The average age for a boy's peak love/interest in cars is what? Probably 3 or 4?
Now, I'm not saying there's not beauty in the sport. I fully confess that I simply don't get it.
But what might that stat imply about the average intelligence of NASCAR fans?
October 28, 2010
You Can Get Old Without Growing Up
Certain old people scare me. The ones who have given up. I think it happens over time. But, eventually, these people stop thinking they have the capacity to do something great.
I like my naivete. It keeps learning intentional. It makes me want to understand everything, because I feel a personal responsibility to change the world and believe that particular knowledge may be necessary for me to do it.
Human potential is insane. If you don't do something awesome with your life, you are wasting amazing potential.
So, press on. And as we get older, we can either become like Mr. Rogers, taking children on tours of a box factory one week, and a gumball packager the next. Understanding how things work. The mechanics behind things. The people. Getting smarter.
Or we can become like Andy Rooney. Hate everything invented after you were 12. Complain about the world. Get stupider every year. And die angry.
You don't automatically get smarter just by being alive. You have to want it.
0 comments
I like my naivete. It keeps learning intentional. It makes me want to understand everything, because I feel a personal responsibility to change the world and believe that particular knowledge may be necessary for me to do it.
Human potential is insane. If you don't do something awesome with your life, you are wasting amazing potential.
So, press on. And as we get older, we can either become like Mr. Rogers, taking children on tours of a box factory one week, and a gumball packager the next. Understanding how things work. The mechanics behind things. The people. Getting smarter.
Or we can become like Andy Rooney. Hate everything invented after you were 12. Complain about the world. Get stupider every year. And die angry.
You don't automatically get smarter just by being alive. You have to want it.
October 26, 2010
Langston Hughes – Dream Deferred
What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over---
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?
0 comments
Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over---
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?
October 25, 2010
Winning isn’t Everything
If Sarah Palin has taught us anything, it is that, "Winning is irrelevant to your relevance."
Back in the 60s and beyond, political losers were still the party front runners next time up. But, that's all changed. Gore lost to Bush, and he was politically done. Kerry lost to Bush, and he was politically done. Forever. No second chances.
Yet, Palin, if anything, has become a bigger leader in the Republican party since her loss. Why is that? Is it because since McCain's name was ahead of hers on the ticket, that "she" didn't really lose?
Or are the rules changing?
0 comments
Back in the 60s and beyond, political losers were still the party front runners next time up. But, that's all changed. Gore lost to Bush, and he was politically done. Kerry lost to Bush, and he was politically done. Forever. No second chances.
Yet, Palin, if anything, has become a bigger leader in the Republican party since her loss. Why is that? Is it because since McCain's name was ahead of hers on the ticket, that "she" didn't really lose?
Or are the rules changing?
October 22, 2010
American Education: The Best and the Boredest
Last night, I met a young German student named Cornelius who was visiting his cousin, my friend Jake for the past month.
Fresh out of school and about to start his first real-world job, Cornelius tried explaining the German school system to me. Here's the gist, keeping in mind that I may have lost some things in translation.
In Germany, after 4th grade, children are separated by perceived potential and placed in different types of schools based on predicted outcome. The students with lower academic records go to trade school. The more successful students go to higher levels of education.
Now, they're not eternally stuck at the age of 10. Germany understands that they can guess wrong. And students who do well at trade school can move up. But, it still sounds really weird and creepy, doesn't it?
We used to do the same thing. In the 60s, when Kennedy said, "We're going to the moon." here's what we did. We tried to find geniuses. We plucked our perceived best and brightest out of high school and sent them to specialized schools. Gave them great teachers, so they could go help NASA. And we got to the moon.
"But why doesn't my kid get the best teachers? That's why they're not as smart!" the populace cried out. It didn't seem fair, and it wasn't.
So, today, the perceived best and brightest might get plucked out for an hour a day to learn slightly more advanced math. And for the rest of the day, they're stuck with the other kids their age, bored out of their minds, based on a weird assumption that like-ages equate to like-talents.
So, here's my question. Is our educational system designed to help geniuses create the future, or to help the average kid follow instructions?
0 comments
Fresh out of school and about to start his first real-world job, Cornelius tried explaining the German school system to me. Here's the gist, keeping in mind that I may have lost some things in translation.
