SpaceX Ran Out of Block 5 Boosters

23 Monday Aug 2021

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Falcon Heavy, Internet, Public Image, Public Relations, Saturn V, Science, Space, SpaceX, Starlink, Technology, United States, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Block 5, Falcon 9, Falcon Heavy, International Space Station, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Space, spaceflight, SpaceX, Vandenberg Space Force Base

The Barn Was Empty, SpaceX Ran Out of Block 5 Boosters

SpaceX activity has been quiet in July and August because they simply ran out of Falcon 9 Block 5 boosters. In June they successfully launched four of their seven pure revenue-producing flights of this year. That, combined with four launches in May for their white elephant Starlink program [SEE: Must Sell Starlink], left them with nothing to put in the air.

The Starship Stack Diversion

They did grab the attention of the SpaceX groupies by stacking a non-flightworthy Starship on a booster in Boca Chica. This allowed them to claim that they finally build a rocket taller than the Apollo Saturn Five rocket…of 50 years ago; however, SpaceX has still not launched a functioning rocket that can rival the Saturn Five.

Heavy lift Rockets and number of successful launches to date.

SpaceX Block Five Returns To Work?

Late this month, SpaceX has a launch scheduled to deliver a cargo ship to the International Space Station (ISS) if they have a booster ready. They currently have eight flyable boosters (1049, 1051, 1060, 1061, 1062, 1063, and 1067;) however, booster 1051 is beyond its ten flight limit¹ and both 1049 and 1051 are now in California awaiting Starlink polar launches from Vandenberg Space Force Base. The most likely candidate boosters for the ISS cargo ship are 1058 or 1063. Both were launched in May and have had three months be readied for flight.

[¹The Block 5 boosters were designed for ten launches without refurbishment. Recently, According to Spaceflight Now, Elon Musk stated that they would fly the boosters for the Starlink program beyond ten missions “…until they break…” indicating the risk of losing the payload is a low priority.]

2021 4th Quarter – What To Expect

There are 17 SpaceX missions rumored for the remainder of 2021. Some of these missions are definitely planned and a few actually have dates and/or boosters assigned. Here is a list of the missions:

August (yes, I know that it is not in the 4th Quarter)

28 August – ISS cargo ship from Kennedy Space Center (KSC) – Booster 1061

LIKELY – [NOTE: At the time of publication, the booster had not been identified.] The only question on this launch is why the booster has not been determined. SpaceX has a policy of not offering details of missions to the public, but usually, the booster assignment is eventually revealed in public documents or by SpaceX unofficial sources. At this late date, it is assumed that the booster has been assigned and is ready to be mated with the cargo ship.

September

September (x2) – Starlink Polar from Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) – Boosters 1049 and 1051.

LIKELY – This mission has been pushed back from July and August. Booster 1049 arrived at VSFB for this mission shortly after its last launch and recovery in May. If it doesn’t launch in September something is wrong. Booster 1051 arrived at VSFB a couple of weeks after 1049. It is possible both missions will be launched in September, but I wouldn’t be shocked if the 1051 mission didn’t happen until October.

15 September – Shift4 Joy Ride from KSC – Booster 1062

LIKELY – Although no booster has been assigned, several should be available for the public relations stunt. It will be a PR boost for SpaceX and they have every reason to make it happen as scheduled.

September 2021, November 2021, & TBD 2021 – Starlink from KSC – Boosters unknown

QUESTIONABLE – SpaceX has launched 27 missions for their Starlink satellites in 2020 and 2021. That is 27 booster cycles that weren’t used for commercially viable launches. Three of those launches ended with the loss of the booster which cut short the revenue potential of additional launches with those boosters. SpaceX could reduce the risk of future booster losses by using Block 5 boosters that have finished their design lifespan of ten launches for the Starlink missions.

However, SpaceX has now moved their two Block 5 boosters with the most launches (Booster 1051 – 10 launches & Booster 1049 – 9 launches) to VSFB in California. It is unlikely they will move these boosters back to Florida this year. That means if a Starlink mission is launched, SpaceX will have to use a newer booster and risk its loss. It is unlikely that all three missions will be launched if any are launched.

October

31 October – ISS Crew from KSC – Booster 1067

LIKELY – The fact that this is a revenue-producing flight, that it involves the crew for the ISS, and that it is a NASA mission, is reflected by the fact that it already has a scheduled date and a booster assigned.

October – German spy satellite from VSFB – Booster unknown

QUESTIONABLE – Unless SpaceX is intending on risking a revenue-producing payload on the overextended 1051 booster, they don’t have a booster at Vandenberg for this mission. Certainly, they could move a booster to California or use the new 1069 booster, but this mission has no date, nor booster assigned. An October launch seems iffy.

October – U.S. spy satellite from KSC – Boosters 1064, 1065, & 1066 (Falcon Heavy)

LIKELY – Boosters are tested and ready. It’s a classified mission and the core booster has to be expended to get the payload into a higher orbit. This is not one for a PR show but it is a mission that they need to show potential commercial and military customers that SpaceX is not just a flying circus.

November

17 November – IXPE satellite from KSC – Booster unknown

LIKELY – Since this mission has a launch date three months in advance it would seem that this is a serious mission. There should be several boosters that will be available.

23 November – DART satellite from VSFB – Booster unknown

LIKELY – This will be an interesting booster assignment. The payload has to go into a heliocentric orbit so it is possible, or even likely, that the booster will be expended. That might be a mission they would assign a booster like 1049 or 1051 as both will have had more launches than they were designed for originally.

December

4 December – ISS cargo ship from KSC – Booster unknown

LIKELY – The mission has a date and the ISS needs its cargo, so this is likely to happen but the date might slide by a few weeks, as in the past.

December – O3b mPower satellites from KSC – Booster unknown

QUESTIONABLE – SpaceX has a long history of putting missions on a tentative schedule and then pushing them back. SpaceX will have to divide its boosters up between Vandenberg and Kennedy Space Center to meet their launch schedule. It would seem that at least three boosters will have to be in California to meet the needs of their customers.

December – Transporter3 from VSFB – Booster unknown

QUESTIONABLE – This will depend upon how many boosters are committed to California. SpaceX seems to be making noises about going big at Vandenberg and the schedule indicates that intention. Unfortunately, SpaceX doesn’t have enough boosters to divide between two launch facilities, and moving them around costs money.

4th Quarter – Turksat 5B from KSC – Booster unknown

NOPE – The kiss of death on a SpaceX schedule is for it to be scheduled for ‘sometime in X quarter.’ It seems to be a schedule filler for SpaceX PR people to refer to when they discuss the number of launches planned for the year.

4th Quarter – Maxar Technologies satellites from VSFB – Booster unknown

NOPE – Same as the Turksat mission. It probably won’t happen in 2021.

5 Reasons SpaceX Must Sell Starlink

11 Friday Jun 2021

Posted by Paul Kiser in Astronomy, Business, Communication, Customer Service, Internet, NASA, Public Image, Space, SpaceX, Starlink, Technology, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Falcon 9, Internet, Public Image, Satellite, Space, space business, space flight, Space Program, Space X, Starlink

Since the start of 2019, slightly over half¹ of SpaceX’s launches have been for the Starlink satellite network. The idea of becoming a worldwide provider of Internet service with a constellation of flashy satellites that people can see crossing the sky after launch has been a welcome boost for the SpaceX fan club. The image of boosters coming back for a perfect touchdown has provided a great cover for the reality that may be lurking behind the SpaceX curtain…SpaceX must sell Starlink.

¹[Starlink = 29 launches, Commercial and Government = 28 launches]

Starlink satellite rack ready to deploy

5 Reasons SpaceX Should Sell Starlink

1. Cashflow

In a previous article, I argue that SpaceX is not doing what is required to keep a business viable, that is to make money. [SpaceX “Burning Through Cash” and Boosters] In 2018, all 21 of SpaceX launches were revenue-producing (100% for a paying customer) flights for either commercial or government customers. That dropped to 11 revenue-producing flights in 2019, and 12 in 2020. In the first six months of this year, SpaceX has only launched 5 revenue-producing flights.

The drastic cut in revenue-producing flights in 2019 raises questions as to why SpaceX couldn’t find customers. Possibly in response, SpaceX ramped up their pet Starlink project in 2020 to maintain the public image of a busy private space enterprise.

However, that image does not come without its costs. Each Starlink launch is estimated to cost $111 million² [Morgan Stanley report Sept 2019.] That number is disputed [NextBigFuture article Dec 2019] by SpaceX; however, they don’t offer to disclose the real costs of the system. If the costs per launch were only $100 million, SpaceX will have spent $2.9 billion since 2019 on the Starlink launches.

Revenue from the users of the Starlink system is not expected to break even with the costs for several years so SpaceX looks to be in a serious cashflow deficit.

²[$50 million for vehicle + ($1 million per satellite x 60) = $111 million]

2. Weak Market Base

Despite the fact that the Internet has been around for over two decades, there is no significant use of satellite-based Internet services. Space allows greater access to users; however, the cost/benefit comparison makes ground-based systems a better option.

The target market is the rural user that can’t easily access a broadband connection and this market consists of users with the least spendable income. There is a great need for quality Internet service in rural areas; however, rural area economies don’t provide the financial resources to pay for it.

Starlink is a service that is like selling food to starving people. The need is there, but if the people could afford it, they wouldn’t be starving.

What 1,500 Starlink satellites look like in orbit. There will be 30,000.

3. Liability

Starlink has already run into controversy about the impact of the massive satellite system. Astronomers worldwide have voiced complaints about the network interfering with the scientific study of space from Earth-based telescopes. SpaceX has attempted to lessen the impact of the reflectivity of the satellites and they have become less obvious in orbit.

There has also been an incident in 2019, where a request was made by the European Space Agency (ESA) to alter the orbit of a Starlink satellite and the Starlink operator refused to comply. SpaceX claims they initially felt the threat was not a concern, then later realized that it was; however, because of a communications breakdown between SpaceX and the Starlink operator, they failed to act. [Forbes article Sept 2019]

With tens of thousands of satellites and scores of launches every year to build and maintain the constellation, the risk of a significant incident is high. The possibility of a collision would not only impact the satellites involved but would send debris out toward other satellites creating the nightmare scenario that was the plot of the 2013 movie Gravity.

Whoever operates the Starlink constellation takes on the liability of an accident that has global implications.

4. Risk of Failure

The Starlink satellite system is a long-term, high-risk gamble both financially and technologically. The logic of how such a system will be economically feasible seems to be flawed. It is a business venture that seems likely to leave someone holding the bag…and the bag may be filled with debt and public humiliation.

The Starlink Constellation: 30,000 moving parts, traveling at 28,000 km/hr, operating 24/7/365. What could possibly go wrong?

5. Cost of Maintenance

Based on the Morgan Stanley analysis, the initial cost of the full 30,000 Starlink satellite system will be somewhere between $40 and $50 billion but the cost doesn’t end there.

Each satellite’s lifespan is only five years according to SpaceX President Gwynne Shotwell [CNBC.com article Nov 2019.] That would seem to indicate that SpaceX may be continuously launching satellites for the life of the constellation.

But SpaceX is Rolling In Money!

SpaceX has been successful in obtaining venture capital; however, the investors expect a return on their investment. If SpaceX can’t make a profit, there will be consequences.

What about the rumored IPO?

An Initial Public Offering (IPO) of Starlink has been talked about by Musk, Shotwell, and the financial community; however, an IPO means that SpaceX will still be responsible for the costs and risks of Starlink. Selling Starlink allows SpaceX to wash their hands of it and recoup the money they’ve already spent.

Starlink has done what it needed it to do. It has given SpaceX the image of a successful private space corporation. SpaceX will likely be in desperate need of money to keep operations functioning for all of the existing projects. Starlink will likely become a liability and finding someone to dump it on is the best-case scenario for SpaceX.

SpaceX Public Relations: Secrecy is Modus Operandi

04 Thursday Apr 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Communism, Conservatives, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Exploration, Falcon Heavy, Government, Government Regulation, Management Practices, Mars, NASA, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Soviet Russia, Space, SpaceX, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

commercial space, Falcon Heavy, manned space program, privatization, Public Image, Public Relations, space business, space exploration, space flight, spaceflight, SpaceX, static fire test

[UPDATE: Eric Ralph, a writer for Telsalarti, posted an article saying that the Falcon Heavy launch was likely to be delayed and that it was “OK.” Again, Ralph is a knowledgable source but not an official source, so SpaceX is not accountable for the speculation. Source: Teslarati 4 Apr 2019.]

SpaceX is scheduled to launch the new Block 5 version of the Falcon Heavy on Sunday (7 April) sometime between 6:36 PM and 8:35 PM EDT. We know this from an official source of information that was made available on 22 March. That information was not provided by SpaceX to the directly to the public. SpaceX reported it as required; however, if not for that requirement, the public would have no information on the time or date of the launch. The public is given the silent treatment while SpaceX collects billions in taxpayer dollars.

