3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

3rd From Sol

Category Archives: Social Media Relations

SpaceX COO Shotwell: It’s the Fault of Those Pesky Space Lasers

27 Friday Aug 2021

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Ethics, Exploration, NASA, Politicians, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Media Relations, Space, SpaceX, Starlink, Technology, US Space Program, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Falcon 9, Space, space business, SpaceX, Starlink, Starship

Shotwell and Space Lasers

On Monday, 24 August, SpaceX’s President/Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell felt the need to explain why SpaceX hasn’t had a Starlink mission since late May. Her response seemed to be taken from the playbook of Georgia’s Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene in 2018 when she suggested the cause of the wildfires in the West: It’s the fault of space lasers.

Taking a page from Marjorie Tayor Greene

Methinks the SpaceX Lady Doth Protest Too Much

At the 36th Annual Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colorado, Shotwell participated in a panel discussion about the pros and cons of Low Earth Orbit (LEO) technology. She volunteered that SpaceX has ‘paused’ the Starlink program. She said that the company has been struggling to launch Starlink missions because “…we wanted the next set to have the laser terminals on them…” 

SpaceX’s Gwynne Shotwell says the company’s next Starlink launch with a new generation of satellites is “roughly three weeks” away. The 2+ month hiatus in dedicated Starlink missions is because “we wanted the next set to have the laser terminals on them,” Shotwell says

— Joey Roulette (@joroulette) August 24, 2021

This panel discussion was not to discuss why SpaceX has not launched a Starlink mission in three months (the last Starlink launch was 26 May) and considering the pain that the company goes through to craft their message, the acknowledgment of the problem and its cause, was not accidental. SpaceX is aware that their lack of appearance on the launch pad is not going unnoticed. 

“…Better-Than-Nothing Beta Service…”

Shotwell spent a good portion of her time on the panel offering excuses for SpaceX’s underperforming Starlink internet service. She noted that the beta program has been nothing to brag about, stating for those that hadn’t tried it, “…we’ve rolled out better-than-nothing beta service…”

Lowering expectations while patting themselves on the back is a strategy that SpaceX has developed into a fine art. The occasional self-deprecating comment to disarm any question of overstating the capabilities of their programs in the past or shortfalls in what they promised has won over many who see SpaceX as the darlings of space exploration.

Facts Ignored By Shotwell

Shotwell could have given several reasons for the three-month lag in SpaceX launches; however, her comments raise several questions about what is really happening with the company and Starlink.

One:  Lack of Flight-Ready Boosters

As of 1 July, SpaceX had eight usable boosters (1049, 1051, 1058, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063, and 1067.) One of those boosters (1051) had completed the design limit of ten flights, but SpaceX mastermind Elon Musk had stated that implied that they would not refurbish boosters beyond the ten flights and would fly them until they break.

All of those boosters had flown a mission in either May or June. The average turnaround time for a Block 5 booster in 2021 is 95 days or roughly three months. Twice SpaceX’s turnaround time for a booster was 27 days; however, occurred early in the year. The turnaround time in the May and June missions all exceeded 60 days.

In addition, two of the boosters (1049 and 1051) were moved to Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) after their last flight. This added to the turnaround time.

Based on the turnaround history for SpaceX’s boosters, it would be extremely unlikely that they could have had any boosters ready for launch in July even though they tentatively scheduled booster 1049 to launch on a polar orbit launch for the Starlink satellite system.

Shotwell’s comment about the delay may be targeted toward that flight and the next polar orbit flight (Booster 1051?) from VSFB. It does not explain the total absence of all SpaceX launches in July and most of August.

Two:  Cheap Lasers Causing Problems?

In April of this year, Shotwell explained that the first prototype lasers had been too expensive and they were going with cheaper lasers for the next Starlink satellites.

The first ones that we flew were very expensive. The second round of technology that we flew was less expensive,” she said…A third generation of laser intersatellite links will start flying “in the next few months…being “much less expensive” than earlier versions.

Shotwell quoted in SpaceNews

Perhaps cheaper lasers are not a better solution?

Three:  Shotwell’s Credibility Gap

The Chief Operations Officer is either not always well informed or she is prone to exaggeration. In either case, she is not the most credible source of information on SpaceX. 

In May of 2019, she boasted that SpaceX would have three to seven Starlink missions and 18 to 21 other missions for 2019. For all of 2019, SpaceX had only two Starlink missions and eleven other missions for a total of thirteen. She projected twice the number of launches than SpaceX actually had in 2019…and she did it five months into the year.

Rocket launches are not a plan-on-a-Monday-launch-on-a-Friday type scenario. They involve years of planning and coordination with multiple players before the rocket engines ignite. Someone that is well informed should be able to know where each mission is in the process and how many of those missions will be ready for launch in the next few months. As Chief OPERATIONS Officer, it would seem her job would involve having a realistic idea of what was feasible in the current year.

In September of the same year, she said she hoped for 24 Starlink launches in 2020. SpaceX had only 14.

Four:  Starlink is a White Elephant Waiting to Die

While SpaceX continues to press the magic of Starlink’s future, the reality is that it is costing them big money to keep putting up satellites that can only be characterized as “better than nothing.”

Doing The Math

Currently, they have launched 28 missions resulting in about 1,700 Starlink satellites in orbit. The full constellation will be as many as 42,000 according to FCC documents. Each satellite has a lifespan of five years. That means that every five years SpaceX will have to replace all 42,000 satellites in the constellation.

Currently, the Falcon 9 can carry 60 satellites at a time. So, to replace the entire constellation every five years SpaceX will have to launch 700 Starlink missions every five years. That’s 140 launches every year or 11 launches per month to replace the expired satellites. 

SpaceX’s response to this is that they hope to launch as many as 400 satellites per mission on the Starship booster. That brings the numbers down but it is still will require 105 Starship missions every five years or 21 launches per year just to maintain the Starlink system. This doesn’t include the ongoing cost of the ground support systems.

The numbers just don’t add up. This is a system that will cost billions to operate and maintain even if they can improve the quality of the better than nothing service. 

To Be Fair

Shotwell didn’t necessarily lie about the reasons for the pause in Starlink launches. She mentioned lasers and a shortage of oxygen as the reasons for the three-month pause. Those excuses may be valid; however, Starlink’s problems are bigger than lasers or a lack of oxygen…but Shotwell doesn’t talk about that because it might end their flying Starlink circus.

Is Space.com a Soviet-Style News Agency for SpaceX

29 Friday Mar 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Communism, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, Journalism, labor, Management Practices, Marketing, Mars, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Science Fiction, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Soviet Russia, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Dragon 2, Dragon Capsule, Elon Musk, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, International Space Station, journalism, journalism standards, journalistic ethics, manned space program, manned spacecraft, Soviet space program, space exploration, space flight, Space.com

Space.com is in love. They are head-over-heels in love with SpaceX. Reading the articles posted by Space.com writers one might think that SpaceX has already landed on Mars, colonized the Moon, and cured the common cold. It’s not that Space.com writers present false information about SpaceX, it’s just that they tend to overlook…well, almost everything negative.

This style of almost compulsory cheerleading of SpaceX by an alleged news source is reminiscent of the type of reporting from the Soviet days of TASS (Telegrafnoye agentstvo Sovetskogo Soyuza,) Russia’s official news source. From 1925 to 1992, Soviet intelligence agencies often used TASS to put out positive news and disinformation, including crafted stories praising the Soviet space program. For decades, TASS was the mouthpiece for the Soviet government reminding Soviet citizens that the Soviet government was always correct even when they were wrong.

A Fake Starship Prototype?

Space.com demonstrates the Soviet-like reporting in one of its latest articles on SpaceX. Writer Lee Cavendish published an article [Space.com 29 Mar 2019] that gushed about SpaceX’s Starship Hopper. He began his piece as follows:

SpaceX continues to amaze in popularizing space exploration. Not only is it doing fantastic work in reaching and exploring space…

Lee Cavendish for Space.com

For his article, he used this artist’s rendering of the Starship…

Artists rendering of SpaceX’s Starship used by Space.com

However, this is what the actual craft looked like at the test site in January before the top blew off in the wind…

…and this is what it looked like after it fall down, go boom….

…and finally, this is what it looked like for this week’s tests:

A test of a Starship, or a silo with legs?

It’s understandable why the artist’s rendering was used and not images of the real thing. SpaceX didn’t even bother to put the top half of the Starship back on for the test.

Not an expert, but doesn’t that seem to be a wimpy propulsion system?

Close-ups of the bottom of the Starship would indicate that almost no effort was put into making this ‘prototype’ anything but a show for the public. From top to bottom this doesn’t look like anything that can get off the ground, which is may be why Space.com used an artist’s rendering.

Is Space.com Ignoring the Problems?

SpaceX has glaring problems and yet, Space.com has nothing but praise for the company. This week I wrote two articles detailing their problems (SpaceX’s Implosion and SpaceX 2019 Launch Schedule Realities] and yet, space-focused media outlets like Space.com seem to have a blind eye regarding the issues that seem to be obvious.

Among the issues that seem to be ignored are:

  • Hidden costs of relanding the boosters (30% fuel reserved for relanding reducing lift capacity, cost of boosters built for reentry and landing, cost of maintaining an ocean landing pad, costs of launch delays because of weather conditions at the ocean landing pad, cost of transportation of reused booster, costs of refurbishment of a booster, etc.)
  • Reduction of 10% of their workers when they should be expanding
  • Failure to test a Block 5 version of the Falcon Heavy before launching for a paying customer
  • A lack of progress on Dragon 2 and Falcon Heavy testing for most of 2018
  • Drastic reduction in 2019 launch schedule
  • Significantly underpricing the cost of a mission while apparently in a financial crisis
  • A silly prototype test of the SpaceX Starship
  • Overhyping an unmanned test of the Dragon 2 crew capsule that was essentially a mimic of a cargo delivery to the International Space Station (ISS)

Space.com:  SpaceX’s Public Relations Team

Instead, Space.com publishes an unending series of articles that 1) sing praises of SpaceX, 2) seem to be expanded versions of a SpaceX public service announcement, and/or 3) are based on an Elon Musk Tweet. At times the articles cover the same topic as reported by another Space.com writer or sometimes the same writer will cover the same topic, only days apart.