In Germany, after 4th grade, children are separated by perceived potential and placed in different types of schools based on predicted outcome. The students with lower academic records go to trade school. The more successful students go to higher levels of education.
Now, they're not eternally stuck at the age of 10. Germany understands that they can guess wrong. And students who do well at trade school can move up. But, it still sounds really weird and creepy, doesn't it?
We used to do the same thing. In the 60s, when Kennedy said, "We're going to the moon." here's what we did. We tried to find geniuses. We plucked our perceived best and brightest out of high school and sent them to specialized schools. Gave them great teachers, so they could go help NASA. And we got to the moon.
"But why doesn't my kid get the best teachers? That's why they're not as smart!" the populace cried out. It didn't seem fair, and it wasn't.
So, today, the perceived best and brightest might get plucked out for an hour a day to learn slightly more advanced math. And for the rest of the day, they're stuck with the other kids their age, bored out of their minds, based on a weird assumption that like-ages equate to like-talents.
So, here's my question. Is our educational system designed to help geniuses create the future, or to help the average kid follow instructions?
October 21, 2010
How Safe is Safe Enough?
We hit on this briefly last week, but I wanted to develop a single conversation around it. U.S. "defense" spending equals roughly 25% of our federal budget. We spend more on "defense" than every other country in the world combined.
So the question is, How safe is safe enough?
At what point will a politician be able to say "We need to start seriously scaling back our global operations." without their opponent yelling, "Obviously somebody doesn't understand that there are currently terrorists working around the clock plotting our children's deaths!" received by giant applause at the town hall meeting.
In all reality, how can this conversation change? I'm sure the first candidate will have to maintain that R&D + intelligence system integration keeps us safer than our ever-expanding global military outposts, and that he could actually increase that spending while severely decreasing our actually costs of production, maintenance and manpower.
But, how do we even get to that point without being laughed out of the room? Because those bombs and parts and men get made in every city of this nation. And they have a vested interest in growing our system, not saving it.
0 comments
So the question is, How safe is safe enough?
At what point will a politician be able to say "We need to start seriously scaling back our global operations." without their opponent yelling, "Obviously somebody doesn't understand that there are currently terrorists working around the clock plotting our children's deaths!" received by giant applause at the town hall meeting.
In all reality, how can this conversation change? I'm sure the first candidate will have to maintain that R&D + intelligence system integration keeps us safer than our ever-expanding global military outposts, and that he could actually increase that spending while severely decreasing our actually costs of production, maintenance and manpower.
But, how do we even get to that point without being laughed out of the room? Because those bombs and parts and men get made in every city of this nation. And they have a vested interest in growing our system, not saving it.
October 20, 2010
Why Negative Political Ads? Because They Work.
These quotes are paraphrased to prevent voter confusion.
Jack Conway on Rand Paul - Kentucky Senate Race
"30 years ago, my opponent was reportedly involved in a hazing ritual in which he tried coercing others into worshiping a make-believe deity called Aqua Buddha."
Chris Coons on Christine O'Donnell - Delaware Senate Race
"20 years ago, my opponent dated someone who was involved in witchcraft."
Here's a local one for you Illinois' folk.
Pat Quinn on Bill Brady - Illinois Governor Race
"My opponent wants to take dogs destined to be put down via euthanasia and put them down en masse, rather than wasting the state money to euthanize them all individually."
These accusations all became television commercials. In fact, I am trying to recall a single campaign commercial I have seen during this election season that spent more than 10% of its air time touting their own beliefs, and not denouncing their opponents as morally bent, and unworthy of the honor of public service.
Why do they do this? Because it works.
We are obviously that stupid. We like the idea of "good" people being in charge of us, and when all we are fed is the candidate's dirty laundry, we pick the person with the smaller stain.
It works. There are really smart campaign managers getting paid a lot of money to win elections. It's not marketing. It's the opposite of branding in fact. It's denouncing. It's short-term bullying. And it works. What if you were to say you refuse to vote for a candidate who puts out a single negative campaign advertisement regarding their opponent? Because that's where I'm at. And I'm not sure if I'd ever be able to vote again.