While a lot of people are distracted by a Raptor in Texas, 27 Merlin 1Ds are hoping to attract your attention in Florida.

KSC goes into Critical Support from 20:30 Local (March 31) to 20:30 Local (April 1), meaning rollout to 39A likely on Sunday and then Static Fire on April 1. pic.twitter.com/nXUtGIiKsJ

— Chris B – NSF (@NASASpaceflight) March 27, 2019

This tweet by Michael Baylor, a managing editor for NASASpaceflight.com and considered a highly knowledgeable source, was wrong. SpaceX has remained silent.

SpaceX Public Relations: Code of Secrecy

Because SpaceX is a private company, they’re not required to tell the public anything,…and they don’t. This leads to speculation through other sources and that speculation works to their favor. By not making announcements about time or dates, they can’t be held responsible for delays. SpaceX avoids negative publicity by not being accountable to the public. The new reality of public relations in space exploration is that everything is on a need to know basis…and the public doesn’t need to know.

Prep for Falcon Heavy Static Fire Test…in 2018

Falcon Heavy Problems?

This week’s Block 5 Falcon Heavy debut is a prime example of how SpaceX uses secrecy to their advantage. Instead of informing the public, the public relations people at SpaceX are taking a low profile prior to the launch. No announcements, no tweets.

Speculation has been made that the static fire test (a short test-firing of the engines) would occur on Monday (1 April,) Wednesday (3 April,) and now Thursday (4 April.) [Sources: Teslarati 28 Mar 2019 – E. Ralph, Spaceflight Now 1-3 Apr 2019 – S. Clark] Again, not from official sources, but by knowledgeable sources. This type of teasing drives SpaceX fans into a feeding frenzy of speculation, but SpaceX isn’t accountable for any of the speculation, regardless of how knowledgable the source.

This allows SpaceX to miss a projected date or time for the static fire test because they never said when the test would occur. It is likely that the information in the above tweet by Michael Baylor was accurate and something has happened to cause SpaceX to push back the static fire test, but they don’t have to reveal that to the public. They can keep the public guessing until it becomes obvious that the launch date and time will not be met.

This also allows SpaceX to minimize failure while wildly pronouncing a success. If the launch is a success, SpaceX will make public announcements with video of every positive aspect of the launch. If the Falcon Heavy launch fails SpaceX will likely cut video feeds to the public and wait several hours to form a carefully crafted explanation that will suggest the failure was an expected risk of a rocket launch. Then they will go silent.

This is what SpaceX did on the first Falcon Heavy (Block 4) launch when the booster core failed to land on the drone ship. The video feed was cut when the booster crashed near the ship and damaged the engines. SpaceX then didn’t confirm or deny what happened until several hours later, even though they had a continuous video of the event. [Source: The Verge 6 Feb 2018 – L. Grush]

Why Should the Public Know?

Roughly half of SpaceX’s revenue has come from the taxpayers pocket. According to Sam Dunkovich, $5.5 billion of SpaceX $12 billion in launch contracts are from NASA or the U.S. military [Source: RealClear Policy 2 Feb 2018.] SpaceX wouldn’t be in the space industry if it were not for the financial revenue it gains from the U.S. taxpayer. The first launch of a Block 5 Falcon Heavy is a significant milestone of how our money is being spent by this private company.

Space exploration has been a public concern since Soviet Russia launched Sputnik on 4 October 1957. The conservatives desire to privatize space exploration is at best an experiment and certainly is a one-sided political agenda. By withholding information from the taxpayers, the effectiveness of that political agenda cannot be fairly determined.

Secrecy in public relations is a Soviet model and not acceptable in the United States. Withholding information from the public to hide the true situation is still a lie. This is why private business is incapable of overseeing themselves and should be required to inform the public of their true activities and problems.

Educational Landmines: Questioning the Pedagogy of Your Child’s School

17 Monday Sep 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, College, Conservatives, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, jobs, labor, Life, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Religion, Reno, Science, Taxes, Universities, US History, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

administration, Conservatives, Education, Education methods, Management Practices, pedagogy, public education, Public Image, school boards, teachers, Washoe County School District, WCSD

Education 2020 – Part I: Criticizing Pedagogy

Dangers of Discussing Pedagogy

Before any discussion of education begins, one must accept that if a parent questions the pedagogy (the methods and practice of teaching) of their child’s school that they risk being attacked, especially by other parents. My personal experience has been that other parents may become passionate about how wonderful the school is, even if there is clear documentation of problems within the school.

Sadly, parents who do criticize their child’s school often lack the knowledge and understanding of pedagogy to intelligently discuss issues and concerns. This has created a long history of parent’s crying ‘wolf’ about problems in the school. Now, all parents are assumed to be uninformed and overprotective, and their concerns and issues to be insignificant.

However, parents do have a legitimate perspective on the education of their children. It must be assumed that the parent will be biased toward their own child, but that does not completely negate the perspective.

Who Are the Experts For Pedagogy?

Ideally, pedagogy should be influenced by people who have expertise in education. Experience and or advanced degrees in the field are factors, but should one educator’s opinions determine the pedagogy for all educators? Research is also a factor; however, simple data (graduation rates, test scores, etc.) is not research because this data is not peer-reviewed. Without peer review, critical questions are left unanswered regarding the validity of the data.

In our country’s current political climate, the idea of equal opportunity in education for all has been supplanted by education to meet the needs of corporations and religious interests. The decades-long effort of lower taxes and attacks on public schools have led conservatives to invade the school boards and districts to plant a new agenda that benefits particular groups. To support their agenda, conservatives often use single viewpoints of an expert touting his or her ‘years’ of educational experience, or advance degrees to support their political agenda.

Who Speaks For the Children?

Is there a legitimate voice in determining the pedagogy of our schools? Yes and no. Teachers and students are the core of education of our youth. Mentoring, not rigor should be the core of pedagogy in any legitimate school. Pedagogy should not be guided by what will make a student a better worker, but by what will develop the skills and ability of the student to make them a better person. Parents are biased, but parents should serve as an assistant to teachers regarding their child’s education.

Most administrators and politicians should not have a significant role in pedagogy simply because they may have a corrupted interest in what is best for the student. Cutting costs, serving political and/or religious interests, etc. should not be part of the teacher/student interaction.

Finally, research, not data, should be at the core of pedagogy. The research should be unbiased for gender, race, and/or socioeconomic status. Graduation rates are meaningless unless there it can be documented that graduating from high school has led to personal, economic, and social success in adult life after graduation. College-bound rates are meaningless unless the student actually succeeds in college and completes a degree. Test scores and standardized tests are meaningless unless it can be proven that high test scores relate to success in adult life.

The Education 2020

It is dangerous territory to initiate a discussion on pedagogy and education in the United States of America; however, it is absolutely necessary. The future is determined by the wisdom of the present. Now is the time to discuss and correct the derailment of pedagogy in our schools.

The purpose of the Education 2020 series is to continue the discussion, identify the problems, and seek solutions.

Raging Employee: A Case Study For Today’s Business

26 Tuesday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Violence in the Workplace, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

denver post, Frank Sain, Franklin Sain, gun, gun magazine, gun violence, NRA, Public Image, rifles, Softec Solutions

Frank Sain’s Mug Shot

Last Tuesday (February 19,) police detectives visited Frank Sain at his office at SofTec Solutions in Englewood, Colorado. Sain was hired as the Chief Operating Officer for the technology company in the Fall of 2011.

As reported by the Denver Post, they questioned him about six emails he sent between February 13 and 15, in addition to voicemails left to Colorado State Representative Rhonda Fields. Representative Fields has proposed legislation to limit gun magazine capacities in Colorado. The emails and voicemails were said to be sexually and racially offensive and indicated he was enraged by the proposed legislation.

“Hopefully somebody Gifords both of your asses with a gun….”

per The Denver Post – In an email from Frank Sain to Representative Rhonda Fields

Two days after the police interviewed him (February 21) an unsigned letter was received by Representative Fields that threatened harm to both her and her daughter.

The next day Frank Sain was arrested and this past Monday the arrest was reported in the Denver Post. According to the Denver Post, Sain admits to the emails.

The situation is an important case study for business because it is the type of crisis that every business must be prepared for in today’s social media, politically charged world.

Company Public Image Issues

Frank Sain’s headshot before he was erased from the company’s website

The obvious issue is public relations. A rank-and-file employee who acts out in a public forum out can damage a company’s reputation, but to have a manager, and in this case, a company executive, who acts out creates an impression that the organization might have been involved, or at least, enabled the behavior of the person.

In addition, an organization’s website typically boasts about its executives and when one of them misbehaves it makes the company look incompetent. It is important for a company to not prejudge an accused employee; however, when the basic allegations are admitted to by the employee the organization must take quick action to divorce itself from the actions of the employee. In this situation, with the allegations reportedly admitted to by the employee, SofTec Solutions quickly responded by removing Frank Sain from their website within 24 hours of the Denver Post story.

One issue is whether or not the organization should speak out publicly regarding the employee. Many companies might choose to not create any more public exposure regarding the situation, but I feel that would be the wrong choice. Both the public and customers/clients of the company will have a negative impression of the company that will be left in everyone’s mind if not addressed. It is important that the company make it clear that the acts and opinions of their executive were not enabled, endorsed, nor condoned by the organization and some type of heartfelt statement should be made with apologies to the appropriate people.¹

SofTec Management Team webpages – Monday versus Tuesday

Human Resources Issues
Separating an employee is never easy. Separating an employee who has demonstrated rage and flaunts his gun ownership is even harder.

An organization cannot have an executive who makes derogatory sexual and racial statements and threatens to do violent harm to others. Of special concern is that in this situation the person seemed to escalate in his bad behavior after being questioned by law enforcement, signaling the potential of underlying, uncontrolled rage.

If the person can be reasoned with, it would be best to sit down with the employee and discuss the situation. Allowing the person to resign might be appropriate; however, in some cases an organization may have a duty to inform other potential employers of the circumstances of the separation. Making the employee someone else’s problem is not a smart move, especially if the company failed to warn the new employer of potential violent behavior.

The best practice in this situation might be to put the employee on paid leave for a period of time and require he seek counseling to address his behavior issues. There should be an understanding that separation with some type of severance package would occur upon compliance with the counseling requirement.

The organization should discuss the situation with legal counsel that is experienced in employee law as local, state and/or federal laws may dictate what an organization can, must, and can’t do in these types of circumstances. Engaging an expert in crisis management and/or violent employee situations should be part of separation planning.

In House Investigation
Under these types of circumstances an organization should conduct a thorough investigation of the employee’s co-workers, clients, etc. The purpose is to identify the scope of the issue. Did he confide in people who should have informed the company? Are there others who are sympathetic to him and might have behavior issues of their own? Does the company foster extreme political anger and if so, how should it be addressed? Did he act out among customers/clients and, if so, what is the impression they have of the company? Did he have an abusive email style with employees and/or customers.

There are many questions that must be answered if an organization hopes to move out of the crisis. Burying the incident may make everyone feel better, but it may turn out that the problem was just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Training, counseling and other remedial efforts for all employees may be required to heal the damage caused by the executive who put the company into the crisis.

¹(UPDATE: Just before publishing this article, the Denver Post announced that SofTec Solutions had suspended Frank Sain and issued a strongly worded statement condemning his behavior.)

The Dark Side of PR: Distraction and Deception or ‘Armstronging’ the Public

11 Monday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM)

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Armstronging, BP, deception, distraction, Lance Armstrong, National Rifle Association, NRA, PR, Public Image, Social Media, Tony Hayward

In this series regarding public relations (PR) tactics of ‘Managing the Message’ I’ve talked about how some organizations focus is centered on Reaction Avoidance (SEE: Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t) rather than public interaction. In a Social Media dominated world, this results in the organization always looking manipulative and weak.

In Part II (SEE: Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations) I discussed the use of Anti-listening techniques to avoid and limit public discussion of issues that an organization may not want to address. In this article we will discuss more sinister techniques used to by organizations to ‘manage the message.’

Managing the Message is the alpha and omega of the NRA

Managing the message inherently requires the belief that PR people have God-like powers over the public. Add an organizational executive team that already believes they are Gods and we have the perfect storm of ego and a lack of ethics that lead to the worst PR tactics in business. Under these circumstances we move from passive techniques to manage the message into an aggressive intent to distract and deceive.

There are many examples of aggressive attempts to manage the message and in almost every case there are people in key positions who see themselves as the maker of information and disinformation. These people believed that they have justification to take any step necessary to protect the public image of the organization and/or promote organizational goals, ethical or not. Distraction, withholding information, and deception are the rungs of the ladder that sink an organization into deeper and deeper into the dark side of PR.

Withholding Information
Withholding Information and/or blocking information is a tactic of an organization using aggressive and unethical PR tactics. One of the best examples of this is the National Rifle Association (NRA.) The NRA seems to only care about public opinion when the polls tend to support its position, but that doesn’t stop them from trying to manipulating public opinion.