Below is a list of articles that Space.com has published regarding SpaceX in the last 35 days:

  1. Meet SpaceX’s Starship Hopper [Space.com 29 Mar 2019 – Lee Cavendish]
  2. SpaceX’s Hexagon Tiles for Starship Heat Shield Pass Fiery Test [Space.com 22 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
  3. You Can Watch SpaceX’s Starship Hopper Tests Live Via a South Texas Surf School [Space.com 22 Mar 2019 – Sarah Lewin]
  4. SpaceX Preparing to Begin Starship Hopper Tests [Space.com 18 Mar 2019 – Jeff Foust]
  5. SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Megarocket to Fly 1st Commercial Mission in April: Report [Space.com 18 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  6. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Demo-1 Test Flight in Pictures [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Hanneke Weitering]
  7. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Looks Just Like a Toasted Marshmallow After Fiery Re-Entry [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
  8. SpaceX Crew Dragon Splashes Down in Atlantic to Cap Historic Test Flight [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  9. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Success Heralds ‘New Era’ in Spaceflight [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  10. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Left Its ‘Little Earth’ Behind on Space Station [Space.com 8 Mar 2019 – Hanneke Weitering]
  11. SpaceX Crew Dragon Re-Entry May Be Visible Over Some of Eastern US [Space.com 7 Mar 2019 – Joe Rao]
  12. Astronauts Pack Up SpaceX’s Crew Dragon for Return to Earth [Space.com 7 Mar 2019 – Meghan Bartels]
  13. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Homecoming Friday May Be Toughest Part of Its Mission [Space.com 6 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  14. VP Mike Pence Hails SpaceX Crew Dragon Success at Space Station [Space.com 6 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  15. ‘Little Earth’ on SpaceX Crew Dragon Gives Boost to Celestial Buddies [Space.com 4 Mar 2019 – Robert Z. Pearlman]
  16. New ‘Celestial Buddies’ Earth Plush Is Even Cooler than SpaceX’s ‘Zero-G Indicator’ [Space.com 4 Mar 2019 – Kasandra Brabaw]
  17. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon Docks at Space Station for First Time [Space.com 3 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  18. Trump Hails SpaceX Crew Dragon Launch, Says NASA’s ‘Rocking Again’ [Space.com 3 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
  19. SpaceX Adds Adorable ‘Zero-G Indicator’ Inside the Crew Dragon [Space.com 2 Mar 2019 – Hanneke Weitering]
  20. Elon Musk Was Emotionally Wrecked by SpaceX’s 1st Crew Dragon Launch Success — But In A Good Way [Space.com 2 Mar 2019 – Tariq Malik]
  21. SpaceX Crew Dragon Launch Heralds ‘New Era in Spaceflight,’ NASA Chief Says [Space.com 2 Mar 2019 – Mike Wall]
  22. With SpaceX and Boeing, Commercial Crew Launches Will Boost Space Station Science [Space.com 1 Mar 2019 – Meghan Bartels]
  23. It’s Just About ‘Go’ Time for SpaceX’s 1st Crew Dragon Spaceship [Space.com 28 Feb 2019 – Tariq Malik]
  24. SpaceX Is Launching a Spacesuit-Clad Dummy on 1st Crew Dragon [Space.com 27 Feb 2019 – Mike Wall]
  25. NASA, SpaceX ‘Go’ for 1st Crew Dragon Test Flight on March 2 [Space.com 23 Feb 2019 – Mike Wall]

Why?

The question is why? Why do Space.com writers seem like they are part of a Soviet-style news agency? One reason is that perhaps they are just fans of SpaceX and Space.com has become a SpaceX fansite. Another possibility is that their access to information regarding SpaceX is conditional on cooperation with the company. It may be as simple as an article that is critical of SpaceX will result in he or she being blacklisted. Maybe the writers are enamored with and afraid of SpaceX at the same time.

Regardless, it would seem that Space.com is not a reliable source of unbiased information. In 2003, Space.com won an award from the Online Journalism Association for coverage of the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. That was over 15 years ago. Maybe they haven’t won another award because they actually have to do journalism to be considered.

Starbucks: The Adults In the Business World

18 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Discrimination, Employee Retention, Ethics, Honor, Human Resources, labor, Lessons of Life, Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Social Media Relations

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

CEO, employee relations, Kevin Johnson, Philadelphia, racism, Starbucks, United Airlines

When you have with 238,000 employees, most of whom interact with the public all day, someone is going to do something stupid. That is a fact of human nature. The question is, how the leadership of a company deals with an incident? In the case of Starbucks, you be the adult and not the five-year-old.

Racists Don’t Think They’re Racist

Racism is a major problem in this country. Racists usually don’t know they are a racist. In their minds, they do what they think is ‘natural’ from their cultural perspective. What is natural is what is correct. This means most racists are in the bigot closet and don’t even know it.

There is no racism test for an employer to give a job applicant. If there were, a lot of people would be unemployable. Closet racists are going to be hired at all major corporations. Sometimes, like at Cracker Barrel, the racism is condoned by the employer; however, most companies avoid hiring overtly racists employees. At least that’s what they claim.

Regardless, when an employee does something that is racist, many executives will attempt to minimize the incident, or attempt to deny the issue was about race. The public relations (PR) people are experts at diluting the obvious by reminding the media that motivations can’t be proven. From a PR perspective, a company, like United Airlines, can do no wrong, even when it does something wrong.

Starbucks Policy of Responsibility

The leadership at Starbucks is probably not perfect, but at least they make every attempt to be aware of what is correct from what is wrong. That is why Kevin Johnson, the CEO of Starbucks wasted no time in responding to one of his employees calling the police on two African Americans for trespassing in a Starbucks when they didn’t purchase something in the store.

In this incident is noteworthy that at least six officers were present to arrest two non-combative African American males. It was overkill that the police were called, and overkill that six police responded. If a white man had robbed the Starbucks it is likely that it wouldn’t have had this response.

The victims of this incident were held for over eight hours after being arrested. They were released after the police admitted they had no crime to with which to charge them.

What Starbucks Didn’t Do

Johnson didn’t offer excuses for his company. He didn’t say the video doesn’t really tell the whole story. The CEO didn’t even hint that it might not have been a racist act.

Instead, Johnson offered apology after apology.  Johnson met directly with the men involved. He called the act “reprehensible.” It is unclear what happened to the employee in question, but the employee is no longer at that store.

Most companies today look like children trying to cover up their misbehavior after a public relations incident such as this one. It is good to know that Starbucks is capable of using common sense and decency in responding to this situation.

Sadly, the rest of the employees at Starbucks will be impacted by this one person’s act. We all pay for the bad behavior of others.

Employee Ownership? Does Business USA Own Its Employees?

11 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Donald Trump, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, jobs, labor, Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Reno, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, United States, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

13th Amendment, Akima, Business, company, corporations, Donald Trump, Employee, employee ownership, employee relations, Employer, flipping the bird, indentured servitude, Juli Briskman, quid pro quo, slavery

Employee Ownership?

It was a chance encounter. Juli Briskman was out riding her bike on a Saturday in October. Trump was just leaving from playing another round of golf. Trump’s motorcade passed Briskman and she saluted the Resident of the White House with her middle finger. Had a photographer not caught the act it would have just been another typical day. This day, it would get Briskman fired. The company’s position:  it owns its employees.

Trump’s Single Digit Approval Rating

Quid Pro Quo

It’s important to note that Briskman was not identified in the photo, nor could she be identified as the photographer was behind her. She voluntarily told her company that she was the one in the photo. The company then fired her.

Employment is a quid pro quo environment. An employer agrees to pay compensation and benefits in return for certain specific tasks and responsibilities. Employment is not servitude, nor does it allow an employer to govern the employee’s actions 24/7/365. The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States forbids indentured servitude along with slavery.

In the social media age, businesses have attempted to expand their authority over employees and govern hu’s (her/his) non-work activities. The problem is that if a company is allowed to govern free speech outside of the work environment they are essentially making a demand on an employee’s time, expression, and choice without compensation. Again, employment is a Quid Pro Quo environment and both parties must agree to the terms of what is offered in return for compensation and benefits.

Is the Reverse True?

The test of this situation is to reverse it. If the company can claim it can govern employee behavior during non-work hours for no pay, does that mean all employee non-work activity is a liability for the company? If an employee kills someone, can the victim’s family sue the company? The point is that a company cannot arbitrarily decide what non-work activities it governs. If it governs some non-work activities, shouldn’t the company assume responsibility for all non-work activities?

The reality is that business has failed to be reasonable in its limitations on employee rules and policies. It is now time to reestablish that quid pro quo relationship and stop attempting to ignore the 13th Amendment.

Journalism Ethics: Interviewing the Reporter As a News Source

27 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Donald Trump, Entertainment, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Journalism, Language, Opinion, Politicians, Politics, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Republic, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, Website, Wordpress, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

community relations, Facebook, investors, journalism standards, journalistic ethics, journalists, local news., local tv news, media companies, media organizations, Newspapers, PR, Public Relations, reporters, Standards

News organizations have not evolved as much as they have devolved over the last sixty years. Journalism ethics have suffered the greatest. The priority in news organizations has shifted from high journalistic standards to gaining market share. The news anchor or primary news host now use the reporter as hu’s* news source.

