well as the kinds of profit margins that materialize.
Much of the work would also be produced by freelancers, who could expect to make more than current freelance rates for media production.
I am also considering a merit-based system that would provide my top producers with "merit points" that could be applied toward acquiring partial ownership of the company, as well as towards promotion within management of the matrix cells of the company's organizational structure.
Because base pay would be the same for all, then any "raises" would thus be tied and proportional only to performance and merit, rather than favoritism or nepotism. Moreover, the relatively higher cost of compensation would help ensure that only the relatively best would get hired in the first place, at least for full-time employment. Any increase to base pay would be applied equally to all employees at the same time.
Anybody who works hard enough towards the success of this company could become partner or work their way up through management. Managers who have stopped performing, however, could just as easily be demoted to dynamically make way for better talent to replace their positions of authority within the matrix structure of this organization. That way, the company always gets better, more innovative, more efficient, and more profitable over time, without being stagnated in the long-run by cronyism or prima donnas.
Thoughts?
***
Update:
Also, if I might add one more critical detail without giving too much information away..
This publication will be heavily oriented towards providing services for individuals. Products will be produced, yes, such as computer programs or iPhone applications, but there will also be a strong emphasis on service-oriented tasks which may include but are not limited to:
Transferring people's old home movie films to video,
editing videos for businesses and consumers,
providing/organizing focus group marketing research,
producing news stories on-demand,
helping to co-author books or autobiographies for clients,
providing affordable educational workshops,
trade/vocational training - licensing - testing - and certification services,
renting recording studio space to musicians,
producing high-tech super interactive multimedia classifieds that are produced on-demand,
producing high-tech interactive expositions of real estate properties on-demand at a cost to the consumer,
et cetera et cetera et cetera.
This is necessary I think because there is essentially more scarcity of services than there is scarcity of digital media. There are also many people afraid of computers who are willing to pay decent money for computer or digital-related services, that may not be willing to pay nearly as much money for digital media that they can more easily pirate or view for free. Providing more service-related resources for consumers may also bring in more readers/viewers for the media that is published through this hypothetical publication.
Revenues generated from these services will help sustain the operational costs of the media production, and the media that is published - produced - and viewed - will help bring light to the various production services that are also directly available to viewers through this hypothetical company.
It's all about diversification here, essentially, as well as making full use of what this kind of high-tech media publication has to offer.
Fund me. Pretty please. Fund me and help save journalism. Now.
***
Update 2:
I for one am tired of watching the journalism industry flop around in a slimy goo of failure. It could do so much good in the world, help so many people, but instead it continues its kamikaze death march towards oblivion. I feel I have answers, and solutions, to help prevent the dystopian future that is most likely going to be an unavoidable reality after the current flawed leadership of the media industry takes its last breath of zombie death. If you know somebody that has money who wants to help curtail the moral and intellectual degradation of society then please let me know.
Thank you.
#8551: Talk up a decent paycheck and maybe you’ll get names.
***
AJ 8554:
Here's what I'm thinking in terms of compensation..
Base pay would be about $52,000 a year per full-time employee, with four weeks paid vacation for each employee. That's about $1,000 per week, or $200 per day of work per full-time employee.
Every employee would receive the same base pay, however, each employee would receive ad revenue profit-sharing for any exclusive content they create that is published through this publication or syndicated via iTunes. For example, say you write a story that has ads running with it, you would get a cut of that revenue in addition to your base pay. If you produce better content that gets more views (or more downloads from iTunes) then you get more pay, in addition to your base pay.
As for what percentage this will be, that has yet to be determined. However, I believe it should be at least 20 percent. This will provide more merit-based compensation to employees that perform better.
If the content you produced was co-produced by others, that cut of the profits must be divided between the contributors. This process will all be automated by computers and the royalty checks will be automatically printed every week, with no room for mistakes or inefficiencies that are the result of human error.
In addition to producing news, this publication will also produce music, entertainment, humor, cartoons, educational programming, iPhone applications, advertising production, et cetera. Larger revenues made from music and iPhone applications will go towards subsidizing the production of other media such as news production, which may not earn as much revenue as other media.