In 1996, the NRA worked with Arkansas Representative Jay Dickey (R) to cut $2.6 million from the budget of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and added the wording the appropriations bill that restricted the CDC from any research that would “advocate or promote gun control.” $2.6 million is what the CDC had spent in the prior year on gun-related research. The 104th Republican-controlled Congress passed it into law and it has restricted the CDC from gun-related research since 1996. (¹)

The NRA worked with Kansas Representative Todd Tiahrt (R) in 2003, to forbid the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) from collecting statistics on gun injuries and deaths. In 2011, the NRA worked with Representative Denny Rehberg (R) of Montana to prevent the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from funding any research that contradicted or challenged pro-NRA positions. (²)(³)

BP: What Leak?
Another example of withholding information occurred in the summer of 2010 when the BP leased oil rig, Deepwater Horizon caught fire and exploded in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP public image destroyed once video revealed the PR deception

In the days after the complete loss of the rig, BP PR tactics included denial of an oil leak at the wellhead, acknowledging a small amount of oil leakage, and finally admitting larger and larger amounts of leaking oil that still underestimated the amount of actual oil spilled. At one point BP withhold live video of the oil spill at the wellhead.

BP’s public position was that until anyone could prove otherwise, they could deny any significant oil spill. BP’s ‘prove it’ stance forced public media to accept BP’s estimates until overwhelming evidence piled up against the company. Once it did, BP’s public image was in tatters. No one believed anything CEO Tony Hayward or BP said.

‘Armstronging’ the Public
Technically the act of withholding information falls into the category of deception and distraction, although an organization that is consciously attempting to deceive or distract the public is flirting with possible criminal and/or civil charges. While some organizations (or even some people) might be under the belief that their unethical acts will never be discovered, some organizations may simply be trying to delay or soften a negative issue by forcing the public to learn the details over a period of days, weeks, months, or years. Yet, many times the PR tactics used by an organization is simply a lack of executive ethics rather than a conscious choice.

I cannot tell a lie…well, yes I can,…piece-o-cake actually

The most recent high-profile example this is the Lance Armstrong fiasco. The world now knows that Lance Armstrong used illegal performance enhancing drugs and techniques during his reign as Bicycling King, but through denial and aggressive legal means he managed to make most people believe he was innocent. Now he admits he lied, but it is far enough past his glory days that it may not have the impact it would have at the time he was active in the sport. Still, who wants to be Lance Armstrong now? No one.

The problem with managing the message is that Social Media has stolen power away from the PR people. An organization’s public image consists of the support and enthusiasm of an elusive mass of connected people, who can smell manipulation and love to expose unethical acts of people with more money than sense. On the other hand, Social Media readily responds to respect and honesty, which is not familiar territory to some older business men. As we move deeper into the Social Media Age, the business world will see a new PR model that listens more, talks less, is more humble and less arrogant, loves interaction and rejects domination.

Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t

05 Tuesday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Opinion, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

BP, Cool Hand Luke, Managing the message, Mitt Romney, PR, Public Image, Race for the Cure, Susan G. Komen, Tony Hayward

“What we got here….is a failure…..to communicate” Captain, the Prison Warden in Cool Hand Luke

Captain (Strother Martin) in 1967 film, Cool Hand Luke knew how to manage the message

If you are a business professor teaching students the importance of ‘managing the message,’ or a Public Relations (PR) firm telling your client how to ‘manage the message,’ would you please stop. No, I mean stop right now. In fact, contact everyone you have taught or advised and tell them you were wrong then refund their money.

CEO Tony Hayward got his ‘life back,’ but BP is still in PR clean up mode in the United States

‘Managing the message’ cost Mitt Romney the Presidential election. It severely damaged Netflix in 2011. It cost a BP CEO his job. It took the Susan G. Komen Foundation from being a major player in non-profit foundations to one that has to hide its name in shame.

Why?

First, ‘managing the message’ doesn’t work. Second, it’s a cowardly way to approach public relations. Third, it’s stupid advice. Fourth, it will end up causing major problems up to and including the end of an organization.

‘Managing the message’ assumes a person has control over the message. That would be a stupid assumption in a world driven by Social Media. John F. Kennedy’s words should be amended:

You can fool all of the people some of the time….until Social Media picks it up and then you’re screwed.

PR is no longer about creating an image. That was true back in the day individuals had no voice and people were subjected to mass advertising in every thing they watched, heard, and read. That was yesterday. Today an organization’s image is created by everyone who comes into contact with the organization. Customers, especially angry ones have as much of a voice in an organization’s public image as the Vice President of Marketing. Today PR is about listening and being honest and real in everything you say and do. That is something that can’t be faked or managed.

Reaction Avoidance
Managing the message is mostly about reaction avoidance. The idea is that if an organization handles it correctly, any negative situation will be minimized. The technique acts like a dam that has a short-term benefit, but a long-term disaster. When a PR crisis occurs the first instinct is to pretend there is no major problem. That is the start of a PR death spiral that only leads to bigger and bigger denials until the organization appears to be run by fools. By then executives turn and blame the PR staff for not ‘managing the message’ better.

TOMORROW: Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations. The two common techniques that characterize an organization who is trying to manage the message and why they fail.

MONDAY: The Dark Side of PR: Distraction and Deception Or ‘Armstronging’ the Public. When ethics are not a consideration, an organization is headed into a downward spiral that will almost always end with a public image that can be fatal.

The Petraeus Lesson: Use Your REAL Name

16 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Communication, Ethics, Generational, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Pride, Privacy, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

David Pertraeus, Email, private life, Public Image, public life

David Petraeus knows about public image, but he believed an alias online was not public

Men my age have been taught the we should have two personalities. There is the ‘professional’ persona that we wear in our public/business life, then there’s the ‘real’ personality that we only show when we are off the stage. That worked when there was a clear division between public and private life. For most of my life I knew that the person I knew at work was not the same as the person who was in the backyard with a beer in his hand.

A baseball cap and polo shirt don’t mask the person, why would an email alias?

The Internet changed all that, but somehow older men didn’t get the memo. When we found out we could create an email account like ‘secretagent007’, ‘mysteryman’, ‘mrinvisible’, etc., we really believed we could say anything we want, do anything we wanted without anyone knowing who we really were. I admit, it is a seductive concept that our professional/public persona could remain unknown online, but the fact is that anything we say or do online is recorded in history and will always be attached to us.

The Petraeus Lesson is simply this: USE YOUR REAL NAME EVERY TIME EVERYWHERE. Don’t allow yourself to be sucked in that YOU are smarter than every one of the 7,079,446,910 people on Earth. Never, ever, ever log on, create an email, or register for a social media site using a false name. If you have an email that doesn’t use your real name then get rid of it and get another one. This is 2012, and you need to know that what you say and do online is public. Period.

I know we older, white males were raised to believe in two personas, but it is a myth that we need to get over. It’s not a privacy issue, it’s a ‘am-I-smart-or-am-I-stupid’ issue.

Southwest Air Gets A Customer Service Win

17 Friday Aug 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Government Regulation, Information Technology, Internet, Public Relations, Respect, Social Media Relations, Travel, Website

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

airfares, Airlines, free market system, Public Image, Southwest Airlines, SWA

Failure is opportunity.

Success is determined by how you respond to failure.

Southwest Air ‘Shamu’ plane

On August 3, Southwest had a big problem. In celebration for reaching 3 million fans on Facebook, Southwest offered a one day ‘flash’ sale of 50% off certain flights for seven specific days this Fall. Unfortunately, their reservation computers decided to take that day off. Apparently the crush of ticket buyers caused their automatic reservation system to lock up. That was bad.

What was worse is that customers who kept hitting the ‘SUBMIT’ button ended up with a ticket purchase each time it was hit. Rumor has it that some people had as many as sixty tickets or more charged for the same flight. Ooooowwww!

I was one of those customers. I didn’t have the multiple ‘submit-hit’ issue, because my ‘SUBMIT’ button went away after I clicked it; however, I didn’t get a confirmation page, and when I checked my account the flight was not recorded. My mistake was repurchasing the ticket when I thought it wasn’t recorded. It was not until the next day that I received two confirmation emails from Southwest Airlines with different confirmation numbers for the same flight. I called 1-800-I-FLY-SWA immediately.

The person who answered patiently waited while I tried to explain the problem and then she explained what happened and apologized profusely. She explained what Southwest was doing to rectify the issue and canceled one of the tickets and refunded the money. She explained that Southwest would be responsible for any overdraft charges, which there weren’t.

At this point Southwest had met my expectations in resolving the issue. They, 1) admitted they made a mistake, 2) took quick action to resolve the basic issue, and 3) offered to resolve any secondary issues caused by the mistake.

Southwest then went one step farther. Three days later I received a $150 voucher towards a future ticket. This is not unheard of in the airline industry; however, it was not required. It reflected the depth of Southwest’s apology. That makes this incident a customer service win for Southwest Airlines.

A customer service failure is never good, but it is only a failure as long as the business fails to respond appropriately.

This situation may also be a good lesson for the airlines. I’ve been watching the airfare rates all summer and they have been outrageously high. The reason there was a rush of people after these ‘one-day-only’ rates is because the airlines have boxed out customers who can defer travel rather than pay inflated ticket prices. The airlines may be comfortable with cutting back seat inventory to keep prices high, but I’m irritated that they are playing games with the free market system to artificially keep the supply low in order to keep demand high.

It brings up the question of whether it’s time to reimpose government regulation on the airlines in order to restore fairness to the customer.

PR & SM Nightmare: Komen Foundation Race To A Self-Inflicted Kill

03 Friday Feb 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Communication, Ethics, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Politics, Public Relations, Religion, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Karen Handel, Nancy Brinker, Planned Parenthood, Public Image, Race for the Cure, Susan G. Komen

Founder & CEO Nancy Brinker leading a PR disaster

It is a public relations worst case scenario.

The decision-makers in an organization make a bad decision and then after it becomes public, the organization desperately seeks to ignore the obvious. Unfortunately, in a Social Media world, making a bad decision is tragic enough, but to try and deny the obvious is fatal. Such is the fate for the Susan G. Komen Race to the Cure foundation.

When a for-profit angers their customers they may see a downturn in sales, but often the customer often has some dependency on the product or service, so they may be willing to eventually forgive and forget.

Non-profit organizations are different. Non-profits depend on public goodwill and in the case of the Susan G. Komen foundation, they are heavily dependent on the active involvement of volunteers and donors of all political and religious views for their Race For the Cure® runs. While the Komen foundation’s purpose is noble, there are many organizations working on behalf of cancer victims and raising awareness of cancer issues. The Komen foundation has no lock on those people who have supported them in the past and continued goodwill is necessary for their continued survival.

A View To A Kill
The Komen foundation had been haunted by religious and conservative political groups once it was learned that grants by the foundation had gone to Planned Parenthood. These grants were specifically for women’s breast health issues, but the conservative groups kept pressure on the foundation to stop all funding of Planned Parenthood.

Karen Handel and Sarah Palin at campaign event

Enter Karen Handel, a rabid anti-choice advocate. Handel unsuccessfully ran for Governor of Georgia in 2010, on an anti-choice/defund Planned Parenthood platform. Her campaign was endorsed by Sarah Palin and Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. Handel narrowly lost in a primary run-off election. In April 2011, The Komen foundation hired Handel as Vice President in charge of public policy. The choice of Handel in this position was a clear message the Planned Parenthood funding would be in jeopardy and the first step in the PR nightmare to come.

In December 2011, the Komen Board of Directors created a procedural rule that would allow the organization to defund Planned Parenthood. The reaction within the organizations was immediate. According to an article by Jeffrey Goldberg in The Atlantic, Mollie Williams, the senior public health director quit in protest. At least two sources in Goldberg’s article indicate that the procedural rule was invented to allow the Komen foundation to cut funding to Planned Parenthood.

After the decision became public the reaction throughout Social Media was quick and massive. People began announcing their condemnation of the decision and that they would no longer support the Komen foundation and the Race For the Cure.

A Possible PR Save?
Once the scope of the reaction became obvious, the Komen foundation might have had a public relations opportunity to save the organization by voting to reverse their decision and immediately firing Karen Handel and any others responsible for putting the organization in a public image blood bath. That move would have instantly made them the target of conservative political and religious groups, but the organization had already experienced that pressure. A reversal would have helped to restore their public image and bought back some goodwill.

The one thing they could not do was spin the decision to try and make it look palatable to the non-Conservative public.

The Nail In The Coffin
Rather than facing up to the bad decision the Komen foundation, led by CEO and Founder Nancy G. Brinker, instead began aggressively spinning the decision and denying the conservative religious and political motivations. Choosing to stand by the decision has now compounded the PR disaster assuring a slow and dishonorable death for the Komen foundation. Blogs are discussing the organization’s budget and how much money is retained for administrative costs. Certainly they might gain some short-term financial support from well-financed Conservative donors; however, they will not be able to replace the legions of volunteers who made The Race to the Cure possible in communities throughout the country.