I can't match the anchor's name to any of the CNN faces online

CNN news anchor interview CNN reporter Matt Rivers

How Did We Get Here?

Originally, the news reporter job was to gather the facts, confirm the facts, and organize the facts into a story. The myth of Superman’s girlfriend getting the scoop and landing a Page One, Pulitzer Prize article wasn’t how it really happened.

Good journalism was the verification of the facts, careful research, and exposing lies. In the end, the reporter’s name was the byline, not the storyline. Reporters needed the attention to detail of an accountant, the interrogation skill of a great attorney, the ethics of a great judge, and the knowledge of a college professor, in addition to the ability to write a compelling story.

But when investors began buying up news organizations, money became the priority over journalism standards. Advancement was based who could attract a bigger audience. Women were brought into the newsroom, but the motivation was ratings, not equality. Money flowed to those that could produce shock and awe. The young, idealistic journalism graduate discovered that a reporter was underpaid, overworked, and disrespected.

And while the journalism standards fell, the news source wall went up. Organizations created ‘public relations’ experts to ‘control the message.’ Now a reporter is the person between the news organization looking for ratings and the news source that wants to be a shining star.

Corporate Public Relations Mastery of Orwellian Doublespeak

Not every company believes in lying to the public, but it does seem the bigger they are, the less responsive they are willing to be. The most recent major incident is Facebook’s initial response to the data of 50 million users being collected by conservatives connected to the Donald Trump campaign.

After the story broke on Saturday 17 March, Facebook ran silent for days before issuing any response. Journalists that attempted to obtain information and/or a response were ignored. Major headlines were running about the data breach and Facebook was on lockdown.

Corporate PR has made the company the least likely source of accurate, reliable, and/or truthful information. So now the reporter digs up whatever information they can and becomes the ‘expert.’ The news anchor often interviews the reporter as the sole news source because no one else will talk.

The problem with this is that the reporter can’t speak with authority. They are not privy to the inside information so they can only offer hu’s opinion. That changes journalism into gossip and guessing. No one can be sure of anything because no one knows the truth. That leaves it up to the individual to accept what they want to hear and reject what they don’t want to hear. That is never good for a democracy.

[*Hu’s is a gender neutral pronoun for his or her.]

GOP Disease: Say It, Then Apologize

23 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Assault Weapons, Communication, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Gun control, Gun Extremists, habits, Honor, Information Technology, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, racism, Respect, Russian influence, Second Amendment, Social Media Relations, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Carl B. Nett, character, CIA, Donald Trump, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, Kentucky, NRA, Secret Service, Secretary of State, Tweet, Twitter, United States, values, Violence

Republicans have a consistent problem. They first say what they are thinking…and then they apologize for it. It’s the GOP disease. In incident after incident a Republican office holder, or a Republican candidate will say something that is completely inappropriate and then smirk. They are proud of it. Then when it becomes national news, they suddenly grow a conscience and apologize for the remark…some of the time.

Former CIA Turned GOP Candidate Jokes About Killing Opponent 

The most recent incident to make national news is when a Republican candidate for Kentucky’s Secretary of State, Carl B. Nett, office suggested in a tweet that he could use an anti-NRA pin for a target if his opponent would move the pin closer to the center of his body.

The tweet itself is disturbing. What is more disturbing is that Nett is a former CIA and Secret Service agent. He was one of the people that our country entrusted with the use of deadly force because he supposedly was trained to control his impulses. As a former agent, the expectation is that he knows that killing someone is not a joking matter.

Nett has caused the world to question the training and discipline of our country’s CIA and Secret Service agents. He has made all of them look like cowboys out for a party with little or no self-control.

Trump As A Model

Donald Trump has been the model for Republicans in breaching intellectual and civil boundaries of behavior with his practice of saying anything that comes to his mind. Trump reveals his inner thoughts and expresses them in a diarrhea-type flow of violent, subhuman, and racist comments.

Unfortunately, Trumpsters love Trump because he says what they are thinking. That, in itself, is also disturbing.

Qualifications To Be a Public Servant

When someone says what they think, that is honesty. Honesty is good; however, when honesty reveals that the person is of a vile nature, they are not qualified to be a citizen of this country, let alone elected to public office. An apology is not the measure of a person. The person is measured by hu’s* actions.

Nett’s apology was a self-serving statement that he’s just a normal human:

I now join the long list of imperfect human beings with “foot-in-mouth” disease. Once again, I apologize to Congressman Yarmuth and his family and ask for their forgiveness.

— Carl B. Nett (@realCarlNett) March 20, 2018

Nett is not a normal human. Hu is representative of the nature and character of the Republican party. Hu’s values are Putin-like values that belong to a society of corruption and terror. We don’t need the excuses of people who can’t respect the ideals our country. We need people of character. Republicans are not those people. Carl B. Nett is a case in point.

[*Hu’s: a gender-neutral pronoun for his/her. Hu: a gender-neutral pronoun for he/she.]

Hiding Journalists Behind the Paywall

26 Monday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Ethics, History, Honor, Information Technology, Journalism, Management Practices, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Stock Market, Technology, Traditional Media, United States, US History, Website, Writing

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

entertainment, investors, journalism, journalism standards, journalists, New York Times, newpapers, News media, news organizations, packaging news, paywall, paywalls, The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post

Several news organizations have blocked their website content behind paywalls. The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post are noteworthy examples. Paywalls are an attempt to force the reader to pay a subscription to access the news articles of the day. The question is what kind of a journalist wants her or his work held captive from the public?

Paywall News Organizations: The Road to Irrelevance

Out of Sight, Out of Mind, and Irrelevant

The thinking of these organizations is that the value of the content behind the paywall will create a desire for the reader to open a wallet and pay them money. The problem with that theory is that information is not ‘owned’ by a news organization, it is only packaged. News is what happens in the world and is reported in the raw on Twitter, Facebook, and all the other free sources on the Internet.

What investor-owned news media attempts to do is make the reader pay for their packaging of the news, not the product itself, and in an age of the Internet, someone else can offer the same product in a different package for free. 

For the writer or journalist that creates the packaging of the news, it means that the public can’t see her or his work…ever. If people can’t see your work, you become irrelevant. The best writer in the world risks becoming invisible when all his or her creative efforts are on a pay-to-read basis.

Even those who are willing to pay for the subscription can’t share an article with others when it is behind a paywall. The benefit of readers discussing a journalist’s work is limited to the subset of those who pay-to-read and in a ‘Share’ world, that is a critical shortfall.

Paying Journalists For Their Work Myth

The organizations that inflict a paywall on the reader and the journalists defend the decision by saying:

Someone has to pay for quality journalism!

But that is a lie. The truth is closer to the statement:

Our investors have to suck as much money out of the work of the journalists!

Note the list of news organizations and, according to Forbes magazine, who owns (as of June 2016) the controlling stake in them.

Behind Hard Paywall (all articles pay-to-read)

  • Wall Street Journal – Billionaires Rupert Murdoch and Lachian Murdoch
  • The Washington Post – Billionaire Jeff Bezos

Behind Soft Paywall (limited free views)

  • New York Times – Billionaire Carlos Slim Helu
  • Wired – Billionaire Donald Newhouse
  • The New Yorker– Billionaire Donald Newhouse

No Paywall

  • Bloomberg Businessweek – Billionaire Michael Bloomberg

The people who control these news organizations don’t need to find new ways to pay journalists. They are just using journalists for greed.

News As Entertainment

Journalism is a philanthropic duty. It is not created to generate profit for investors, it is created to provide information to citizens. The transition from journalism to entertainment is strictly about greed.

Few great journalists become wealthy, but great journalists become the keystone to a great society. The fall of our country can be traced, at least in part, to the fall of journalism. If journalism is about making money then journalists are just prostitutes of news.

Government Shutdown An Opportunity

18 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

115th Congress, border wall, budget, DACA, democracy, Democrat, Democrats, Donald Trump, federal budget, government shutdown, ICE, immigrants, Mexican Immigrants, Net Neutrality, Republican, Tax Cut and Jobs Act, Twitter, US Customs, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, US/Mexican Border

DACA protesters in San Francisco 5 September 2017

Time for Democrats to take a stand

A government shutdown is a bad thing. It creates a lot of problems and it affects a lot of people. Typically, one political party is blamed, and that creates a risk of losing elections.

But this is a different moment in time. People are tired of being mowed over by the Republican party. People are tired of the Democrats always giving up concessions only to have the Republican take more away later. It’s time for Democrats to take a stand and not flinch.

Provisions To Avoid a Government Shutdown

Democrats can’t take the stand for just one issue. It has to be for several core issues and they cannot negotiate away any of the issues. Democrats should demand the following Provisions:

  1. All DACA recipients will be given a 20-year deferral and shall have preferred status in obtaining citizenship provided they are employed, a full-time student, are not convicted of a felony and pay all taxes as required.
  2. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will be restricted from taking any action on any immigrant unless the person has committed a felony. All immigrants in custody that have not committed a felony will be released.
  3. Net Neutrality must be restored.
  4. All measures passed by the House or Senate must achieve a two-thirds majority for the remainder of the 115th Congress, and for the 116th Congress if Republicans maintain a majority in the House or Senate.
  5. The 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act is repealed except for those tax cuts for those earning under $250,000.
  6. All Trump appointees must be removed from office and all acts by those appointees are to be rescinded. All new appointees must be meet Provision 4, above.
  7. President Donald Trump will not be allowed to make any Executive Orders for the remainder of his term, and all of his previous Executive Orders by President Donald Trump are rescinded.
  8. All funding for a wall between Mexico and the United States will be void, with the exception of sections of the border that both Mexico and the United States agree upon.
  9. President Donald Trump will not be allowed to have a Twitter account.
  10. President Donald Trump must pay for all services and costs when not staying in the White House or other government-owned facilities.