This organization will adopt more of a newer, matrix-type organizational structure rather than the traditional top-down hierarchical structure. This matrix-type structure will allow for more adaptability than is normally allowed through more traditional business models, as well as increase productivity and decrease inefficiencies. I can't go into more detail about this particular organizational structure here, however, because it is the secret to this organizational model that I have developed that will essentially drive the success and profit of this hypothetical publication.
I would also like to provide benefits to full-time employees, but the range and scope of these benefits would be completely dependent upon how much startup capital I could acquire for the initial formulation of this company, as well as the kinds of profit margins that materialize.
Much of the work would also be produced by freelancers, who could expect to make more than current freelance rates for media production.
I am also considering a merit-based system that would provide my top producers with "merit points" that could be applied toward acquiring partial ownership of the company, as well as towards promotion within management of the matrix cells of the company's organizational structure.
Because base pay would be the same for all, then any "raises" would thus be tied and proportional only to performance and merit, rather than favoritism or nepotism. Moreover, the relatively higher cost of compensation would help ensure that only the relatively best would get hired in the first place, at least for full-time employment. Any increase to base pay would be applied equally to all employees at the same time.
Anybody who works hard enough towards the success of this company could become partner or work their way up through management. Managers who have stopped performing, however, could just as easily be demoted to dynamically make way for better talent to replace their positions of authority within the matrix structure of this organization. That way, the company always gets better, more innovative, more efficient, and more profitable over time, without being stagnated in the long-run by cronyism or prima donnas.
Thoughts?
***
Update:
Also, if I might add one more critical detail without giving too much information away..
This publication will be heavily oriented towards providing services for individuals. Products will be produced, yes, such as computer programs or iPhone applications, but there will also be a strong emphasis on service-oriented tasks which may include but are not limited to:
Transferring people's old home movie films to video,
editing videos for businesses and consumers,
providing/organizing focus group marketing research,
producing news stories on-demand,
helping to co-author books or autobiographies for clients,
providing affordable educational workshops,
trade/vocational training - licensing - testing - and certification services,
renting recording studio space to musicians,
producing high-tech super interactive multimedia classifieds that are produced on-demand,
producing high-tech interactive expositions of real estate properties on-demand at a cost to the consumer,
et cetera et cetera et cetera.
This is necessary I think because there is essentially more scarcity of services than there is scarcity of digital media. There are also many people afraid of computers who are willing to pay decent money for computer or digital-related services, that may not be willing to pay nearly as much money for digital media that they can more easily pirate or view for free. Providing more service-related resources for consumers may also bring in more readers/viewers for the media that is published through this hypothetical publication.
Revenues generated from these services will help sustain the operational costs of the media production, and the media that is published - produced - and viewed - will help bring light to the various production services that are also directly available to viewers through this hypothetical company.
It's all about diversification here, essentially, as well as making full use of what this kind of high-tech media publication has to offer.
Fund me. Pretty please. Fund me and help save journalism. Now.
***
Update 2:
I for one am tired of watching the journalism industry flop around in a slimy goo of failure. It could do so much good in the world, help so many people, but instead it continues its kamikaze death march towards oblivion. I feel I have answers, and solutions, to help prevent the dystopian future that is most likely going to be an unavoidable reality after the current flawed leadership of the media industry takes its last breath of zombie death. If you know somebody that has money who wants to help curtail the moral and intellectual degradation of society then please let me know.
Thank you.
4.16.2009
Help Us Help Me Help You
I am seeking the names of specific individuals who would seriously be willing to fund the construction of an ultramodern media publication of the future.
The main thing that has held me back from better developing particular ideas that relate to this for so long is having no capital to do so. Almost everything I have produced, much of which has never been published, has been produced on zero funding. I consider almost everything I’ve produced up to this point to be mere practice and child’s play compared to what I could (and should) actually build with adequate funding.