It is apparent that the Susan G. Komen foundation leadership has little understanding of the impact of Social Media on public relations. They have acted as if they were operating in 20th Century media environment where a bluff could be held through a news cycle and the voice of the organization could drown out the facts of a situation. Now Nancy G. Brinker has spent all her credibility and has become the face of the scandal. Unfortunately, there is no turning back now. The Race For the Cure has made themselves political by making this decision, and by trying to spin the story they have made a serious wound a fatal one.

UPDATE:

At approximately 8:30 AM PST on Friday, February 3, 2012, CNN said the Komen Foundation was reversing its decision and would fund Planned Parenthood.

Social Media ‘Evolution’ At Nation’s Investment Firms

26 Thursday May 2011

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Ethics, Government Regulation, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Blogging, compliance, FINRA, investment firms, New Business World, New York Life, Public Image, Regulatory Notice 10-06, Rule 10-06, SEC

USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype: 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Can your investment advisor write a blog about his or her job? Can they Tweet that they just read a great article on oil futures and add a hyperlink? Can they post that they had a big day in the market? Prior to January 2010, the answer was no…not unless they wanted to risk her or his job.

Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) rules didn’t specifically prohibit business-related Social Media participation, but SEC regulations on advertising and communications have been presumed to extend to online engagement and in a vacuum of good guidance, most major firms took the position of forbidding their representatives from participating in Social Media formats. This removed the fundamental aspect of Social Media that benefits commerce on the Internet, the one-on-one connection.

In January 2010, FINRA issued Regulatory Notice 10-06, which gave investment firms parameters for allowing their representatives to use Social Media within the bounds of SEC and FINRA regulations. The reaction was not instantaneous because firms had to solve the issue of how to supervise agent’s online communication. Protocols had to be established, software had to be adapted and installed, and training of agents had to be implemented; however, there has been a rapid Social Media ‘evolution’ in investment advising during the past 12 months.

For some firms, a deliberate, but ‘conservative approach’ to implementing Social Media engagement is being employed. One industry representative said, “…we had to help agents know what they can talk about and what they can’t talk about.” But she added, “…I’d rather be doing this now than wait three years and try to figure it out…Social Media exists and it’s not going away.”

For New York Life the direction was made very clear according to Ken Hittel, Vice President, Corporate Internet, who said, ” Our CEO, (Ted Mathas) made it very clear that agent participation (in Social Media) is a requirement.” New York Life uses a software program to meet SEC and FINRA regulations of supervising agent’s Internet interactions. Hittel said that the implementation of the program, “…went smoothly and was completed in a couple of months.”

The SEC regulations on advertising and adviser/investor communications are not new and apply to all methods of interactions, including those performed via the Internet. A FINRA podcast outlines five issues that apply to all forms of investment communications. All statements made by an agent must:

not be exaggerated or misleading and all material facts must be disclosed
clearly identified the firm and agent
not include or imply any forward-looking statements
provide the customer/investor a sound basis to evaluate the services or market
file any statements regarding mutual funds, variable products, and/or exchange traded funds within 10 days of being published

Each investment firm is expected to train their agents on how to comply with SEC and FINRA requirements. Hittel said that the New York Life agent training program is “..not just compliance.” He pointed out that Social Media creates 12,000 “Brand Ambassadors” for the company and they based their Social Media training on a “best practices” approach. Hittel said that there is a saying at New York Life, “…that you can do anything, not everything,” which is reflected in New York Life’s approach to Social Media engagement. The firm has established a progressive program for Social Media participation by their agents…within the scope of SEC and FINRA regulations.

Re-Imagining Rotary

16 Thursday Dec 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Club Leadership, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Rotary, Rotary@105, Tom Peters, Website

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Club Members, Public Image, Public Relations, Rotarians, Rotary, Rotary Club, Rotary District 5190, Rotary International, Tom Peters

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

In 2003, Tom Peters wrote Re-Imagine! Business Excellence in a Disruptive Age. In that book, Mr. Peters takes a visionary look at business and our culture that confronts the traditional…and remarkably stupid concepts of the modern working world. His words have foretold many of the new realities we see unfolding around us.

Recently I have had to face up to some hard realities about Rotary. Rotary is a great organization, but the organization is being held back by an old skin that needs to be shed. Rotary’s membership issues cannot be solved unless RI’s President Ray Klinginsmith’s suggestion of ‘keep what works and drop what doesn’t,’ is absorbed into the organization’s DNA. It’s time we Re-Imagined Rotary, so I will offer up my view of what I would change about Rotary to re-vitalize the organization from bottom to top.

Rotary International (RI)
Club Members should be RI members. Currently Clubs are members of RI, but the Rotarians in the clubs are not. I’m sure there is a rational legal reason for the wall of separation and I know the history, but there is a negative symbol created by the divide between Rotarians and the parent organization.

Council on Legislation (CoL) should be abolished and organizational changes taken directly to Clubs. Currently the Council on Legislation meets once every three years. In a world of rapid change and flattening of hierarchical structure, the CoL is a dinosaur. A significant problem with the CoL is that to be a representative you must be a Past District Governor, and while we have some very smart and forward-thinking Past District Governors, we also have some Past District Governors who see themselves as Cardinal’s in the Church of Traditional Thinking. Change needs to come from the Clubs and a handful of amendments could be presented to the clubs on a monthly basis for voting via the Internet. Discussions for and against the amendments could be made via linked blogs.

Decentralize most of RI. Face-to-face contact is valuable, but often an organization’s headquarters develops a ‘bunker mentality’ which does not serve in the best interest of the whole. VoIP phones, the Internet and webinars can bring people around the world together as well as people in cubicles, in fact, often the Internet tools do a better job in creating an environment of sharing ideas.

Every RI employee has to be a Club member. I don’t know if this is currently required or not, but my feeling is that the paid staff of RI can serve the organization of better if they see Rotary from the viewpoint of being a Club member.

Zone and District
Eliminate the PDG monopoly. Rotary has a wealth of knowledgeable people but all the significant discussions and decisions are made behind doors labeled, “Past District Governors ONLY.” It is not a system of decision-making that brings all the talent to the table. Some of my best friends are PDG’s and I have great admiration for what all of them have contributed to the organization; however, when tackling a problem such as years of declining membership, the people who have dedicated themselves to Rotary and have been rewarded with significant prestige of office, may not be the best people to address why others don’t ‘get’ Rotary.

All Zone and District Leaders must write blogs. Rotary is great in sending out emails and finding people to speak at meetings, but the organization is still in the dark ages when it comes to communicating. Emails just fill up the Inbox and get buried among all the other emails. The concept of ‘just-in-time’ information is not well understood in Rotary. Blogs put information that is Google searchable and readily available when someone needs it. Blogs can offer information, ask questions, or begin a discussion. Blogs allow each club to absorb the information at their own pace.

Zone and District Leaders are consultants, not Lords. This really isn’t a problem for most Zone and District Leaders because most of them approach their position as a consultant for the organization; however, we still have a few leaders who are insulted when some insolent Rotarian suggests a different concept or idea from their own. I have a list of them in our District, and I know I’m on their list.

District Conference and Assembly to be held on the same weekend. It is such a basic idea to increase participation, give respect to the member’s time, and improve the value of both functions that it shouldn’t be an issue, yet it is vehemently opposed by some Past District Governors.

Clubs
No Club to be chartered without a website. Today, no business or non-profit is taken seriously as a legitimate organization unless they have a website. Any club that wishes to be chartered should start with a website for the provisional club to answer questions, inform, and create methods of contact with the organizers of the club. Once a club is formed the website becomes the 24/7/365 presence for the club. It is so basic to survival it has to be mandatory.

Club member immersion in Social Media. Rotary has always been about creating connections between people and Social Media is the greatest tool ever invented to do exactly that. It is not about one Social Media savvy member creating a Facebook page, but about all members logging in and using the page. All committee meetings, announcements, social events, and projects should be posted on a Facebook page by the person in charge of that activity. The fear that many of our members have about Social Media is a telling indicator of how quickly Rotary is falling out of the real world.

Absolute adherence to the no religion and no politics policy established in the Constitution. Rotary is an organization of business professionals and that should be our public image. Unfortunately, some clubs have a public image of being a sub-organization of a certain religion or a certain political view. If people want to join a church or a political party they can and will, but Rotary is not a place for members to further their personal religious or political beliefs.

A greater focus on Vocational development. Rotary should be a place where smart business people get smarter. Incorporating business seminars into to Club meetings and District Conferences should be standard practice. Rotarians can and should be experts in the latest technology, management and business practices. Some clubs do this, many do not.

Clubs must have a significant focus on the inclusion of family members. Our organization tends to ignore business professionals with children because we have so many members without children. Many Club social activities don’t involve ‘kid and/or teen-friendly’ activities. The status quo is a great way to keep Rotary’s membership in decline.

Club members must be interconnected with other Area clubs. In any community all Rotary clubs should offer a united and coordinated front. I think Rotary is getting better about creating connections between clubs, but this connection should go deeper than just the Club Presidents. Every club member should recognize that they are part of a larger force in their community that includes all Rotary clubs. Good natured competition is great, but petty rivalries between local clubs should be dealt with immediately by District and Area Leadership.

Do or Die Time
I am absolutely convinced that Rotary driving towards a cliff. We either have to make a major change in direction or we will go off the cliff. We are being eaten alive by a monster that is consuming our will to change. We either confront the monster or we die.

Rotary played a major role in my life for the last 9 1/2 years and I have come to appreciate the beauty that arose out of a simple concept of business professionals joining forces for good. I have a profound respect for what Paul Harris created with this simple concept but I fear that he would be very anxious about the fact that Rotary has failed to attract young professionals in most clubs. For Paul Harris and the good of all Rotarians, Rotary must change. It is time to Re-Imagine Rotary and shed the old skin that encumbers the organization.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Sandoval/Reid campaign money not a stimulus for Nevada

24 Wednesday Nov 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Communication, Consulting, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Management Practices, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Relations, Traditional Media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Democrats, Governor, Management Practices, Nevada, New Business World, Newspapers, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Republican, Republicans, Rory Reid, Sandoval

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Article first published as
Sandoval/Reid Campaign Money Not a Stimulus for Nevada
on Technorati

We endured relentless political ads on television and radio, but Nevada didn’t hit the jackpot in campaign dollars flowing into the State from the Governor’s race. Despite the fact that almost $3.8 million dollars was spent by the Sandoval for Governor Campaign in the months leading up to the election, 80% of the money was payable to recipients outside the State. Rory Reid’s campaign also spent a significant portion of its money to out-of-state firms with MSR Media Strategies, LLC in Fairfax, Virginia netting almost $2.8 million from the Reid campaign.

Sandoval Campaign Expenses
(Spreadsheet listing all campaign expenses through October 21, 2010)

In a detailed review of Governor-Elect Sandoval’s campaign reports, 63% ($2.4 million) of campaign expenses were made payable to Strategic Media Services, inc. in Washington, D.C. for advertising. While some may argue that money spent for advertising comes back to the State in the form of purchased television and radio air time and newspaper ads, one Nevada media consultant pointed out that most media outlets in Nevada are owned by out-of-state media corporations, so political ads that ran on many local stations were payable to non-Nevada interests. The one exception is the Intermountain West Communications Company that owns several television stations including in the western United States including KSNV-Las Vegas, KRNV-Reno, and KENV-Elko.

David Neal, President of Strategic Media Services, inc. (Sandoval’s leading campaign expenditure) and Kyle Osterhout, Partner of MSR Media Strategies, LLC (Rory Reid’s leading campaign expenditure) were not immediately available; however, two media experts with campaign related experience said that the standard fee for media agencies is 15% of the advertising purchase. In some cases a campaign may negotiate rebates from the media agency based on volume of business; however services such as the production of the ad are typically not included in the 15% fee.

The Las Vegas area did benefit from 19% (over $720,000) of the campaign funds with over $400,000 paid to political and media consultants. Almost half a million dollars went to the three Las Vegas firms of October, Inc., Autumn Productions, and Autumn EMedia. The latter two are subsidiaries of November, Inc.

The Reno, Lake Tahoe, and Carson Valley garnered only 1 percent (less than $30,000) from the Governor-Elect’s campaign and rural Nevada received less than $10,000.

NEXT: Where the money came from in Sandoval’s campaign

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Nevada Best Kept Secret: #1 in Crime

05 Friday Nov 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, History, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Relations, Rotary, Taxes, Traditional Media, Travel, Violence in the Workplace, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

auto theft, Blogging, Blogs, crime rate, crime statistics, Employment, Executive Management, HR, Management Practices, Nevada, New Business World, Newspapers, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, rapes, robbery, Rotary

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Article first published as
Nevada #1 Crime Rate Not Acknowledged
on Technorati

On a late October morning a Wal-Mart employee was ‘disgruntled’ and he decides it’s time to take action. He smuggles a gun into the store and buys ammunition for it in the Sporting Goods department. He then goes to the restroom where he hides in the handicapped stall mulling his decision. He makes a final commitment to confront his bosses and leaves the restroom, straight toward the manager’s office. Once there he confronts the manager, the one he likes, and, at gunpoint, orders him to call two other managers to the office. When they arrive they find an angry man with a gun. At some point the three managers make a run for it and all three are shot. All three live, but their lives will never be the same.