Shutdown Better Than Alternative?

These ten provisions may seem harsh. The alternative may be mass work stoppages, strikes, and protests, which is what will likely happen if the Democrats fail to stop the Republicans from destroying our country.

About This, About Writing

13 Saturday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, April Fools Day, Branding, Business, Club Leadership, College, Communication, Crime, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, genealogy, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Opinion, Panama, Photography, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Rotary, Science, Science Fiction, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Tom Peters, Travel, Universities, US History, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Blogging, Paul Kiser, Paul Kiser's Blog, PAULx talks, rebranding, Wordpress, writing

In the Beginning

Eight years ago I started writing this blog. I had assumed that writing a blog would put me in front of a broad audience anxiously awaiting my next post.

It didn’t….but I kept writing. I wrote about business, human behavior, human resources, management, social media, my personal life, Rotary, public relations, history, time, blogging, travel, Nevada, global warming, spaceflight, politics, my stroke, April Fool’s Day, religion, science fiction, science, photography, media, more history, Panama, gay marriage, the future, great people, not-so-great people, education, Moffat County, patriotism, more politics, and fantasy.

There were a few bright moments when I touched upon a topic that caught some attention, but for the most part, my writing has simply been an expression of my opinions and ideas. I’ve discovered, writing is more important than being read.

Writing, For Me

A blog is like writing a diary or a book. It is meant to a personal statement. Someday, my children or my children’s children may read it and know more about me. I find comfort in that thought. 

My articles became less frequent in the last few years, but recently I have experienced a rebirth of writing. I suspect that my sleep apnea may be one of the issues causing the decline in writing. My brain was starved of oxygen and sleep every night for many years. Now that I am being treated for it, my cognitive functions seem to be reengaging.

Writing a blog has improved my communication skills, and has helped me organize my thoughts. This, this thing I’m doing, is an unfinished novel about the world from one perspective. I’m not a great writer, but I’m better than I was eight years ago.

For the last month, I have been publishing a new article every day. I don’t know that I will keep up that pace, but it is forcing my brain to think, and that is the goal.

Rebranding My Writing

I have decided to rename my blog. First, the term ‘blog’ has developed a negative meaning to many people, so I needed to drop the term. Second, my last name is not as relevant as it was a year ago, before I discovered that biologically, I am not a ‘Kiser.’ 

I tried several title ideas but finally settled on PAULx talks. It is the 2.0 version of Paul Kiser’s Blog. I don’t have a destination in mind for my writing. I never have, but I’ll see where this takes me.

Need a New Plan for Gaining Political Support

02 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Democrat, Democrats, DNC, PAC, PAG, political action, political ads, political candidates, political causes, spam, spamming

 

About thirty percent of my emails are requests from political interests. They implore me to give them money to avoid the dire consequences that will surely happen if their cause is not successful. These are from progressive causes targeting liberals, not wealthy conservatives who actually have spendable incomes. 

Begging for money works on the street sometimes, but I can’t imagine any intelligent person that will be motivated by street tactics. It is embarrassing that the liberal viewpoint is being represented by groups that have all the skills and tact of a late-night, off-channel, ACT NOW television commercial.

If you want my attention, tell me what you’ve done and why you’ve done it. Tell me how you’ve spent money up to now. Give me a link to a website that I can go to if I want to learn more. Don’t threaten dire circumstances. Don’t beg for money. Don’t send me emails on a daily or even weekly basis. If I support your cause I might follow-up on it, but not if you annoy me.

We have major problems in this country and if a group’s best plan to solve the problem is to send me an email begging for money, then they’ve failed. Political causes HAVE TO STOP listening to political media hacks that tell them how they raised money in 2008 and start thinking of how to mobilize people to respond to the issues of 2018.

In case they haven’t noticed, the wealthy have figured out how to win politics with money, and they are really good at it. It’s time to out think Soviet Republicans and that shouldn’t be difficult, but outspending mega-corporations and the wealthy is not a competition in which I will participate.

PR Fail: What United Airlines Should Have Done

28 Tuesday Mar 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Honor, Human Resources, Internet, Management Practices, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Travel, Women

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

buddy pass, buddy passes, children, dress code, fashion, gate agent, girls, HR, leggings, non-rev, non-revenue, policies, tickets, UAL, United Airlines

United PR:  At least we don’t shove the children out at 35,000 feet!

Sunday morning United Airlines once again proved that they have some of the worst public relations people in the business, which is likely a reflection of their top management.

The Situation
Two young girls, ages estimated to be around ten to eleven years old, were prevented boarding a United Airlines flight from Denver to Minneapolis with their family. These were children, not adults, nor young adults. According to United Airlines, they were flying on what is known in the industry as a “Buddy Pass,” which is a relatively free (taxes have to be paid) ticket that is one of the benefits of airline employees.

The girls were wearing leggings, which again, according to United Airlines, is in violation of the dress code of people flying on a Buddy Pass. The gate agent apparently approached the family and told them the girls could not board the plane wearing leggings.

It is important to note that two of the girls did not have any other clothing options at the gate, and the family apparently checked bags with the girl’s clothing in them at the main ticketing, where a United representative had to weigh the bags, check the tickets, and confirm the identifications of each of the passengers. Despite this close contact with the passengers, the ticket agent did NOT prevent the children, nor the rest of the family from heading to the gate.

The gate agent that confronted the family was involved in a “tense” discussion of the dress code issue in front of other passengers. At one point the gate agent bragged, “I don’t make the rules, I just enforce them.”

This became a major public relations issue because passengers in the area were witness to the scene and a passenger from another gate investigated the situation and reported it on Twitter. The gate agent’s handling of the situation was overt enough to cause another family, not involved in the incident, to have their daughter put on a dress over her leggings.

United later reported that the girls later changed and boarded another flight.

What United Should Have Done
It boggles the mind as to the many public relation fails occurred by United staff, but here is what the public relations people should have said and done:

On Sunday, March 26, a family was boarding one of our flights on a special ticket that includes a dress code requirement for the passenger. One of our gate agents determined that the children were not dressed according to that policy, and the family was not allowed to board the flight.

While the gate agent technically followed our policy, we regret that this situation became a public scene. We also regret that our staff did not remind the family of that policy when they checked their bags at the main ticket counter, when the children would have been able to obtain appropriate clothing before their bags were checked.

Our policy is meant to encourage a professional appearance of those passengers who are flying as a benefit of being employed, or being a family member of one of our employees. When this involves children, we attempt to be sensitive to the difference in the typical appropriate dress for their age.

We regret to the manner in how this situation was handled and apologize to the family involved and to the passengers who were witness to this situation at the gate. We are reviewing our policies and how those policies are enforced.

The United Blood Bath
Rather than apologizing, United decided that it would work to sway public opinion against the traveling family and humiliate them further. Their announcement in response to the situation put all the blame on the children and their family and implied that the gate agent who created the scene was the hero.

It is a Trump-like strategy that is based on never admitting failure, even when the failure is obvious. It did produce a wave of approval by people who enjoy watching someone being crushed by a more powerful and insensitive force.

However, this type of strategy builds mistrust of an organization and clearly demonstrates United’s lack of empathy for its passengers, paying or not. It also demonstrates the lack of humanity by a corporation that doesn’t understand the deferred cost of bad public relations, and proves that United doesn’t know the quality of mercy.

Pokémon GO: December 12th Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda

13 Tuesday Dec 2016

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Customer Relations, Customer Service, exercise, Generational, Health, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Public Image, Public Relations, Recreation, Respect, Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Apps, characters, fails, Niantic, Pokémon, Pokemon GO, smartphones, The Pokémon Company International, TPCi

If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.

That is sage advice that I almost never take. 

12 December 2016, could have been a big day in Pokémon GO lore. It was the day that Niantic would recapture the interest of millions of trainers who have lost that loving feeling for the game. It was the day that Niantic, in a stroke of brilliance, would tease, and then deliver on infusing life back into the game.

December 12, 2016: Disappointment Day

December 12, 2016: Disappointment Day

Let’s back up for the muggles. The alpha and omega of Pokémon GO is capturing virtual characters in the wild on a player’s smartphone. There are currently 149 characters of which, some are common as dirt, others uncommon, others rare, and a few that are almost nonexistent. There are other aspects of the game, but those are secondary to capturing ‘wild’ Pokémon GO characters.

Since its launch in July, millions of people have played the game and moved through multiple levels of the game; however, the game has lost the attention of many players (or trainers) because they have caught most of the available 149 Pokémon Go characters. When someone has reached Level 25, they have seen and captured almost all the ones that they can realistically find. By Level 25, a trainer is mostly seeing the five to ten ‘common-as-dirt’ characters, and that makes the game boring.

Rumors have been flying for a couple of months now that Niantic has been aware of the issue and was preparing to introduce the “2nd Generation” or 2nd Gen of characters, that would add about 100 new Poké creatures. Last week, Niantic updated the sound files on everyone’s smartphone app, adding 100 new files, leading to speculation that the addition of the 2nd Gen characters was imminent. Then, Niantic said that on 12 December they would make a major announcement about adding new characters. The stage was set and anticipation was building.

What happened? They apparently added eight baby characters, and gave Pikachu a Santa hat. Oh, and the new characters can’t be caught in the wild. A trainer has to take their phone for a walk of up to ten (10) kilometers to hatch an egg that may or may not have a new character inside.

Do you hear that sound? It is the deafening sound of millions of former trainers shrugging their shoulders, shaking their heads and walking away.

So what positive things can I say about Niantic’s big 12 December announcement?

(This section intentionally left blank.)