Many films are produced annually on budgets of $70 million or more. For less than one sixth of that kind of funding I could build my vision for the supreme media publication of tomorrow, the likes of which has yet to be fully realized, ever.
I want to rebuild the journalism industry as well as make it a valuable profession again for the right people with the right drive who have the right training and the right vision. That is my goal here, to save journalism and to better society with better journalism. My goal here is not to attain wealth or power over other individuals, but having adequate funding and executive control over the creation of this project will be absolutely necessary for the successful completion and full realization of this project, at least in the short term.
Trying to retrofit or restructure any existing businesses or institutions simply will not do if I am to build what it is that I envision in particular, to the scope that I envision it. I have to build this one from the ground up and I need to be the one with executive control over its creation if it is to truly succeed, as quickly as possible. Of course, I have no problem collaborating with others on its creation for I would certainly plan on hiring many talented people that I have in mind, but this project is simply not going to be fully realized if I do not have executive control over its creation (at least within the short term).
I am looking for specific names of specific people who would genuinely be interested in funding this initiative. They could be venture capitalists, philanthropists, celebrities, whatever – so long as they are individuals. Groups, such as the “Knight News Challenge,” I am absolutely not interested in hearing of, at all. Most of the ideas they fund are an absolute joke in my opinion.
Large groups and committees are often way too conservative and myopic to understand the value of ideas that are “ahead” of their time (or even ideas that are in their time right now, that society is already currently ready for). And when I mean “conservative” I do not mean “economically or fiscally conservative,” I mean “completely and utterly debilitated by group think” to the point to where they have little or no foresight in their thinking, whatsoever.
Many individuals, however, are often not nearly as myopic in understanding the value of ideas that are categorically ahead of their time (especially the right individuals). Landmark creative individuals such as “Steve Jobs” are not going to suffer from the same flawed, myopic reasoning as compared to groups like “The Wall Street Journal” or “The Knight Foundation.” Steve Jobs would not have been able to accomplish what he has accomplished if he was forced to work under the likes of Dick Cheney or was funded by the likes of Rand Corporation.
If you happen to be one of these such individuals or happen to know any of these individuals specifically, then please let me know.
Many people with the capital and will to rebuild journalism don’t necessarily have the right ideas to do so, and most people with the right ideas and initiative to rebuild journalism simply just don’t have the capital to do so. That’s why we need to work together.
Help us help me help you. Thank you.
The main thing that has held me back from better developing particular ideas that relate to this for so long is having no capital to do so. Almost everything I have produced, much of which has never been published, has been produced on zero funding. I consider almost everything I’ve produced up to this point to be mere practice and child’s play compared to what I could (and should) actually build with adequate funding.
Many films are produced annually on budgets of $70 million or more. For less than one sixth of that kind of funding I could build my vision for the supreme media publication of tomorrow, the likes of which has yet to be fully realized, ever.
I want to rebuild the journalism industry as well as make it a valuable profession again for the right people with the right drive who have the right training and the right vision. That is my goal here, to save journalism and to better society with better journalism. My goal here is not to attain wealth or power over other individuals, but having adequate funding and executive control over the creation of this project will be absolutely necessary for the successful completion and full realization of this project, at least in the short term.
Trying to retrofit or restructure any existing businesses or institutions simply will not do if I am to build what it is that I envision in particular, to the scope that I envision it. I have to build this one from the ground up and I need to be the one with executive control over its creation if it is to truly succeed, as quickly as possible. Of course, I have no problem collaborating with others on its creation for I would certainly plan on hiring many talented people that I have in mind, but this project is simply not going to be fully realized if I do not have executive control over its creation (at least within the short term).
I am looking for specific names of specific people who would genuinely be interested in funding this initiative. They could be venture capitalists, philanthropists, celebrities, whatever – so long as they are individuals. Groups, such as the “Knight News Challenge,” I am absolutely not interested in hearing of, at all. Most of the ideas they fund are an absolute joke in my opinion.