Last week’s shooting of three managers in a Wal-Mart in Reno (Nevada, USA) should not be surprising in a State that has the worst crime rate in the United States. Nevada has been ranked as the Most Dangerous State for the last four years (2006-09) by Morgan Quitno’s (morganquitno.com) annual crime rate report.

Nevada’s Crime Story

Nevada ranks #1 in women being killed by men (1)
Nevada ranks #1 in stolen cars per capita (2)
Nevada ranks #1 in robbery per capita (2)
Nevada ranks in the top 10 for assaults per capita for the last 4 years (3)
Nevada ranks in the top 10 for forcible rape per capita for the last 4 years (3)

What is a surprise is the deafening silence about the State’s notorious ranking by local media. The top 50 hits of a Google search of ‘Nevada High Crime Rate News Media’ offer no mention of the issue among the State’s primary television and print media resources. It also was not an issue discussed in most of the major political contests this year despite the fact that Nevada’s #1 status in unemployment, foreclosures, and bankruptcies were all fodder for candidate mud-slinging.

It should be noted that Nevada’s crime rankings are not an artifact of the 2007-09 Recession. The State has been a leader in crime independent of the economic environment. It is unknown if Nevada’s out of control crime issues are effecting tourism because for over half a decade the State has experienced a steady decline in gaming revenues because of increased competition due to Indian gaming in California and other States. Any impact of Nevada’s high crime reputation would be masked by the larger trend; however, as there seems to be little awareness of the State’s crime issues, it is unlikely that it has had an impact…yet.

Nevada’s gaming industry would likely suffer more revenue losses if the crime woes were widely publicized and lower gaming revenues would have a trickle down effect on newspaper and television advertising revenue but, there is no evidence that the local media intentionally avoids the subject to risk offending their advertisers. Gaming also plays a significant role in Nevada politics but, there is no evidence that politicians avoid discussing the issue for fear of offending potential major contributors to their campaigns.

However, the lack of discussion seems to only be feeding the problem. If any effort is being made to turn around Nevada’s position as the Most Dangerous State it is being done without fanfare ….and without success.

NOTES:
(1) – Statistic for 2008 (from crimeinamerica.net)
(2) – Statistic for 2009 – #2 in 2005-08 (from disastercenter.com)
(3) – Statistic for 2006-09 (from disastercenter.com)

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

The Vultures Start Circling on Election Day

03 Wednesday Nov 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Relations, Respect, Rotary, Traditional Media, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Let Freedom Ring, Newspapers, Public Image, Republicans, Tea Party, USA Today

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Article first published as
Vote Brings Out the Vultures
on Technorati

Tuesday’s vote put the Republican Party back in charge of the House and significantly reduced the Democratic majority in the Senate. The polls prior to Tuesday had already signaled that the Democrats would face near historic losses and that news brought out the vultures (hawks is too nice a metaphor). A full-page ad in USA Today by Let Freedom Ring used the opportunity of a Democratic blood-bath to promote their fear-mongering agenda.

The unknown author(s) titled the ad with: “When will President Obama Accept Reality?” They use the recent incident of two printer bombs (not to be mistaken with any products sold by Hewlett-Packard) addressed to synagogues in Chicago to argue that we “..clearly remain under attack.”

The ad proclaims that they:

…will seek out candidates that a not afraid to praise and defend America. We will elect those who are not afraid to put a strong America first.

Who is the terrorist?

Clearly the fact that we did not respond with a nuclear bomb in Yemen last weekend has offended these people. I say these people because they seem to wish to remain unknown. Not only do they avoid listing any names in the advertisement, their website is absent of any responsible party. As typical with this type of propaganda, the people behind this effort don’t stand behind the statements. The anonymous statements have the same value to our country as gang graffiti on a dumpster.

However, this ad is a big win… for those who are responsible for shipping the printer bombs from Yemen last week. A handful of criminals who wanted to make a name for themselves could not hope for a better result from two failed bombs that never came close to a target. They got a full-page ad in USA Today and they didn’t have to pay a penny for it. They are now the toast of every other criminal out there who wishes people would pay attention to them.

Who is the real terrorist? The nameless person who made the bomb, or the nameless people who try to take an incident and use it to promote fear for their political agenda?

I know who has my vote.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

HR/Security Hot Topic: Should you watch your employee’s personal Internet activities? (Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc.)

28 Thursday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Consulting, Crisis Management, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government Regulation, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Pride, Privacy, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Recreation, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Violence in the Workplace, Website

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

background checks, Blogging, Blogs, case law, Employee evaluations, Employee privacy, Employer liability, Employment, Employment Law, employment verification, Executive Management, Facebook, HR, Human Resources, Internet, lawsuit, LinkedIn, Management Practices, monitoring employees, New Business World, performance reviews, Privacy, Privacy on the Internet, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Rotary, security, Social Media, Social Networking

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

One of the hottest topics in the world of employment is whether or not an employer should monitor his or her Internet activities. This is a subject I’ve written about before, but it is an issue that is still emerging and has yet to have any significant case-law to provide guidance to employers.

It is well-known that a large number of employers perform a ‘Google’ search on the Internet before they hire an applicant, but now companies are feeling the need to continue to monitor an employee’s Internet activities after hire. Many experts, especially those involved in employee liability prevention support an employer’s right to monitor an employee’s Internet activities even when those activities occur off-duty and offsite. The logic is that it is prudent to aware of anything an employee might say or do that could embarrass the employer, or any indication that the employee might take an action that might involve the company and its facilities.

These are rational arguments, but I believe that monitoring an employee’s activities is opening the door to bigger liability issues. Sound odd? Here’s the scenario I see happening in three Acts.

Should the Employer be Big Brother?

Act One: A busy-body employer or manager casually checks his or her employee’s Facebook, MySpace, and/or Twitter accounts. The employer might even do a Google search on an employee from time to time. When the employer or manager finds something that they see as objectionable they confront the guilty employee and take the proper action. It becomes known throughout the company (and the employee’s family) that the employer monitors its employee’s personal Internet activity.

Act Two: An employee has been reprimanded for content they have posted on the Internet. Six months later the same employee posts information on the Internet that he is considering suicide and describes in detail how he is going to kill himself. Two weeks later the employee carries out the suicide as described. The family is aware the employer monitors the employee’s Internet activity and sues the employer claiming that the employer should have reasonably been aware of the planned suicide and taken action.

Act Three: Companies find themselves with two polar opposite choices. Either the company does not monitor their employee’s Internet activities or the company assigns resources to constantly monitor the Internet on every employee to insure they capture any relevant data for which the company should take action.

I was trained in Human Resources under the policy that what the employee did on her or his own time was off-limits to the employer unless it had a direct impact the job performance. That policy has had to be adjusted in a world where work and off-duty time can often be hard to differentiate, and where drug testing, researching credit scores and background checks have become standard operating procedure for many companies. However, an employee’s personal Internet activities is almost impossible to track in a society that is increasing involved in hours of daily online social networking. The question is whether an employer wants to be liable for monitoring its employees 24/7/365 and being held responsible for taking the appropriate action, or whether the employer would be better served by not being sucked into liability issues that can be avoided by simply not playing the role of Big Brother ?

I know which strategy I would recommend to my clients.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Rotary@105: 7 Relationship types that affect membership retention (Part II)

27 Wednesday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Club Leadership, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Passionate People, Pride, Public Relations, Relationships, Rotary, Rotary@105, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Alien, Blank, Blogging, Blogs, Club Members, Common Interests, Competitor, Customer Loyalty, Equality, Executive Management, Facebook, Friend, Internet, LinkedIn, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Mentor, New Business World, Partner, Public Image, Public Relations, Rival, Rotarians, Rotary, Rotary Club, Seven Benchmark Relationships, Social Media, Social Networking, Star, Stranger, Submissive, Subordinate, The Star, Trust, Twitter, Value-added

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

NOTE: This article is a secondary article to
Relationships Typing: 3 factors that the affect quality and depth of friendship

As mentioned in the first part of this article, I have defined three factors that seem to determine the quality of my relationships. 1) Trust, 2) Common Interests and/or Experiences, 3) Equality.

By using a 21-point scale to rate each factor in various relationship types we can see how Trust (or the lack of), Common Interests and/or Experiences (or the lack of), and Equality (or the lack of) define the relationship. Below are seven types of benchmark relationships and how they might affect membership retention in a Rotary club.

Too much friendship?

The Star
We all have people who we look up to, but there are just a few people that we put on a pedestal. I see the Star relationship as one where the trust level is relatively high (+7 on a scale of -10 to +10) as well as the common interest level (+8 on a scale of -10 to +10), but we feel inferior (a -9 on a scale of -10 to +10) to this person. In this relationship the depth and quality of the relationship is usually shallow. These people are not close friends, but rather an admired acquaintance. A new member in a Rotary club might see the Club President as the Star.

The Mentor
The Mentor is a different version of the Star. The difference is that we trust the Mentor implicitly (+10) and we have a strong common interest (+9); however, we see ourselves as inferior (-6) to our Mentor. The Mentor has achieved a level of success that we hope reach and our relationship is based on a mutual effort to gain an equal level of success in the future. I think it is a mistake to believe that a Mentor relationship can be imposed. The only successful Mentor relationships I have observed are those that have occurred by a mutual agreement of both parties. In over nine years in Rotary have witnessed few successful Mentor relationships. When it does happen it is a win-win situation for both members, but the Mentor must be highly skilled and/or knowledgeable, a passionate person, and a great trainer. In addition, the ‘trainee’ must recognize the Mentor’s superior knowledge and have a desire to learn from him or her. If not, the relationship will fail.

A Partnership is not necessarily a friendship

The Partner
I see the Partner as a relationship seeking mutual benefit for both people, but without the level of trust of a Mentor relationship. In a Partner relationship the trust is conditional (0, not + or -) and the two people usually see the other as his or her equal (0) or at least they have something of value that balances the relationship, but the common interest is high (+9). I would consider the Partner relationship to be a symbiotic or co-dependent relationship and while the relationship may seem to be a strong bond, the slightest feeling of inequality or betrayal can end the relationship. In Part I of this series I mentioned that the employer/employee relationship might be a partnership, but I also believe that some marriages can start out, or devolve into Partner type relationships. In a Rotary club a member who has established mostly Partner relationships with other members is likely to have no deep attachment to the club and likely to leave.

The Friend
Of all relationships, I think a Friend is the hardest to achieve. A quality friendship involves a high level of trust (+9) and a significant level of common interests and/or experiences (+6), but also a genuine feeling of equality (0) must exist. The trust and equality factors for a friendship are difficult for most people to offer to another person. It is a special relationship and one to be highly valued, but once achieved it is a strong bond that lasts over time and distance. If every member were to have only one other true ‘Friend’ in his or her club most members would never consider leaving.

The Rival or Competitor
A rival is a relationship, even though we usually don’t think of it as one. It is a relationship based on mistrust (-8) of another person and somewhat ironically, a relationship that includes a high level of common interests (+8). I think that while we may feel we are superior to our rival that the truth is that we are afraid that we are not, thus I give an equality rating of (+3) to a Rival relationship. The Rival relationship is one of the worst possible relationships that could develop in a Rotary club. Sooner or later the club is going to be drawn into the conflict or one or more members will leave because of it. Ironically, it is the high level of common interest that seems to set up the Rival/Competitor situation. Without the envy or jealousy caused by the common interest both people would probably ignore each other.

Common Interest can enhance a relationship, or create conflict

The Subordinate or Submissive
Note that with the Subordinate relationship I am talking about someone who sees another person as their subordinate or submissive. This can be an employer/employee type relationship, but it is any relationship where a person sees him/herself as superior (+10) to another person. The trust level is relatively high (+5) as the person with the bigger ego expects the subordinate to obey their wishes and typically there is somewhat of a common interest (+3), but not necessarily a significant level of commonality. The big problem I have seen with this type of relationship is that the target of this attitude may not feel that they should be the subordinate. In a Rotary club it is surprising easy for a club leader to see other club members as their subordinate. Nothing creates a false sense of power like a title and in a volunteer organization titles are meant to assign responsibility, not authority, but not everyone understands that concept.

The Alien or Blank
It seems somewhat pointless to talk about the lack of a relationship as a type of relationship, but the I find it interesting to understand that some people just don’t show up on our relationship radar even though we may see them on a regular basis. I didn’t fully understand this until I was in Rotary, but after a few years in a club you learn the some people can disappear in plain sight. I feel the lack of a relationship, when there realistically should be is a type of relationship and I refer to it as an Alien or Blank relationship.