Pokémon GO Partners With Starbucks

08 Thursday Dec 2016

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, exercise, Green, Information Technology, Internet, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, The Tipping Point

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Apps, Games, Gyms, phone apps, Pokémon, PokéStops, Pokemon GO, smartphones, Starbucks

It's official!

It’s official!

It’s no longer rumor. Pokémon GO is now a partner with Starbucks, and it is the perfect match.

At shortly after noon today (8 December 2016,) Mountain Standard Time, Niantic (the developer/partner of the Pokémon GO app for The Pokémon Company International aka: TPCi) turned on over 7,500 new PokéStops and Pokémon Gyms at Starbucks locations around the United States. Starbucks also began serving Pokémon GO frappuccinos to complete the partnership.

During its July launch, Pokémon GO placed PokéStops and Gym in retail centers and malls, creating a windfall of potential customers; however, businesses were not active partners with Pokémon (TCPi.) This week’s launch of business partnerships with Starbucks and Sprint (launched yesterday) signals a new era in cross-pollination of business interests with increased customer traffic created by the Pokémon GO game.

Rumors suggest that Pokémon GO is not finished in December surprises. The most anticipated update is the addition of the second generation of Pokémon GO characters. Trainers (players) are running out of new characters to capture, so a holiday event that includes expansion of the character field would be vital to keeping trainer interest.

Stay tuned!

Populism is a Symptom of the Failure of People, Not Government

26 Tuesday Apr 2016

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Education, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Politics, Religion, Respect, Social Media Relations, Taxes, Traditional Media, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2016, Bernie Sanders, Conservatives, Democrats, Donald Trump, Elections, James Madison, Mara Lisasson, Politics, populism, populist, Republicans

 

Mara Liasson, NPR/Fox News Journalist

Mara Liasson, NPR Political Correspondent/Fox News Contributor

Mara Liasson, political correspondent for National Public Radio (NPR,) reported on the Morning Edition segment that populism is a major force in this year’s Presidential campaigns, and she wanted to find out what effect it might have after the election.

In her report she featured people who feel ‘left behind.’ Her first interview was with a proud ‘Hillbilly.’ Her next interview was with Kathy Kramer, a political science professor from the University of Wisconsin. Liasson described Professor Kramer as one who has spent the last eleven years talking to Wisconsin people who “felt ignored, or dismissed by politicians, the media, the government, or big business.”

Liasson suggested through her story and her featured interviewees, that the Populism movement is not just a 2016 event, and is likely to have an impact in future elections.

Populism is not new to organized societies, and according to James Madison, is not an action that leads to a better society. In the Federalist No. 10 paper, Madison refers to populists movements as people,

Author, Political theorist, Constitutionalist, President of the United States of America

Author, Political theorist, Constitutionalist, President of the United States of America

…who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have tapped into the passions of many people, and at least in the case of Trump, exploited people who seek to impose their beliefs and interests on those who disagree with them. Madison continues his description of populist-type movements later in the same paper,

A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practices…have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good.

Missed in Liasson’s report is that the root cause of their dissatisfaction of government and politicians, the feeling of being left behind, is a direct result of the types of leaders that voters have been electing since Ronald Reagan in 1979. The populists anger, among conservatives, seem to be a combination of electing the wrong people, inciting a belief that the caucasian male is superior, and a desire to inflict personal religious beliefs as public law. Add to the their misplaced emotions, a failure to use reason to examine the issues effectively, and we have what James Madison described 228 years ago.

We can’t fix government or politicians until we fix the people. Madison knew that, but what Madison may not have known was that the twenty-first century news media would accept populist movements as valid political thought, when it is simply public masturbation of the uneducated, immature, and egocentric mind.

The Joy of No

01 Tuesday Dec 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Club Leadership, College, Communication, Consulting, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Honor, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Tom Peters, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bosses, committees, dictators, Human Interaction, meetings, No, organizations, Social Interaction, workplace

_DSC1990No is a perfectly acceptable answer….providing,

  • The idea or suggestion lacked thought or had no basis in fact. (e.g.; Would Donald Trump be a good President?)
  • The idea or suggestion has obvious flaws. (e.g.; Should we let a gun be in a room with a bunch of 2nd grade children?)
  • Is a matter of personal opinion or seeks personal approval. (e.g.; Would you go out with me?)

But when an idea or suggestion doesn’t fall under any of these categories, the “no” answer becomes a potential weapon of personal destruction for the person saying it, and a beautiful opportunity for the person on the receiving end.

Being the youngest of four boys, my brothers and parents became accustomed to telling me ‘no.’ I was constantly asking questions and making suggestions, and the ‘yes’ answer was likely to encourage me. In those situations where I actually had a good idea, it was enough that as the youngest member of the family, a ‘no’ answer was valid.

As an adult, I never had any expectations that my ideas and suggestions would be better received, so hearing ‘no’ was an irritation, but I accepted it as part of life.

However, I as grew older I noticed that some people seemed to enjoy telling other people ‘no.’ Often these people were in leadership positions and their tactic was to dominate and/or intimidate others. In some cases people would act as a dictator within the organization, silencing the ideas and opinions of others with a type of ‘no’ answer that implied dire consequences if the person didn’t drop the subject, or the idea was treated so lightly as if the person was unintelligent for making the suggestion. For years I thought that part of being a good manager was to have the privilege and responsibility to tell others, “NO!” 

Then several years ago I joined a service club and became very involved in the organization. I served on several Boards and committees. I discovered that I could manipulate some people because I always knew their response to whatever I suggested would be, ‘no.’

It was then I realized that when someone says ‘no,’ it is a gift. The “No-ee” has done all they are required by making the suggestion or asking the question. The “No-er” has put their reputation and respectability on the line. The ‘no’ answer gives them all the responsibility, and, as a situation plays out, their failure to consider someone else’s idea or suggestion may be the fatal decision that brings them down.

I still find enjoyment of sometimes asking a perfectly legitimate question of someone I know will give me a ‘no’ answer. It is even more interesting to do this when I have more information about the issue or situation than they do and they can’t help but give me an answer that will eventually haunt them.

Still, I have learned that organizations and relationships with ‘no’ people are typically doomed. There’s a time to experience the joy of ‘no,’ and then there are times it’s best to walk away and shake the dust off your sandals.

Why Blog? Why Not? Six Reasons

07 Wednesday Oct 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Communication, Generational, Health, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Passionate People, Photography, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

art, Blog, Blogging, expression, self awareness, thoughts, writer, writing

Why Blog?

Because it’s there.

Blogging is the sand castle of writing, but waves don't wash it away

Blogging is the sand castle of writing, but waves don’t wash it away

  1. Blogging is not a path to fame or fortune. If you think people are going to hang on your every blog post, you will likely be disappointed. If you think your blog is going to change the world, you will likely be disappointed. If you think people are going to pay you to write, you will likely be disappointed.
  2. Blogging is the opportunity to write. Like dance, or acting, or painting, blogging is a creative art. The more you write, the better your skills. The more skilled, the more satisfying.
  3. Blogging is expression. It is a public diary that exposes who you are and what you think. If you try to be someone you’re not, you likely will be embarrassed.
  4. Blogging is long term. If your measure of success is the number of readers who read yesterday’s blog, you probably shouldn’t blog. The Internet is a library and Google is the librarian. Five years from now someone may search for information and discover your blog is exactly what they needed. That is success. Remember, your blog is one among billions, but time is without measure.
  5. Blogging is about legacy. Your children’s children will have the opportunity to get to know you through your blog. It will expose them to your mind and your passions. Somewhere down the ancestry line will be a grandchild or great-grandchild who thinks exactly like you, and they will treasure the opportunity to get to know themselves through your writing.
  6. Blogging is about finding yourself. Writing down our internal discussions can be revealing. We may not fully understand our values and who we are until it comes back to us in our own words.

Most people cannot fathom why anyone would blog, but if you blog, you are not ‘most people.’ That alone should reassure you of the value of blogging.

A Failure of Communication

06 Tuesday Oct 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, parenting, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, Website, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

CAS, charter schools, Communication, Coral Academy of Science, Education, elementary, emal, Facebook, Gulen movement, Gulen Schools, high school, Iman, Instagram, K-12, middle school, Nevada, Reno, Teaching

“What we got here is a failure to communicate“
Prison Warden in Cool Hand Luke

Organizations should use extreme caution in employing anyone over forty-five for handling public image and public relations. I fall into that bracket and I’ve been studying social media since 2007, but I only know enough to understand that most ‘professionals’ of the traditional media don’t have a clue when it comes to communicating information to people in this century.

Traditional media professionals reminisce about the glory days when the game was to be on good terms with the editor of the local newspapers, have drinks with the news directors of the local television stations, and talk shop with the other local public relations (PR) directors at the bigger companies. Those were the days when a phone call could land a big story for the local news that would launch a new product or service. Top management would pat the PR guy on the back (or on the butt if the person was female) and tell him or her what a great job they did.

Those days are over.

The Internet, Facebook, customer reviews, Twitter, Yelp, and a thousand other media channels severely wounded traditional media and the old ways are never coming back. Yet, talk to an old PR person and say that nothing has really changed. It’s all about who you know. Old PR people don’t have a clue at how silly they sound.

I was at a school board meeting for a public charter school last week where a self-professed ‘expert’ in public relations announced that she was at a conference and learned that people no longer used websites to obtain information. She said that parents of school-age children only paid attention to Facebook and Instagram.

Actual "Principal's message" from current school website....written at least three years ago

Actual “Principal’s message” from current school website….written at least three years ago

It should be noted, and that the school’s website is one of the worst on the Internet, and that the school is known for its severe deficiency in communicating information to parents.

Public Communication 2015
As part of the out-of-touch generation, take my advice with a grain of sodium chloride, or whatever water retaining additive you choose, but here is what I have learned in the past eight years.