Large groups and committees are often way too conservative and myopic to understand the value of ideas that are “ahead” of their time (or even ideas that are in their time right now, that society is already currently ready for). And when I mean “conservative” I do not mean “economically or fiscally conservative,” I mean “completely and utterly debilitated by group think” to the point to where they have little or no foresight in their thinking, whatsoever.
Many individuals, however, are often not nearly as myopic in understanding the value of ideas that are categorically ahead of their time (especially the right individuals). Landmark creative individuals such as “Steve Jobs” are not going to suffer from the same flawed, myopic reasoning as compared to groups like “The Wall Street Journal” or “The Knight Foundation.” Steve Jobs would not have been able to accomplish what he has accomplished if he was forced to work under the likes of Dick Cheney or was funded by the likes of Rand Corporation.
If you happen to be one of these such individuals or happen to know any of these individuals specifically, then please let me know.
Many people with the capital and will to rebuild journalism don’t necessarily have the right ideas to do so, and most people with the right ideas and initiative to rebuild journalism simply just don’t have the capital to do so. That’s why we need to work together.
Help us help me help you. Thank you.
4.11.2009
Nature and Newspapers
Part of what separates the strong from the weak within Nature is the will to survive
(as well as the ability to successfully adapt to a changing environment).
Therefore, it could easily be argued that most of these hidebound newspaper executives
who are refusing to take the necessary steps and hire the right people to actually save their companies,
must either be tremendously weak or weak-willed within spirit, as well as
fundamentally incapable of successfully adapting to a changing climate.
Think survival of the fittest, they are not the fittest.
The slow and weak will get eaten by lions if they slow down the pack for too long,
that's just the natural order of things, so to speak.
Sorry hidebound newspaper executives,
but Nature and the pack are both saying, "No."
(as well as the ability to successfully adapt to a changing environment).
Therefore, it could easily be argued that most of these hidebound newspaper executives
who are refusing to take the necessary steps and hire the right people to actually save their companies,
must either be tremendously weak or weak-willed within spirit, as well as
fundamentally incapable of successfully adapting to a changing climate.
Think survival of the fittest, they are not the fittest.
The slow and weak will get eaten by lions if they slow down the pack for too long,
that's just the natural order of things, so to speak.
Sorry hidebound newspaper executives,
but Nature and the pack are both saying, "No."
4.07.2009
Death By Ineptitude?
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Better Know a Lobby - Newspaper Lobby | ||||
| ||||
From here, circa March 31, 2009:
"Last question.."
"Sure."
"Knock knock."
"Who's there?"
"The death of the newspaper industry."
-Stephen Colbert
***
From Pat Thornton's Journalism Iconoclast - "It’s time to reinvent the newspaper industry"
circa April 6, 2009 (emphasis by me):
"When an industry goes from so high to so slow, so fast, it’s ultimately because its leaders became complacent.
They never thought that the monster profit margins would end. They never thought that diversification was important. Instead, they gleefully doubled down on print in recent years with ill-advised acquisitions.
After all, why diversify away from newspapers when they make so much money?
When you look at industries that ultimately fail, it’s because their leaders never thought a new technology or a new way of producing a product could come along. They thought they would be able to do the same thing forever. That short-sighted thinking is ultimately doomed to fail."
[...]
"If newspapers want to reinvent, it means a lot more than just finding new ways to disseminate old content. Reinvention means thinking of completely new products that tap into separate markets.
That’s why a computer maker gets into the portable music space. That’s why a computer maker starts selling movies. That’s how a computer maker becomes a dominant player in the cell phone space.
If Apple executives insisted on only being a computer company, Apple would have gone bankrupt. Instead, when the chips were down, they decided to start taking major risks and those risk paid off. Newspaper companies have to start taking real risks, and they have to be captained by those willing to take risks."
[...]
"We cannot change the complacency of the past, but we can change the course of the future. We must make a pact never to be complacent again. New technologies will be rapidly forming and changing lives in the coming years.
If the remnants of the newspaper industry want to survive and ultimately thrive, we have embrace new technology and get out of front of trends, not behind them. We have to embrace change. And, yes, that means we have to employ people in all ranks who are not married to the past and are willing to be a part of a revolution.