The quality of Friendship
I would not argue the point that it takes two to make or break a relationship; however, I would argue that the quality and depth of any relationship is determined largely by our own attitudes, in concert with the way the other person treats us. Understanding the factors that influence a relationship is the first step to making positive changes. In a Rotary club, failing to recognize that not all relationships are constructive can have major consequences on membership retention.

In Part I of this series I talked about a facilitator at a meeting who didn’t want to dilute his ‘friendships’ with people in the Social Media. My response to him is this: friendship is more about what we bring to the table and not the method of connection. The Social Media is not a threat to good friendships, just a different way to engage in them.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Relationship Typing: 3 factors that affect quality and depth of friendship (Part I)

27 Wednesday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Club Leadership, Communication, Employee Retention, Ethics, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Passionate People, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Club Members, Depth of Relationships, Employee evaluations, Employment, Executive Management, Facebook, Friendship, Internet, LinkedIn, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Quality of Relationships, Relationship Typing, Rotarians, Rotary, Social Media, Social Networking, Twitter

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Several weeks ago I was at a Rotary District Leadership training meeting and I made a comment that the Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter allow us to have more friends and more connections to other people. I was shocked into silence when one of the facilitators said that he didn’t want that. He explained that his friends were those very close, very special people that he choose to be friends with, and that he didn’t want to dilute his social circle with people from the Social Media.

It was an interesting point and it caused me to start thinking about the quality and depth of the relationships of the people around me. In several decades of business, procurement of two bachelor’s degrees, and almost a decade in Rotary I have learned that not everyone is my ‘friend’ even though I may have frequent contact with them. All of us have people who are important to us and we all have people who we just don’t like, but until now I hadn’t focused on the factors that seem to define my relationships.

Understanding what shapes my attitude is a significant step towards taking an active role in building better and less conflictive relationships with the people around me. For this reason I wanted to explore what determines what type of relationship we have with another person.

I have come up with three factors that seem to determine the quality of my relationships. 1) Trust, 2) Common Interests and/or Experiences, 3) Equality.

Trust, Common Interest, and Equality

The trust factor seems obvious, but I find this to be a complex issue. Trust can be absolute, non-existent, or conditional. For example, I would propose that many employer/employee relationships are based on a conditional trust where both parties are on the constant guard of the other person betraying his or her trust.

The common interest and/or experiences factor may also seem obvious; however, sometimes common interests or experiences can create feelings of jealousy, envy, rivalry, or disgust. Just because two people have a lot in common doesn’t result in a bond of appreciation.

The final factor is not as obvious. My experience is that the level of equality felt by a person is a significant factor in determining the quality and depth of a relationship. In an organization of volunteers like a Rotary club we often mistakenly believe that everyone is equal, but my experience has been that the relationships that form in a typical Rotary club are often shaped, at least in part, by one person’s feeling of superiority over another.

Using these three factors I have been able to better define the quality and depth of my relationships. Because each of these factors have a positive and negative component, I use an 21-point scale (-10, -9, -8, … -1, 0, +1, … +8, +9, +10) to score their significance. For example a Relationship Type might be low in trust (-7), high in common interest (+8), and neutral in equality (0). While all relationships reflect a continuum of these factors I have defined seven benchmark relationship types and have scored each factor on the 21-point scale.

In part two of this article I will define the seven relationship types and their scoring. I also will discuss how the relationship type might impact membership retention in a Rotary club.

Click on the link below for the continuing article
Rotary@105: Relationship types affect membership retention

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

I’m not angry, nor am I stupid…and I voted

25 Monday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Internet, Lessons of Life, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Relations, Random, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Taxes, US History, Women

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Christine O'Donnell, Democrats, Election, Election 2010, Elections, Meg Whitman, Mike Steele, Nevada, New Business World, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Republicans, Sharron Angle, Social Media, Tea Party, Vote, Voting, Wackos

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

I have seen the ads for the Democratic candidates that make the claim that their opponents are ‘extremists’. I disagree with this assessment of some of the Republican/Tea Party candidates. They are not extremists, they are just stupid.

When the Nevada Republican candidate for Senate, Sharron Angle, suggest’s that ‘some people’ are angry enough to “invoke their Second Amendment Rights”, in an attempt to scare people into voting for her, that’s just stupid.
When California Republican candidate for Governor, Meg Whitman, is blaming illegal immigrants for all the problems in her State, but then it’s revealed that she employed an undocumented worker, that’s just stupid.

Angle: Manning up in stupid
When Delaware Republican candidate for Senate, Christine O’Donnell, uses campaign contributions to pay for her personal household expenses that’s just stupid.
When Sharron Angle says her opponent should ‘man up’ as if she is some tough cowboy out on the range, it sounds silly, and it’s just stupid.
When Meg Whitman, a multi-millionaire and former CEO, is called a ‘whore’ by an unknown person in her opponent’s party and milks it as if she is some poor, defenseless, innocent Southern Bell, whose honor has been violated, that’s just stupid.

O'Donnell: God's Chosen messenger to the US Senate

When Christine O’Donnell, who ‘dabbled’ in witchcraft says that she ‘prays God will open people’s eyes’ so they will vote for her that’s just stupid.

When the Michael Steele, Chairman of the Republican party, expenses his trip to a West Hollywood strip club to party funds, that’s just stupid.

Michael Steele: RNC Chairman

When Republican party candidates blame the economy on our government, instead of the unethical business men who traded our country’s future for profit for themselves and their investors, that’s just stupid.

Today I voted, and I didn’t vote for stupid. I voted for Harry Reid who serves as a statesman for Nevada and for our country and who will be the best possible representative Nevada could hope for in the difficult times ahead.

I voted for Rory Reid because I believe that Nevada must change direction from the low/no tax strategy (no income, corporate, capital gains, inventory taxes) that we have had for decades and now we are the 1st in unemployment, crime, and foreclosures, and among the worst in education.

I also voted YES on all four State Amendments and two local Advisory Questions.

I voted to have the Governor appoint Supreme and District court judges because I don’t like it when judges campaign. The electorate rarely pays attention to judicial offices and I would rather they be vetted in a formal process, not paraded in public like beauty candidates.

I voted YES to have an intermediate court established. In a conversation with a Supreme Court Justice it became apparent that Nevada’s Justice system has a major bottleneck of cases that could be cleared out if we had a system similar to other States.

I voted YES to allow the Legislature to resolve minor conflicts of our tax code with Federal law.

I voted YES to repeal/revise the knee-jerk eminent domain law. It has problems and it needs to be fixed.

I voted YES to ‘beg’ the State to seek the consent of local governments before raiding their revenues.

I voted YES to encourage the consolidation of the Reno/Washoe governments. I wish Sparks was included. We have three government entities in this valley and it is a ridiculous duplication of services.

This year we will learn whether stupid wins the day or not. John F. Kennedy put it the best: ‘you can fool some of the people all the time and you can fool all the people some of the time’. If stupid wins this year, the fools will be running the village. Heaven help us.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Starbucks is Re-Imagining the business…again

22 Friday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Passionate People, Print Media, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Tom Peters, Traditional Media, Travel, Website, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

alcoholic drinks, Bars, Beer, Blogging, Blogs, Coffee, Customer Loyalty, Digital Starbucks, Executive Management, Free Internet, Free WiFi, Internet, Management Practices, Nevada, New Business World, New York Times, Newspapers, NYT, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Selling, Social Media, Social Networking, Starbucks, tea, The Wall Street Journal, Tom Peters, USA Today, Value-added, wine, WSJ

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

This week Starbucks continued to add value to its stores and more Re-Imagining seems to be in the forecast. A few months ago Starbucks did the smart move of offering free WiFi for everyone (see article below) and on Wednesday they took it one step farther with a Digital Starbucks that features free web content if you sign on to their WiFi service while you’re in the store.

(Free WiFi at Starbucks)

Now when you use the free WiFi service in any Starbucks you can also read a digital version of the day’s Wall Street Journal, New York Times, or the USA Today. The New York Times requires software download of a reader, but the USA Today loads up its own reader and retains the exact look of the paper copy. The site also includes Yahoo! news and GOOD content.

In addition to news, the Digital Starbucks offers access to a selection of entertainment, wellness, business/career, and local online resources. There is also a page to access most of the functions found on the Starbucks website. It seems apparent that Starbucks has teamed with AT&T, the WSJ, NYT, USA Today, and several others to offer this value-added service. Recently all Starbucks stores received new labeled newspaper stands with the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, and USA Today in the top three shelves with the local paper given the bottom shelf. In my October tour of stores in Houston, Boston, Denver, and Reno I have seen more papers sold out than I have ever seen at a Starbucks store. Obviously the collaboration is a win-win.

A screen shot of the DG Wellness page

While some information has been sent out regarding the new online features most people have not caught on to the major remake of the log-in page and the new free media resources. That will change over time and I expect Starbucks will see a positive increase in store traffic as customers become aware of what they can access for free at their local store. I have already noticed high occupancy of the key ‘power’ tables (tables next to a power outlet) in almost every store I’ve visited since the free WiFi service started on July 1st.

Starbucks After Hours
The value-added virtual Starbucks is small change compared to what may be coming to some Starbucks locations. As reported in this Monday’s USA Today, the company has been testing wine and beer service at a Seattle location. The three-month remodel of a standard store resulted in a cafe-type look and feel, moving away from the glorified fast food feel of most coffee houses. The move is designed to generate more late day revenue when coffee sales die down. There is little doubt that local bars may find a Starbucks too much to compete with as it creates a middle ground for those like getting out in the evening, but seek a relaxed atmosphere free of loud music and single men on the hunt.

While I remained concerned that Starbucks is allowing accountants have too much say in store operations, I have to congratulate them on bringing value-added service and innovative ideas into the forefront. The winner is the customer … the only person that matters.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Point of Confusion

21 Thursday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Lessons of Life, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Relations, Random, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

14th Amendment, Blogging, Blogs, Illegal Aliens, LoCOS, Public Image, Republicans, Republicas, Tea Party, undocumented citizens, US Constitution

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Yesterday the USA Today ran an article (by Alia Beard Rau of the Arizona Republic) which reported that Republicans in 15 States were working to change the 14th Amendment to deny U.S. citizenship to children born in the United States if their parents (or parent) could not document their citizenship. That’s correct. If a child is born in the United States of America and the parent is an undocumented citizen the child is without a country.

Now, if that parent wanted to have an abortion these same Christian-loving, God-fearing Republicans would be the first to forbid the medical procedure to ‘protect’ the rights of the unborn child. Apparently they care for the child before it is born, but after it’s born it’s okay to flush the child’s rights as a citizen.

Babies: The great threat to America!

Wow! The lynch mob stupidity just has no end.

The LoCOS (Lack of Critical Observation Skills) seem to have a severe case of ‘Morals of Convenience”. Whatever suits their policy of targeting groups of other racial, religious, or ideological backgrounds is okay in their version of Christianity. It must be a powerful feeling to make up morals as needed. It worked for the Nazis.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Dear Teresa Laraba, SVP of Southwest Airlines Customer Service

20 Wednesday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Passionate People, Pride, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Travel

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Boarding Groups, Cattle Boarding, Customer Loyalty, Executive Management, Internet, Management Practices, New Business World, Open Seating, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Senior Vice President, Southwest, Southwest Airlines, SWA, Teresa Laraba, Value-added

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Teresa Laraba
Senior Vice President Customer Services
Southwest Airlines

Dear Teresa:

Last Friday I felt betrayed by Southwest Airlines and while the outcome of the event was not horrible, the stress it caused me has profoundly effected the trust I place in your airline. I also felt that some of your key people failed in their duty toward customer service.

I have been on 28 Southwest flights since the beginning of August and the one that was the longest was last Friday’s flight from Boston to Reno. I was on the flight for almost eight hours. I knew it was going to be a long flight, but I always pay for Early Bird boarding so that I can get a window seat and settle in. I have relied on this service to make the ‘open seating’ policy less of an ordeal, especially on long, full flights where the last to board are the Big Losers who have to sit in the middle seat.

The Boarding Pass of Shame

The day started out stressful as a major storm hit the northeast and I had to drive through heavy rain, in the dark to get to the airport. After getting to the airport, gassing up the car, and turning it in, I took a sigh of relief as I went to get my boarding pass. I had early boarding, which was critical on a flight that would be five minutes short of 8 hours on the same plane. I finally found the TSA line and as I stood there I looked to see where I would be in the ‘A’ Boarding Group. I was shocked to see that I was in the ‘B’ Boarding Group, and that I was at the end of the ‘B’ Group.

I got through the security line and went to the Gate Counter. I asked the gate agent at the counter, (who seemed like she was in a bad mood at 6:30 AM in the morning,) if this was a mistake. She said that there was a ‘computer glitch’* and that all Early Boarding passengers lost their Early Boarding status. She told me I would be refunded $10.

(DEFINITION: Computer Glitch – One of our computer programmers applied a change to the system that screwed everything up, and while it was human caused, we’re going to make it sound like a mechanical problem, so we don’t have to take responsibility for the error and actually do something to make it right.)