It is true that many people from different generations tend to engage in social media at varying levels; however, there is no one single media that can reach everyone regardless of their generation. Education level, social economic status, and language all play a role in where people gather information. To declare that there are one or two media sources that parents of school-age children rely on is arrogant at best, and more likely, ignorant.

Any organization’s strategy has to be to use every possible form of media delivery to reach the stakeholders. In the case of a school, information has to be delivered through student folders, phone call announcements, in-school announcements, school website, parent emails, mail, Public Service Announcements (PSA,) school’s Facebook page, etc. Information must also be repeated in order to reach people when they’re listening. A single Facebook post is like going to a street corner at 6:00 AM and yelling out information and then assuming that everyone who passes by that street corner that day will hear the message.

But just sending out the same message through all the channels is ineffective. Social media channels are best used as a ‘reminder’ or ‘alert’ forum with a link back to one source (e.g.; the school website.) Long posts on Facebook make the information less likely to be read both now and in the future. Short posts with a link to more information for those interested is the most efficient method of delivery.

The website is NOT dead. In fact, it is more vital than ever. A charter school’s website is an information source for those considering enrolling their children, a primary source for parents for detailed information, and it establishes the public image for the school. A Facebook page is vital, and if you have a brilliant administration, Twitter can be the inside source for parents who want to know the inside scoop of what is happening now, but the school website will always be the 24/7/365 place for vital information.

It will take a decade or more to weed out the old PR professionals who live in the past; however, it doesn’t take a sixteen-year-old to know when someone doesn’t understand how to communicate in this century. If the stakeholders say they are not being adequately informed, it’s obvious the organization has a problem.

Epilogue : The 2010’s

20 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Caucasian, college graduates, Conservatives, Equality, GDP, high school graduates, poor, racism, racists, Reagan agenda, Republicans, Ronald Reagan, The 1%, un-wealthy, wealthy, White politicians

The 2010’s – End of Civility

Image credit: J. Scott Applewhite/AP.

White Conservatives: “Go F**k Yourselves America”

  • Population:  308.7 million
  • Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita:  $47,805
  • Median Annual Income:  $47,793 
  • Life Expectancy:  78.7
  • Average Age at Marriage:   Men 28.2, Women 26.1
  • % of pop. w/high school degree or higher:  87.0%
  • % of pop. w/college degree or higher:  30.0% 

REAGAN:  The Killer of America’s Prosperity
From 1950 to 2010 the population of the United States of America doubled (+104.0%.) The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) tripled (+218.1%.) The median annual income is eleven times more than 1950 (+1028%.) Life expectancy has increased by over 15% (15.4%.) Men AND women are marrying an average of over five years older in 2010 than they did in 1950 (men +23.7%, women +28.6%.) The percentage of people with at least a high school degree is now almost 90% versus 34% in 1950 (+153.6%.) Today, 30% of our citizens have at least a college degree versus 6% in 1950 (+383.9%.)

Something went right for America in the last 60 years. But that is changing.

Prior to the Great Depression, Republicans controlled the House and Senate for the majority of the previous 70 years. After the Great Depression both the House and Senate was under Democratic control until 1980. In 1980, America began folowing the conservatives agenda (Reagan 1980-1988, Bush 41 1989-1992, Republican control of Congress 1994-2008) of dismantling the government at all levels, start more wars, give more money to the wealthy, and give less help for the un-wealthy. Since 1979, the wealthiest 1% after-tax income has increased by 200%.

U.S._Income_-_Changes_by_Income_Group_1979-2011

The 1% are 200% wealthier since conservatives took control of the government

Since 1980, annual increases in U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has stalled and fallen.

GDP Growth by Year

ANNUAL GDP GROWTH: Post World War II, U.S. annual GDP began a steady growth until shortly after Ronald Reagan became President.

GROWTH SACRIFICED FOR GREED
Post-war prosperity was spurred by significant federal government projects and programs. Conservatives derailed that by blaming government for economic issues that were caused by corporate and business greed.

Despite the obvious failure of the Reagan agenda, conservatives have taken a position of complete denial and fantastical thinking. They no longer believe they have any obligation to acknowledge or respect the rest of America. Conservatives are behaving as a child would behave when they are not getting their way, even though their request is completely inappropriate. Rather than accepting that President Obama was elected twice by a majority of Americans, Republicans have blocked all efforts to move forward on measures proven to generate American prosperity because it would make those that have more, give more.

Reagan conservatives have failed and they are backed in a corner of failure. They will not accept reason, nor facts. Civility would force them to accept their failure, so they must be uncivil. They are willing to destroy America, rather than acknowledge failure.

WHY ARE WE HERE?
America has experience massive change in the past 65 years. Most of that change has been good, but the one aspect of the American concept, the idea that we are all created equal, is the one issue in our country that has cast a shadow over us for centuries. White males believe that they are superior to all others and as our demographics have changed Caucasians have worked to obstruct equality rather than accept it.

Segregation was not considered racist until it became obvious it was motivated by whites who were racist. Dismantling government programs that benefit the poor and those in need may not be considered racist, until we realize that these ideas have been pushed forward almost exclusively by white politicians. Telling America that the rich are too burdened to pay a fair share of their taxes is not considered racist until you examine the loop of rich white people giving money to white politicians to pass laws that will reduce taxes on the wealthiest who are almost all white.

America is a country that has yet to commit to everyone being equal. In the 1950’s, white people took their money and ran away to the suburbs. In the 1960’s, the federal government finally stepped in and paid attention to the unequal treatment of African-Americans. In the 1970’s, we became distracted by unethical leaders, war, oil shortages, and inflation. In the 1980’s, we were conned into the idea that our government was to blame for all our problems in the 1970’s, while the Reagan spent money that America didn’t have to spend. In the 1990’s, the conservatives regained control of Congress and began dismantling the federal government and ending ethical business oversight. In the 2000’s, Republicans led America down a path of war and destruction that almost wiped out our economic system.

Why we are here is because we have become weak. We have listened to fools and we know they are fools. They are willing to tear America apart for greed and their own racist ideals. To a racist, compromise is unthinkable, and that is why conservatives will never work towards a unified nation.

THE SERIES:  The 1950’s    The 1960’s    The 1970’s    The 1980’s    The 1990’s    The 2000’s    

This is Why (2015 vs the 2000’s)

19 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2004 Tsunami, 9/11, Afghani, Amazon.com, Anthrax, Assault weapons ban, Conservatives, Election 2000, Facebook, Florida vote counting, George W. Bush, Global Financial Disaster, Global warming, Hurricane Katrina, Iraq, Mars, NASA, Opportunity, Pope John Paul II, President, President Barack Obama, Republicans, Rovers, Saddam Hussein, Smartphone, Space Shuttle Columbia, Spirit, Supreme Court, Texting, Twenty-ohs, Twitter, Virginia Tech Massacre, Wikipedia, YouTube

The 2000’s – The Defeat of America

Decade of Fear: Y2K, 9/11, WMD's, Katrina, Banking Collapse, Unemployment, Global Warming, Putin, ISIS

Decade of Fear: Y2K, 9/11, WMD’s, Katrina, Banking Collapse, Unemployment, Global Warming

  • Population:  281.4 million
  • Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita:  $44,492
  • Median Annual Income:  $40,703
  • Life Expectancy:  76.8
  •  Average Age at Marriage:   Men 26.1, Women 23.9
  • % of pop. w/high school degree or higher:  80.4%
  • % of pop. w/college degree or higher:  24.4% 

TWENTY OH’s
If the 1990’s were a seismic event of technological and social change, the twenty-oh’s is when the tsunami of change hit. Had nothing else happened but the advancement of the Internet, the changes by that alone would have drastically remade the world as we knew it; however, the twenty-oh’s were not content in merely redefining society and the way we communicate, the first decade of the new millennium was going to do an extreme makeover of all our expectations in life. Here are twenty things that made us say Oh!

  1. Y2K, the disaster that never came (Jan. 2000)
  2. Elections of 2000
    1. Florida election fiasco (Nov./Dec. 2000)
    2. Supreme Court appoints George W. Bush as President (Dec. 2000)
  3. Attacks of September 11, 2001
  4. Anthrax letters
  5. Wars of Just Because
    1. Afghanistan (2001-2014)
    2. Iraq (2003-2011)
  6. Rise of Smaller and Smarter Technology (Entire Decade)
    1. Smartphone
    2. Texting
  7. Space Shuttle Columbia destroyed on reentry (Feb. 2003)
  8. Mars Rovers bounce to successful landings and missions
    1. Spirit (June 2003)
    2. Opportunity (July 2003)
  9. Saddam Hussein captured (Dec. 2003)
  10. Assault weapon ban expires (Sept. 2004)
  11. Online Wonders
    1. Amazon.com
    2. Facebook
    3. Twitter
    4. Google
    5. YouTube
    6. Wikipedia
  12. Indian Ocean Earthquake/Tsunami (Dec. 2004)
  13. Pope John Paul dies (Apr. 2005)
  14. Global Warming
  15. Hurricane Katrina (Aug. 2005)
  16. Virginia Tech Massacre (Apr. 2007)
  17. Global Economic Disaster (2007-08)
    1.  Financial giants collapse
    2.  Housing market collapses
    3. Auto industry collapses
    4. Massive unemployment
  18. Price of gas soars, and falls….as a function of conservative politics
  19. Barack Obama elected as President (Nov. 2008)
  20. Nuclear weapons
    1. Iraq
    2. North Korea

The Twenty-oh’s began with the most bizarre Presidential election in American history, followed by the most shocking attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, followed by two United States initiated wars that would be fought simultaneously, followed by the loss of the Space Shuttle and its crew on reentry to Earth, followed by an earthquake/tsunami that would kill almost a quarter of a million people in 14 countries in one day, followed by a massacre at Virginia Tech, followed by a near meltdown of our global financial system, followed by an African-American being elected as President.