And so, the newspaper industry eventually won’t have that much to do with paper. Like Apple with computers, newspapers will still have print products (and they should, after all there is a market for them), but newspapers will be so much more than papers. They’ll produce products that are wildly different from newspapers.
That’s the only path forward."
***
So..
..how many times do you have to prove yourself to newspaper executives
before they start paying you to save their companies from certain doom?
Hey newspaper execs, hire me to save your company. Now. Seriously.
What are you waiting for?
Death?
I may not have all the answers, but I know enough to know
that other people are not coming up with the same ideas
that I’m just sitting on, yet to be published,
waiting for media publications to give me a call.
It’s time for the executives of media companies to swallow their pride
and pay me for my ideas, you know, if they want to have any chance for survival.
Or they could just continue on their kamikaze suicide run..
***
Here’s some classist humor for you guys..
How many overpaid wealthy change-hating newspaper executives does it take
to screw in a lightbulb?
None,
that’s what the unpaid interns are for!
Haha, oh..
I’m laughing so hard I almost shit my pants!
Not really,
it’s almost criminal how so many of these executives have absolutely destroyed
the livelihoods of so many decent, hardworking journalists
with their ineptitude.
You might think that the absolute shame of their utter failure
might drive more of these executives to step down
or at least hire the right people to save their companies,
but apparently not.
Death by ineptitude?
4.02.2009
Everybody Deserves To Be Hugged By Somebody..
..everybody deserves to be loved?
If you happen to have any beauty or smarts..
then share it with someone you love?
If you happen to have any beauty or smarts..
then share it with someone you love?
Four Things That Make People Jealous
Four things that cause jealousy are..
***
1) Wealth
A) Economic Wealth
Surplus of time, money, mobility, or other material wealth - relative to others.
B) Social Wealth
“Social capital” - a surplus of love, respect, fanfare, or popularity relative to others.
2) Power
A) Authority
Ability to exert formal or institutionalized political power & control over others,
such as elected officials, law enforcement, or business managers.
B) Influence
Ability to effect change through less direct & more informal means,
such as celebrities, academics, or lobbyists.
3) Beauty
A) Scientific or Natural Beauty
Symmetry, health, or innate capacity for survival within nature.
B) Culturally Defined Beauty
Qualities & traits which are inclusively selected or deemed valuable by society.
4) Smarts
A) Intelligence
Natural & innate logic or reasoning abilities that may include, but are not limited to,
strength of memory, problem-solving abilities, or speed of thought.
B) Knowledge
Street smarts, social mores, information, or wisdom learned & obtained culturally
through social institutions such as family, school, community, or media.
C) Creativity
Inventive abilities relating to imagination, abstract thinking,
& the ability to generate new or original ideas & concepts.
***
Wealth, power, beauty, and smarts. These are the things that make people jealous..
Watch out!
***
1) Wealth
A) Economic Wealth
Surplus of time, money, mobility, or other material wealth - relative to others.
B) Social Wealth
“Social capital” - a surplus of love, respect, fanfare, or popularity relative to others.
2) Power
A) Authority
Ability to exert formal or institutionalized political power & control over others,
such as elected officials, law enforcement, or business managers.
B) Influence
Ability to effect change through less direct & more informal means,
such as celebrities, academics, or lobbyists.
3) Beauty
A) Scientific or Natural Beauty
Symmetry, health, or innate capacity for survival within nature.
B) Culturally Defined Beauty
Qualities & traits which are inclusively selected or deemed valuable by society.
4) Smarts
A) Intelligence
Natural & innate logic or reasoning abilities that may include, but are not limited to,
strength of memory, problem-solving abilities, or speed of thought.
B) Knowledge
Street smarts, social mores, information, or wisdom learned & obtained culturally
through social institutions such as family, school, community, or media.
C) Creativity
Inventive abilities relating to imagination, abstract thinking,
& the ability to generate new or original ideas & concepts.
***
Wealth, power, beauty, and smarts. These are the things that make people jealous..
Watch out!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)