Southwest Airlines doesn’t seem to understand that when you fail to do what you promise, giving back the money you took in exchange for that promise is not making it right. Giving money back for a service not performed is what you are legally obligated to do, it’s not doing me a favor. It is essentially saying, “We’re not going to try to screw you out of your money for our failure to do our job.”…thanks a lot.

So I was going to sit in the middle seat for an eight-hour flight because Southwest screwed up and that was your ‘best’ customer service response. I complained further and the gate agent reluctantly said she would let me board at the end of the ‘A’ group. That was a good half measure at a solution, but I still don’t know why she didn’t offer it when she first admitted the error.

I was still frustrated so I called your Customer Service line. I was met with the same cold, uncaring, “..we’ve had a computer glitch and you’ll be refunded your $10.” When I told her that I was going to be stuck on the same plane for eight hours she acted like she didn’t believe me. I then helped her with the math and explained the three time zones we would be crossing, to which she said, “Oh, yes, that is eight hours.” In her defense she did suggest that I could talk to the gate agent, but I had already done that with little results.

I’ve flown SWA a lot recently, and I’ve come to trust the Early Bird boarding system. I used to try to pull my boarding pass at 24 hours before boarding in order to get a decent seat with limited success. The Early Bird boarding option has made all the hours in a loud aluminum tube where I have no rights, no say, and no real food, … bearable. BUT, on the longest flight of 29 (tomorrow is #29), the system failed me…big time. What I’ve learned from this not only is the Early Bird boarding system unreliable, that when there is a problem, Southwest does not, 1) recognize the significance, or attempts to minimize the problem, and 2) offers no reasonable solution unless you really complain.

I do have three positive experiences to report that kept this flight from being a disaster. First, I was able to get a window seat and that kept me from going over the edge. Second, another SWA employee, (Mark, I think) who actually loaded the passengers on the plane, recognized that the loss of the Early Bird boarding passes was a major problem. He made it clear that anyone with Early Bird boarding would be allowed on the plane at the end of the ‘A’ Group. He admitted that it was a big problem and he apologized several times for it.

That was it! Admitting it was a major problem, apologizing for it, and then attempting to make it right was the key to showing that someone cared. The gate agent and the phone ‘customer service’ showed a lack sympathy or concern. Your ‘customer service’ staff has become too good at minimizing the problem and being ‘professional’ by not caring.

The third positive came from the flight deck. We boarded the plane to sit there for an hour so someone (a professional mechanic) could come and tape up an exit sign that was hanging down. However, the pilot (possibly the co-pilot) came out and personally explained, multiple times what was going on and during the flight he came out and walked the plane explaining where we were in the flight. He cared enough to show his face and give us the news, bad and good.

I don’t understand why your customer service staff is so uncaring, leaving the rest of the employees at SWA to pick up their slack? I will likely continue to fly SWA because we really don’t have a choice anymore, but I will go back to pulling my boarding passes 24 hours in advance, even with my Early Bird boarding fee, just because I can’t trust your system to do what it supposed to do, and because when it fails, your CS staff could care less.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

What I’m Not Buying This Year

13 Wednesday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Relations, Random, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Taxes, The Tipping Point, US History

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Christine O'Donnell, Conservatives, Crime, Depression, Ethics, Executive Management, Good Government, Hispanic, Illegal Aliens, Illegal Immigrants, LoCOS, Management Practices, Mexican Nationals, Mexico, Nevada, New Business World, Political Parties, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Re-Imagine!, Recession, Republicans, Rotary, Sharron Angle, Tea Party, Unemployment, Unethical Business Practices

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

Tis the season and there are a lot of political candidates out there selling their version of what is wrong with this country/state/county/city and how they are going to fix what ails us. This year is different from most because it seems that a lynch mob has taken over a prominent role in politics and like most lynch mobs they don’t need facts, they just need someone to be angry at and someone to blame.

It would be easy to label the people behind this political lynch mob as ‘stupid’, but that is probably overly harsh. These people are driven by emotions, not a lack of intelligence, so stupid is not the correct term. I prefer to describe the lynch mob as people who have a Lack Of Critical Observation Skills (LoCOS for short.) This year the LoCOS are trying to sell a lot of garbage and I’m not buying it. For example:

Nevada: The best at doing it wrong

LoCOS: Lower taxes will improve the economy
To the LoCOS who are selling the load I have one word. Nevada. Nevada has no Income tax. Nevada has no Capital Gains tax. Nevada has no Corporate tax. Nevada has no Inventory tax. Even conservative business groups rate Nevada as one of the most ‘business-friendly’ states. Nevada is to business what the Bunny Ranch was to male ego.

According the LoCOS argument, Nevada should be awash in new business. Nevada’s economy should be booming. Nevada should be the poster child of the low tax concept.

The fact is that the State exposes the Lo Tax/Mo Biz as a myth. Nevada is Number ONE in unemployment (2nd place Florida is over a full point better than the Silver State.) Nevada is Number ONE in crime. Nevada is Number ONE in housing foreclosures. Nevada is consistently among the lowest in unbiased education rankings. Nevada is proof that lower taxes does not make for a better economy.

(Article: Nevada’s State of Disaster)

LoCOS: Business is better at running our government
Let’s remember that it wasn’t government that put us in a recession but business…BAD business. Government was an enabler, in that it stopped regulating and monitoring the unbridled greed of the incestuous investor-run business world, but at the end of the day it was business people who made all the decisions. The corporate executives chose to ignore the obvious result that would happen from their greed and dove head on into unethical practices that doomed our economy.

Greed is inherent in business. Greed is why business exists. There is no ‘care for fellow citizen’ in the business world. Business is based on competition, winners and losers, and often the losers are not the weakest, but rather loser’s are the one’s with morals. Business only keeps to a moral compass when there is an unbiased arbiter oversees its activities. That is the role of government.

This year we are seeing the perversion of investor-run business with clearer eyes. The Chamber of Commerce has abandoned their mission of promoting good business in the community in favor of attacking local governments and promoting only those candidates that will remove the protections for honest business and our citizens. It is ironic that anyone would suggest that business, with its greed-driven motives and proven track record of unethical practices, should replace good government.

Don’t get me wrong, a strong economy needs good, healthy businesses, but good, healthy businesses need a strong government to create and monitor the rules for which guide and protect all. The leap of logic of the LoCOS, that our government should be run as a business, is as absurd as saying that FIFA needs fewer referees on the soccer field.

LoCOS: The trillion-dollar debt is bad
The LoCOS must have Alzheimer’s.

I’m not in favor of a large deficit, especially when it involves sending US dollars to finance the destruction of another country …. but I’m really not in favor of is a Depression. That is what we faced in early 2009. Business had raped our economy through outrageous, unregulated practices and we were on the brink of an abyss that had no bottom. Again, business, not government caused our economy to fail. Initially, our country let big banks suffer the consequences of what they had done, but it quickly became apparent that what was about to happen was the massive collapse of the entire economic system, which would have forced the United States government to take over the day-to-day operations of almost all of our major financial institutions.

Cheney's Folly: The start of our debt problems

The alternative to a nuclear meltdown of our economy was to lend money to those institutions, help initiate controlled purchases of ailing banks, and invest government money in key assistance programs. Was it a bailout? Yes, but it was investing, not buying, which meant we would get the money back in almost every case.

The government also invested money in the mismanaged auto industry that, if not preserved, would have sent us into Depression-era unemployment overnight. Yes, it increased our nation’s debt. A debt that had gone from surplus in President Clinton’s years, to a deficit under George Bush. It would have been better if we had not spent so much money on Cheney’s overseas folly and already been in the hole when the house of cards of bad business fell, but there was no choice. The decisions made in late 2008 and early 2009 were necessary and save our country from disaster.

Have we recovered? No. But the LoCOS rage over a big deficit is being driven and financed by the major corporations that would prefer the citizen forget what really happened. I wish business hadn’t forced us to use trillions of taxpayer’s dollar to remedy their greed, but we had no choice.

LoCOS: Government is bad
Government is really, really good providing it is run by reasonable people who truly care for the citizens … all the citizens. There is one difference between civilization and anarchy and that is government. Every time I hear the LoCOS point out an example of bad government I can think of a hundred ways that government has made our country great. I mentioned to a person that the airlines need to be regulated again and they pointed out how, under government regulation, an airline was forced to maintain a route to a small city that was not profitable. Yes, that is tough, but what about the scores of lucrative routes that government regulation handed that same airline on a silver platter? I’m really weary of the single exceptions to how great government has been in making this the strongest country in the history of the world. Single exceptions do not make an argument for destroying our country.

Government is the foundation of our society and the only people who don’t benefit from a strong government are the greedy and unethical. When we were in school we would have rather had no teachers telling us what to do, but that wouldn’t have made our education better. It’s time we stopped making the argument of a 5th grader…and time we started respecting what a blessing it is to have a government that keeps our society from devolving into anarchy.

The Face of the LoCO People

LoCOS: Electing stupid people is smart
This one mystifies me. A candidate from any other party would be laughed out of politics for saying or doing something stupid and yet candidates for the LoCOS wear their stupidity like a new hat. LoCOS candidates are avoiding the media, saying one thing, then changing their story. They scream about illegal aliens and how they are destroying our country, then it’s revealed they were employing them. They dress in Nazi uniforms. They steal other people’s work and claim it as their own. They take campaign money and pay their personal bills with it. They have to explain to people why they are not a witch. They threaten violence on people, yell about almost anything, deceive, and often outright lie…and the LoCOS cheer on.

I know that the quality of candidates of the LoCOS is a reflection of the lack of respect they have for our country and government, but isn’t prima facie evidence that the LoCOS can’t really be trying to improve our country when they are represented by the worst of the worst?

LoCO S: Illegal aliens (=Hispanics) are destroying this country
First, let’s remember that a major portion of the United States (California, Nevada, Utah, southwestern Wyoming, western Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas belonged to Mexico until the mid-1800’s. We took the land from them at gunpoint and paid fifty cents on the dollar for the land. I could make a strong argument that Mexican nationals are not really the illegal aliens in Alta California, Nuevo Mexico, and Tejas, but I will let that dog rest.

(Article: America’s Hostile Takeover of Mexico)

Regardless of the history of Mexico and the United States, the fact is that a typical tactic of a lynch mob is to find a symbol (person or group) that has little or no opportunity to defend themselves and present them as evil. This is a tactic used by the KKK, the Nazis, and every ultra-right wing, nationalistic, racist group. It doesn’t matter of whether the targeted group is guilty of anything, just that they, or no one else, is able or willing to stand up and challenge the accusations. Mexican immigrants are the perfect target for a group like the LoCOS.

The facts are that:

Most Mexican undocumented immigrants lead quiet, peaceful, law-abiding lives in the United States (a fact that the LoCOS lie about)
Mexican undocumented immigrants are working jobs that no American citizen wants to do
That the United States is the primary enabler of the drug wars in Mexico (we buy the product and sell them the arms)
Mexican undocumented immigrants can’t file for Income Tax refunds (which most would get if they were citizens) so the United States collects and keeps all the money deducted from their pay.

But according to the LoCOS, they are pure evil and responsible for our all our economic and societal ills. In Arizona, a sheriff’s deputy called that he was under attack by Mexican drug smugglers and was shot. He became the hero of the LoCOS.

Deputy Puroll's wound

Despite a massive effort, no drug smugglers were found. Now it turns out that the wound was from a bullet fired at close range (not from 25 yards as he claimed) and likely self-inflicted. Almost no one questioned the story of the deputy at the time, despite the inconsistencies in his account. Why should they, blame it on the Mexicans. Naturally, the story has to be true!

To me, the whole issue of ‘illegal aliens’ is a tornado in search of a trailer park. The damning terminology, the use of single examples, and falsified facts all indicate that the LoCOS need to create a threat and it the Muslims are too far away to pick on so the target is Mexican nationals.

The New Testament of the Bible has clear instructions on how a Christian is behave. Jesus said to love thy neighbor as thyself. The Apostle Paul says, “…as touching brotherly love ye need not that I write unto you: for ye yourselves are taught of God to love one another..” (1 Thessalonians 4:9). The LoCOS often boast of their devotion to Christ and then desecrate his teachings by their un-Christian attitude towards those of Hispanic descent.

I’m not buying it.

LoCOS: Threatening our government and the electorate with armed rebellion
Several members of the LoCOS, including LoCOS candidates have indicated that ‘some people’ may be mad enough at our government to invoke ‘their Second Amendment Rights’. I don’t care how you say it, to suggest that some people are going to take up arms against their fellow citizens (if the LoCOS don’t get their way) is wrong. In this country we vote, and we don’t take up arms to enforce the LoCOS will on the majority. Anyone who suggests this is a threat to our Constitution and to this country. Mad or not, there is a line that cannot be crossed over.

I know that everything I said here will not make any difference to the LoCOS. In fact, they will be outraged that I spoke out against their unbridled illogical arguments. You can’t reason with a lynch mob. But sometime in the future we will all look back on this and say, “What were the LoCOS thinking?” The problem is that they are not.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Your Privacy Rights on the Internet: Read before you write.