THE GREAT CONSERVATIVE FAILURE
Despite all that happened, it was politics that defined the 2000’s. Keeping with the two-faced Reagan policy of “America Can’t” and money must be taken from the poor and given to the rich, President George Bush took the cost of running two wars off the books so that he could look like he was cutting government spending when he was, in fact, putting the government deeper in debt and running massive deficits.

Behind the scenes, a decade of conservative-driven deregulation in the financial industry created a bad debt bomb that exploded in 2007-08. Almost overnight, America’s economy was devastated by greed and a lack of common sense. People who saw the disaster coming took the attitude that everyone else was unethical, so why should I be the only good person? When the curtain fell on Wall Street, Republicans, who created the environment for the disaster, quietly stepped away and whistling as if they were unaware there was a problem.

Bush 43, was completely out of his league in dealing with the problem. To repair the damage to our economy would require taking actions that was would essentially prove that the Reagan doctrine was the cause of the disaster, and President Bush was not willing to take the necessary actions. Fortunately, Barack Obama had just been elected and, with Bush impotent in action, the 44th President stepped up and began to manage the crisis and establishing a plan of recovery.

The Republican caused disaster did not cause conservatives to humbly acknowledge their failure, but rather pushed them to further deny the facts. As the economy began recovering, conservatives began blaming Democrats for not making the recovery happen faster. As conservative predictions of Democratic policy failure began to be proven wrong, conservatives began raising absurd and meaningless issues to redirect people’s attention (e.g.; Obama was not an American, Obama was a Muslim, Obama had a secret plan to take everyone’s guns away, etc.) 

Because the Reagan doctrine was based on white, 1950’s suburban thinking, the hate for President Obama came naturally to the white, male voter. Instead of a political correction for the failed Reagan agenda, conservatives became even more rabid and illogical. By the end of the decade America was heading for defeat at the hands of conservatives who had taken away American prosperity and were unwilling to accept any idea that didn’t match their failed version of the world.

NEXT:  Epilogue

THE SERIES:  The 1950’s    The 1960’s    The 1970’s    The 1980’s    The 1990’s

The Beginning of the End For Starbucks?

11 Wednesday Feb 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

*bucks, caffine, Coffee, coffee brewers, Coffee retailers, Oprah Chai Tea, SBUX, Starbucks, tea

WTF? Even Jasmine is disappointed

WTF? Even Jasmine is disappointed

There are always people who hate Starbucks. It’s easy to do. A person can find retail coffee brewing houses that make as good, or better espresso drinks, and the die-hard loyalty of Starbucks customers, like myself, can be obnoxious. Even the term, ‘barista,’ can seem pretentious to some.

Still, Starbucks has always done one thing right: exceed customer’s expectations. Note some of their highlights:

  • When coffee drinking was dying out with old people who were raised in the era of the peculator coffee pot, Starbucks revolutionized coffee drinking with espresso drinks that created a new generation of caffeine consumers.
  • When other food and beverage businesses were trying to get the customer out the door as fast as possible, Starbucks was offering free WiFi and encouraging customers to enjoy a non-work, non-home, ‘third place’ to spend time to relax and enjoy.
  • When the coffee/tea/snack menu was becoming boring, Starbucks re-designed their menu and name to become known for more than just beverages.

Starbucks has always tried to do a little more than their competitors, which is why they have stood out. 

But lately it seems Starbucks has fallen victim to the accountants and investors. This is to be expected. The average Fortune 500 or equivalent corporation last only between 40 to 50 years. Smaller companies have a much shorter life span.

“The average Fortune 500 or equivalent corporation last only between 40 to 50 years”

Typically a successful company manages become established and then after a period of time it catches fire. This is usually a combination of having a great idea at an unexpected moment. Customers often have a feeling of relief and joy associated with the product or service, a “WOW!” feeling. It can take twenty years or more for a business to have this kind of impact in a market.

If the business can survive the explosive growth phase, the next phase is coasting or reinvention. Coasting companies usually don’t make it to forty years. Competition is always ready to go after the market share of the leader who thinks they’re unbeatable. Anyone can copy and improve upon an idea.

However, the business that works to keep ahead of the competition by offering their customers something extra tend to outlast those who only copy them. Certainly, Starbucks fits this mold.

But at some point the accountants and investors start chipping away at a successful enterprise. They start by whispering, “We can save five cents per unit if we don’t do this. Why should we offer this, it doesn’t bring in revenue!” Soon managers are focusing on saving money to look good, not creating new sales.

“We can save five cents per unit if we don’t do this. Why should we offer this, it doesn’t bring in revenue!”

That’s when the wheels come off. As the company ‘saves’ money the customer begins to wonder why they do business with them instead of the competition. As revenue shrinks, investors get nervous, accountants ring the alarm bells and the pressure to do more with less boils the great people out of the company. At this point the fate of the company is set. The people left don’t know how to offer the unexpected to the customer and if they did, it would be against company policy.

Starbucks became forty on March 30, 2011. Today they are almost 44 years old. So where is Starbucks now?

A few years ago I noticed that most Starbucks stores took away all the trash cans from outside the store. Starbucks offers drive through service and outdoor seating a most of its stores, so it is obvious that outside trash cans are needed, but somewhere someone said, “Why do we offer to take care of people’s trash? It doesn’t provide revenue!” That was the first sign of a change in attitude.

This past holiday season Starbucks was again offering their ‘Sticker’ program for the holiday drinks, offering a free drink for every five holiday drinks sold. At least a week before Christmas Starbucks began running out of the holiday drink syrups. This was in contrary to past years when some of the holiday drinks were available until well into January. Why would Starbucks miscalculate how popular the holiday drinks would be, and how hard would it have been to order more from their supplier?

Of course, without holiday drinks, Starbucks saved money on the Sticker program. Obviously, an accountant projected the maximum loss of free drinks through the Sticker program and cut off the supply when the maximum benefit was reached in holiday drink sales.

The final evidence for me was subtle, but obvious.

Many Starbucks offer a ‘Puppachino’ (whipping cream in a kid’s cup) for people who have a dog. This is an off-menu free service and it caused our dog to go from barking at the Starbucks window attendant to quietly and anxiously anticipating her Puppachino. Today, our Puppachino was water in a kid’s cup with a little whip cream on top.

The simple change in a free service was a deafening moan of a company that is hemorrhaging goodwill from cuts to the veins of good management. No one would offer a cup of sticky, whip cream-laced water to their dog inside a car. It was a slap in the face of the customers. The manager is saying, “we can’t afford to offer this service, but we know you’ll bitch if we stop it, so here, pour this on your backseat.”

Starbucks is in full retreat and is following the spiral downward to be just another company that we will reminisce about in ten years.

Is Taylor Swift Planting Pity Stories?

31 Saturday Jan 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Honor, Internet, Public Image, Public Relations, Social Media Relations, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

#katyperry, #superbowl, #taylorswift, HollywoodLife.com, katy perry, Music, pity, pop, Super Bowl, Taylor Swift

Taylor Swift:  Queen of Pity

Taylor Swift: Queen of Pity

Taylor Swift has always been a pity hound. Her ‘woe-is-me’ songs¹ about her failed relationships and enemies have one common denominator, namely, Taylor Swift.

But in the past few months stories about Katy Perry planning to “Diss” Taylor Swift at high-profile events, including tomorrow’s Super Bowl, have been surfacing. Hollywood Life ran almost identical headlines:

Katy Perry & Rihanna Plotting To Diss Taylor Swift At MTV EMAs (Hollywood Life, September 24, 2014)

Katy Perry Planning To Diss Taylor Swift During Super Bowl Performance (Hollywood Life, January 3, 2015)

Multiple media outlets picked up both stories, but all pointed back to Hollywood Life’s story without further evidence of fact. In addition, the actual source of the accusation is never revealed by Hollywood Life, so one can only speculate as to who has the most to gain by planting a ‘woe-is-me’ story.

Based on Swift’s history of pity pimping, it would seem more likely that she is planting stories about Katy Perry, than the Queen of Pop actually conspiring to use her Super Bowl honor to acknowledge the lesser wannabe pop star.

¹Songs and who the song is allegedly about (source):

  • Forever & Always – Joe Jonas
  • Better Than Revenge – Camilla Belle
  • We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together Again – Jake Gyllenhaal
  • Dear John – John Mayer
  • Out of the Woods – Harry Styles
  • Bad Blood – Katy Perry

Exposing a Bully is Not Bullying

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Honor, Human Resources, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Opinion, parenting, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Women

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

bully, bullying, Dr. Peggy Drexler, Kelly Blazek

During this past week much has been written (including myself) about the case of a person in a position of power, Kelly Blazek, the gatekeeper of a Cleveland, Ohio jobs listing for marketing positions, writing a nasty email to a job seeker. Blazek’s language in the email was unyielding in her attempt to embarrass and humiliate the job seeker. Blazek was using her power to bully someone who was in an inferior position.   

Therefore, I was shocked when I read an ‘Opinion‘ on CNN.com by Dr. Peggy Drexler, who wrote that by publicizing the email and seeking attention to the bullying, the job seeker:

“….acted with malice, and caused the older woman significant damage…”

The specific language suggests that Dr. Drexler is encouraging Blazek, the person who was the bully, to sue the victim on the grounds of malice, libel, and/or age discrimination. One might question as to whether Dr. Drexler’s motives were that of an ambulance chaser, seeking to be employed by Blazek as an ‘expert’ witness in a civil suit.