11 Monday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Passionate People, Pride, Privacy, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Blogging, Blogs, Facebook, Internet, LinkedIn, New Business World, Privacy on the Internet, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Rotary, Social Media, Social Networking, Twitter, Your Rights

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

I have had several discussions with people who have a fear of the Internet and Social Media tools. The common issue that arises is regarding privacy, which to me is an interesting concern. Being concerned that you’re giving up your privacy if you use the Internet is, to me, a Homer Simpson moment.

I’m not sure where anyone got the idea that writing something and sending it out over a public system of servers, visible to almost anyone, and recorded for all time would be private, but for those of you who have that impression, let me read you your rights:

Your Right to Privacy on the Internet

You have a right to stay silent.
You have a right to not participate in Internet/online activities.
You have a right to consult an attorney before you participate in any Internet/online activities.
You have the right to stay in your house, block up the windows and never go out into public.
If you choose to participate in any Internet/online activities, anything you say can and will:
- be considered a reflection of your public image
- be available for anyone in the world to access
- be recorded for the remainder history of the civilized world
- be used against you now, or in the future
If you choose to NOT participate that will NOT prevent:
- People from talking about you on the Internet
- People using your image for almost any purpose

The Internet, and Social Media tools like Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and LinkedIn allow people to communicate in a way we’ve never been able to communicate before. It is not intended for private discussions, but it is an open forum. That makes some people uncomfortable, and while I understand that, I also have to wonder why people have a need to say something they are not willing to say publicly?

There is still a time and place for a personal, one-to-one conversation to discuss matters between the two people, but isn’t that better to be done in person? Privacy is not what one should expect when using the Internet, but it is the place for ideas and concepts to be discussed in an open environment that values the input of all. Yes, sometimes the stupid people have louder voices and win the day, but at some point people will look back and learn who was behaving stupidly and who was really correct.

Here are four things I try to keep in mind when participating in online activities:

Sometimes I’m going to say something stupid. I’m human and I will have to buck up and take responsibility for it.
Sometimes people are going to ridicule what I have to say. That doesn’t mean they are correct and it may be a reflection of their poor judgement, not mine.
By participating I will learn more than I could if I did not participate. Sometimes the lesson will be difficult, but that will usually mean I will learn more.
Social Media is not the alpha and omega of life, but it is one of the most powerful communication tools ever conceived.

Now you have been read your rights… you can take it from here.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

Social Media 3Q 2010 Update: Who Uses Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, & MySpace:

08 Friday Oct 2010

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Consulting, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Passionate People, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Tom Peters, Traditional Media

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Age, Blogging, Blogs, Demographics, Facebook, Gender, Internet, LinkedIn, New Business World, Newspapers, Public Image, Public Relations, Publicity, Re-Imagine!, Rotary, Rotary Club, Rotary International, Social Media, Social Networking, Tom Peters, TweetDeck, Twitter, USA Today

by Paul Kiser
USA PDT [Twitter: ] [Facebook] [LinkedIn] [Skype:kiserrotary or 775.624.5679]

Paul Kiser

The third quarter 2010 demographics of Social Media users according to Google’s Adplanner services has a few surprises. Facebook actually dropped from 550 to 540 million users in the third quarter, and Facebook users over age 54 dropped from 16% to 10% in the last six months. Based on the data from the 2nd and 3rd quarters there is a significant slowing in the growth of the major Social Media tools.

Among the numbers are the interesting age group distributions of each of the networking sites. The data gives important clues of what each site is being used for in addition to who is using it.

Facebook’s Fire Cools
No one can dispute Facebook’s impact on the world. It is BIG, and with millions of posts and interactions each day, the influence of its users is the envy of every marketing professional. Traditional media professional and other old people will be tempted to look at the 3rd quarter data and declare that the Social Media ‘fad’ is over and on the decline. That would be a statement of ignorance.

Facebook 3rdQ 2010 DAILY visits

Facebook’s growth could not continue indefinitely and its amazing growth in users from 2008 to the start of 2010 was being fueled by a viral exploration of a new media that allowed people to connect in a way they never had before. Now that exploration has calmed and I believe we are seeing the coming of age of Social Media.

The drop of 10 million users during the third quarter is only significant in that it shows a leveling off of the growth. The average time on the site is over 23 minutes, which is much longer than the other three major U.S. Social Media tools (MySpace 14:40 mins., Twitter 13:10 mins., LinkedIn 9:50 mins.) That is important as more time spent means more interaction and more influence by users and advertisers.

Facebook reaches almost 57% of the people in the United States (35% worldwide) which is a staggering statistic. If USA Today could reach 57% of Americans (without giving the newspaper away to every hotel guest) and know that the readers were spending over 23 minutes looking at their paper they would probably be the only newspaper in the United States… and mega rich. As of March 2010, USA Today has a circulation of only 1.8 million compared to Facebook’s over 65 million visitors (based on cookies.)

3rdQ Facebook Users by Age

1stQ Facebook Users by Age

One statistic that keeps bouncing around in the Social Media world is that “women over 55 is the fastest growing group of Facebook users.” That it is old data. While the over 55 group had climbed to 16% at the end of March 2010, it is now the fastest shrinking age group and Facebook users under 18 years old have been the fastest growing group during the last six months.

Finally, 57% of the Facebook users are women, which is about the same as six months ago. That seems to confirm that Facebook is about ‘social’ networking and making personal connections. Facebook continues to be the place where buying decisions are influenced through small group interactions. Business and Marketing people will find that if they try to manipulate these discussions it will eventually backfire on them. Facebook is where business should LISTEN, not talk.

Twitter 3rdQ 2010 DAILY visits

Twitter Continues to Pause
The biggest surprise in the 3rd Quarter with Twitter was that it did not break the 100 million user mark. At the end of the 2nd Quarter it was at 96 million users, which was up by 16 million from the 1st Quarter. However, Twitter only grew by 2 million and now stands at 98 million users.

Twitter’s daily visits have leveled off for the last six months, and some might see this as an ominous sign for the hyper-fast post Social Media tool; however, this is deceiving as many Twitter users, (like myself,) don’t go to the Twitter site to use the tool, but rather use an application, like TweetDeck, to interact on the site. Thus the visit count would not be recorded as a site visit.

Twitter’s lack of significant growth in the number of users may be do to a continued lack of understanding of the value of the Tweet world and a period of constant ‘Fail Whales’ in the 2nd Quarter and early 3rd Quarter. The service has seemed to address the major problems in system overloads, but lately has had a return of a few service interruptions in the past few weeks. Obviously, if Twitter continues to have problems it won’t be able to survive in an environment where reliability is oxygen to users.

As for the lack of understanding of the value of Twitter, the service will struggle to grow until people can learn that the impact of Twitter is not in the posts, but the conversations and the URL links to other blogs and webpages. Twitter is like Headline News for new ideas and concepts. Often posts reveal a new approach or cutting-edge information that won’t be in the traditional public arena for months. That is why I still see Twitter growing if they can rid themselves of service interruptions.

3rdQ 2010 Twitter users by Age

1stQ 2010 Twitter users by Age

One interesting development in the latest data is the shift in the age demographics. Twitter seems to have made a shift to younger adults. The 18-34 age group is up by 16%, while the 35-64 age group is down by 9% from six months ago. Also, teenagers (under 18) have dropped by 6% since the 1st quarter and now make up only 4% of all Twitter users. The apparent dislike for Twitter among teenagers is a clear age defining characteristic. I have had two separate teenagers say to me “You’re not on Twitter, are you!?”

Apparently Twitter gives you cooties. Who knew?

MySpace Back From the Brink?
I have predicted the end of MySpace for sometime, but in the 3rd quarter it did something bizarre … it gained users. It had dropped 14 million users from the 1st to the 2nd quarter and then it gained one million users back in the 3rd quarter. MySpace now stands at 67 million users. Not earth-shaking, but certainly noteworthy. LinkedIn would sacrifice several interns to have that many users. MySpace also has more women. Female users consist of 64% of the MySpace population.

MySpace 3rdQ 2010 DAILY visits

The reason? Well, no other major Social Media tool lets you search by gender … and age … and height … and race … and body type … and sexual orientation … are you getting the picture? MySpace is a social dating site as much as anything else and lonely people make up a lot of our world’s population. So maybe MySpace has found its niche as a romance network and that will stop the freefall of the past two quarters.

3Q 2010 MySpace users by Age

3rdQ 2010 MySpace users by Age

Yes, there are more teenagers on this site than most (14%), but 63% of the users are between 18 and 44 years old. One caveat. MySpace has limited the ‘find-a-friend’ search function to give the results of people age 18 and over. That is a smart move to protect minors; however, some teenagers have simply listed themselves as an age of 18 or older to circumvent the limitation. I caught a few teenagers that list themselves as 19, but on their main page description they indicate their real age. This is likely why the number of ‘under 18’ users have dropped from 34% to 14% in six months.

LinkedIn Drifting in Niche
The 3rd quarter statistics show that despite millions of people looking work, the business person to business person website of LinkedIn is not growing. It is at 41 million, which is actually higher than the end of 2nd quarter, but the same as the end of the 1st quarter.

LinkedIn 3rdQ DAILY visits

Like MySpace, LinkedIn has found its niche. Essentially, LinkedIn is a business-oriented website that provides a job exchange service. Most users are using the networking website as their digital résumé in order to attract job offers. In the Tom Peters ‘Re-Imagine’ business world where branding is a key element of survival, LinkedIn is Mecca for self-promotion.

Unfortunately, LinkedIn is not as successful as Facebook and Twitter in two-way interaction. Both of those Social Media tools do not have as much as of an ‘agenda’ by individual users as LinkedIn. Users of the business-oriented network seem to spend more time professing what they know and don’t spend as much time listening to others. This is the traditional media model of one-way communication, which is the style of communication that Social Media has displaced. For some, the self-promotion run amuck style of some LinkedIn users is a turn off that may hurt the site in the long run.

3Q 2010 LinkedIn user by Age

1stQ 2010 LinkedIn users by Age

It will be interesting to see how LinkedIn will fare as the business-caused Recession of 2007-09 eases and people are employed again. LinkedIn could be a key to a sudden labor shortage in 2012 as those companies with the best opportunities will be able to target and recruit candidates through LinkedIn, leaving other employers to either compete or settle for what’s left over.

Age and gender on LinkedIn reinforce the business-world orientation as more males (57%) are users and the distribution of the age groups reflects the working world. Interestingly, while LinkedIn still has more users over 54 years old (15%), this is 7% drop from the 1st quarter. That is offset by an 8% jump of the 24-34 year old users in the last six months.

4th Quarter Predictions?
I believe we are seeing a refinement of each of the big four Social Media tools. Facebook has become the social sharing network, Twitter is the thought-provoking, learning network, MySpace is the social relationship network, and LinkedIn the branding and résumé network. The demographics are settling in to reinforce the existing nature of each of the networks. Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn will likely end 2010 about where they are now unless something viral either cause a rush of new users, or sends people running away. Twitter still has potential significant growth, but I don’t see that happening in the 4th quarter.

The volatility of the Social Media networks have made it difficult to understand what they will eventually represent in our world; however, now that there seems to be a calming of the major networks, the value and purpose is becoming clearer. That will allow the big four to lock in their market; however, it will also open the door for other networks to identify areas of opportunities and weakness. My prediction is that 2011 will be the entrenchment of the Social Media, followed by more competition by other networks seeking to improve or offer alternatives to the established services.

More Articles

Business: Public Relations, Management, and Social Media Related

Rotary Related

Science Related

Personal Experience Related

Our Country and History Related

3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

Tag Archives: Public Image

SpaceX Ran Out of Block 5 Boosters

The Barn Was Empty, SpaceX Ran Out of Block 5 Boosters

The Starship Stack Diversion

SpaceX Block Five Returns To Work?

2021 4th Quarter – What To Expect

September

October

November

December

5 Reasons SpaceX Must Sell Starlink

5 Reasons SpaceX Should Sell Starlink

1. Cashflow

2. Weak Market Base

3. Liability

4. Risk of Failure

5. Cost of Maintenance

But SpaceX is Rolling In Money!

What about the rumored IPO?

SpaceX Public Relations: Secrecy is Modus Operandi

SpaceX Public Relations: Code of Secrecy

Falcon Heavy Problems?

Why Should the Public Know?

Educational Landmines: Questioning the Pedagogy of Your Child’s School

Education 2020 – Part I: Criticizing Pedagogy

Dangers of Discussing Pedagogy

Who Are the Experts For Pedagogy?

Who Speaks For the Children?

The Education 2020

Re-Imagining Rotary

Sandoval/Reid campaign money not a stimulus for Nevada

Nevada Best Kept Secret: #1 in Crime

The Vultures Start Circling on Election Day

Point of Confusion

Dear Teresa Laraba, SVP of Southwest Airlines Customer Service

What I’m Not Buying This Year