Dr. Drexler’s opinion piece did describe the nature of Blazek’s email; however, she softened Blazek’s misdeeds by saying:

“Blazek’s words were, of course, undeniably, and likely unnecessarily, harsh”

In her opinion piece, Dr. Drexler masterfully works around the most blatant language in Blazek’s email and, in at least one place, segmented the quoted language so that the most vicious remark doesn’t look like it was the climax of the rest of the paragraph. She also uses Blazek’s “Communicator of the Year” recognition as a reference of her skills, rather than the irony that is obvious after reading a complete version of Blazek’s blistering email. The most damning paragraph from Blazek’s email is missing from Dr. Drexler’s opinion:

“I suggest you join the other Job Bank in town. Oh wait — there isn’t one.”

Dr. Drexler admits that Blazek’s behavior was wrong:

“No question, Blazek lashed out first, with unprofessional behavior that can only be described as bullying.”

However, Dr. Drexler seems to enable Blazek’s behavior by accusing the job seeker:

“But Mekota responding in kind makes her no less a bully.”

In Dr. Drexler’s world, when bullied, sit back and take. Don’t fight back and don’t call out the bully. Other professionals have a different take on how to respond to a bully. In responding to adult bullying, Mental Health Support (from the United Kingdom) suggests the following :

“…if you find yourself the victim of bullying, a bully’s bad behaviour is entirely his or her responsibility, not yours,…”

The website goes on to say:

“Once you have identified a bully and know what to expect from him or her, you must choose not to be a victim, if you want the bullying to stop. Expose the bullying for what it is. Take a stand, and don’t back down…”

“…The important point here is to expose the bully and call him or her to account. Confrontation and exposure, with evidence to support a victim’s accusations, are what the bully tries hardest to avoid. Once exposure happens, the bullying is likely to stop.”

There was an injustice done to Ms. Blazek, but that was from Dr. Drexler in attempting to sanctify Blazek’s behavior by accusing the job seeker of an equal act. Dr. Drexler’s portrait of Blazek as the older woman, victimized by the young, evil job seeker, causing her to lose her career and disappear from social media is absurd. The job seeker did not write the email, nor did she make the decision to shut down Blazek’s websites and social media accounts. Blazek was in the wrong and the damage to her career rests solely in her hands.

The Blazek Syndrome

01 Saturday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Ethics, Generational, Honor, Human Resources, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Opinion, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Media Relations, Women

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Blazek Syndrome, Cleveland, head hunter, humility, job search, Kelly Blazek, LinkedIn, Marketing, Ohio, Twitter, Wordpress

Kelly Blazek - Armed with a keyboard and dangerous

Kelly Blazek – Armed with a keyboard and dangerous

You may not recognize the name Kelly Blazek, but she is the poster child for public image disaster. When people wonder how bad personal embarrassment can be, we now have Blazek as our code word for really, really bad. 

Kelly Blazek is probably a decent human being, but what she will be remembered for is her moments of ‘Ms. Hyde’ behavior. She founded a job bank listing for marketing and public relations positions in the Cleveland, Ohio area. She had a WordPress blog and Twitter, LinkedIn accounts. Head hunter Blazek was also recognized as “Communicator of the Year.” by a local business group.

Within a matter of days she went from a leader in her field to a ghost. There is no blog site, no Twitter account, nor any trace of her other than a growing number of postmortems in blogs and news articles of her epic nasty responses to people who reached out to her.

The Blazek Syndrome
Her story is a step-by-step, what-not-to-do in business.

STEP ONE:  Don’t let frustrations with the job spill over into your communications and interactions.

Among the most notorious of her responses, Blazek reacted to a college graduate seeking to connect with her as part of her job search. Her manner that can best be described as vile. Among the barrage of hateful statements were the following:

“I love the sense of entitlement in your generation. And therefore I enjoy Denying (sic) your invite…. (to connect on LinkedIn.)”

“I suggest you join the other Job Bank in town. Oh wait — there isn’t one.”

“You’re welcome for your humility lesson for the year.”

Everyone has a bad day, but any business person should know that what you write is what will save you or hang you. There is no excuse Blazek could offer for her verbal abuse of this job seeker.

STEP TWO:  Making a mistake, even as massive as this one, does not mean it’s the final chapter. Life is not over and running and hiding will not help.

Blazek has compounded the crisis by trying to disappear. When sharks smell blood of a wounded fish they go into a frenzy. By disengaging from social media, people may lose interest, but what will remain is the public shame. The best time to do damage repair is while people are still paying attention

STEP THREE:  Apologize over and over.

Instead of deleting social media accounts, use them. In a public image crisis people need to hear every possible sincere apology, but do NOT attempt to offer excuses. 

STEP FOUR:  Listen to what is being said and respond with humility.

Remember BP’s  Tony Hayward remark, “I want my life back.” The public image crisis is over when people say its over, not when the disgraced person wants it to be over. Read what other people are saying and respond in a kind and humble way to as many people as you can. Make the story about the lesson learned. 

Early 2014 PR Fails: Target and Christie

13 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bridgegate, George Washington Bridge, Governor Chris Christie, GW bridge scandal, New Jersey, Nixon, retail, store, Target

Self-inflicted Wounds?

Self-inflicted Wounds?

Only 13 days in 2014 and Target and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie share the spotlight for worst public image of the new year.

Target credit information theft just keeps getting worse. We learned last week that data was stolen for 70 million Target customers, not 40 million as belatedly reported earlier this month. Target is averaging over one sales-killing announcement a week so far this year and each new announcement makes the crisis worse. There are people who say Target will survive, but if someone were going to attempt to kill a leading corporate retail organization, this would be the way to do it.

It’s not like Target has no competition. Making customers worry of whether their credit data is safe when they shop is not a unique experience desired by any retail store.  Add the but-wait-it-gets-worse element and sales are bound to sink.

Target will likely continue to minimize the crisis, which will only increase the distrust of the brand. The PR strategy they are following is going to dig them into a deeper grave.

Not to be outdone, Governor Chris Christie is dropping his own PR boob bombs. After claiming that a traffic tie up at the George Washington Bridge was part of a legitimate traffic study, he then was forced to confront emails that clearly indicated his top aides were involved in Nixon-era tactics aimed at some type of petty revenge act.

Governor Christie's apology missed the mark

Governor Christie’s apology missed the mark

The issue is not whether or not Governor Christie knew that his senior staff were behaving like chimpanzees throwing their poop at people in the zoo, the issue is Christie is either 1) incompetent for surrounding himself with idiots, and/or, 2) incompetent for not knowing what was going on, or, 3) aware of everything and is lying about it. 

The big PR factors in both crises are the lack of humility and accepting responsibility. Instead of minimizing the crisis, Target should have been ahead of the crisis. Not only should they be providing the most accurate and honest information, they should have been apologizing to their customers, assisting them, and offering to make things right for any customer who is affected by the loss of their credit data. This is an issue of long-term survivability, not revenue projections for the current quarter.

As for Governor Christie, that ship has sailed. He had a chance to accept responsibility and resign. His, the-buck-stops-here-but-I’m-blaming-everyone-else strategy only proved that he has dignity of Lance Armstrong. He could have admitted his mistakes, stepped back, and then worked to rebuild his reputation, but he instead he revealed how low he can go.

Public image is everything, and it does not suffer fools gladly.

Hey Stupid, Privacy is Dead and Your Face is the Reason

31 Tuesday Dec 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, parenting, Photography, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anthony Weiner, Biometrics, face, Facebook, facial recognition software, Facial recognition system, Ohio, on line, Privacy, Twitter

Facial recognition software is the final nail in Internet privacy

Facial recognition software is the final nail in Internet privacy

Go ahead, just try to protect your privacy. Give up Facebook. Scoff at Twitter. Swear you’re going to never sign on the computer again. It is all useless.

Stick a fork in privacy on the Internet. There no such thing as privacy on the Internet, nor is there privacy off the Internet.

A girl decides to check up on her boyfriend. She happens to be an attorney in Ohio and has access to the State’s facial recognition software. She uses it to snoop on her boyfriend and other people her friends were dating. This was in 2008. Five years ago and she was using (well, misusing) facial recognition software that was meant for finding criminals.

It doesn’t matter whether you take the picture or post it. It doesn’t even matter if you knew you were in the picture. New Years Eve? Good luck in keeping your face out of every picture that people around you take. If your face shows up in a posted picture, it can be found and matched. 

Not only law enforcement is using facial recognition software. Casinos are using it. Some suggest that Disney is using it in their parks. Retailers are using it. Your significant other can buy it and download it today. If you want to see how deep the rabbit hole goes, watch this TED Talk on facial recognition software.

Anthony Weiner: Too bad it wasn't his face that got him in trouble

Anthony Weiner: Too bad it wasn’t his face that got him in trouble

There is no such thing as privacy. One more time. There is no such thing as privacy.

THE ANSWER
Behave. That’s it. Or at least know that if you don’t behave everyone will find out and it will be at the worst possible moment for you. People learn how to behave when they go out in public. The Internet is public. There is no difference.

← Older posts

Other Pages of This Blog

  • About Paul Kiser
  • Common Core: Are You a Good Switch or a Bad Switch?
  • Familius Interruptus: Lessons of a DNA Shocker
  • Moffat County, Colorado: The Story of Two Families
  • Rules on Comments
  • Six Things The United States Must Do
  • Why We Are Here: A 65-Year Historical Perspective of the United States

Paul’s Recent Blogs

  • Dysfunctional Social Identity & Its Impact on Society
  • Road Less Traveled: How Craig, CO Was Orphaned
  • GOP Political Syndicate Seizes CO School District
  • DNA Shock +5 Years: What I Know & Lessons Learned
  • Solstices and Sunshine In North America
  • Blindsided: End of U.S. Solar Observation Capabilities?
  • Inspiration4: A Waste of Space Exploration

Paul Kiser’s Tweets

What’s Up

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jun    

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,651 other subscribers

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

 

Loading Comments...