0 comments
Jack Conway on Rand Paul - Kentucky Senate Race
"30 years ago, my opponent was reportedly involved in a hazing ritual in which he tried coercing others into worshiping a make-believe deity called Aqua Buddha."
Chris Coons on Christine O'Donnell - Delaware Senate Race
"20 years ago, my opponent dated someone who was involved in witchcraft."
Here's a local one for you Illinois' folk.
Pat Quinn on Bill Brady - Illinois Governor Race
"My opponent wants to take dogs destined to be put down via euthanasia and put them down en masse, rather than wasting the state money to euthanize them all individually."
These accusations all became television commercials. In fact, I am trying to recall a single campaign commercial I have seen during this election season that spent more than 10% of its air time touting their own beliefs, and not denouncing their opponents as morally bent, and unworthy of the honor of public service.
Why do they do this? Because it works.
We are obviously that stupid. We like the idea of "good" people being in charge of us, and when all we are fed is the candidate's dirty laundry, we pick the person with the smaller stain.
It works. There are really smart campaign managers getting paid a lot of money to win elections. It's not marketing. It's the opposite of branding in fact. It's denouncing. It's short-term bullying. And it works. What if you were to say you refuse to vote for a candidate who puts out a single negative campaign advertisement regarding their opponent? Because that's where I'm at. And I'm not sure if I'd ever be able to vote again.
October 19, 2010
A Print Ad That Doesn’t Suck
I can't remember the last time a print ad in a magazine stopped me in my tracks.
Until yesterday. Right after the ad with the SUV carving through the forest (seriously, I am SO sick of car ads that tell me nothing new, driving in scenarios I would never attempt), this ad from Effen Vodka graphically startled me.
Yes, there are layers of innuendo in the ad, but I contend that's not the reason it grabbed my attention. The photography is jarring. The detail is beautiful. The monochromatic coloring is lovely. Her hat is awesome! It made me stop flipping through the pages. And that's exactly what an ad is supposed to do. Create a positive interruption. I had never heard of Effen Vodka. Now I have. And I have a positive brand association with it.
Check out the rest of the terrific ad series put together by Euro RSCG, and for those of you in the business, try to figure out how to bring this design strategy to your brand.
0 comments
Until yesterday. Right after the ad with the SUV carving through the forest (seriously, I am SO sick of car ads that tell me nothing new, driving in scenarios I would never attempt), this ad from Effen Vodka graphically startled me.
Yes, there are layers of innuendo in the ad, but I contend that's not the reason it grabbed my attention. The photography is jarring. The detail is beautiful. The monochromatic coloring is lovely. Her hat is awesome! It made me stop flipping through the pages. And that's exactly what an ad is supposed to do. Create a positive interruption. I had never heard of Effen Vodka. Now I have. And I have a positive brand association with it.
Check out the rest of the terrific ad series put together by Euro RSCG, and for those of you in the business, try to figure out how to bring this design strategy to your brand.
October 18, 2010
The Difference Between Jesus and Sesame Street
In this Bill O'Reilly interview with Richard Dawkins, O'Reilly gives the following reasoning for his faith in Jesus Christ.
"My thesis is that if everybody followed the teachings of Jesus Christ that we'd have peace on earth. Love your brother. Everybody love one another. And we'd be almost an idyllic situation."
That is NOT a good reason for belief. If everybody followed the teachings of Mr. Rogers, we'd have a pretty idyllic situation, too. Sesame Street. Buddha. Joseph Smith. Gandhi.
If we perfectly followed the morality of nearly any philosophy, the world would be a much better place. But Jesus wasn't simply claiming moral authority. He claimed to be restoration. The answer to every "Why...?" question about God and his universe. The answer to every "Why...?" question about relationship with God and each other.
Bert and Ernie don't offer that.
October 15, 2010
The Responsibility of the Offended
Last month, at Rutgers College, Tyler Clementi tragically ended his life after being outed by his roommate en masse. Dharun Ravi, Clementi's roommate, had been using his computer's Web cam to monitor and transmit live video of his roommate's romantic activity to all of his friends.
Upon learning about this egregious invasion of privacy, Clementi jumped off the George Washington bridge.
This is a horribly sad tragedy that you undoubtedly have read much about. But, I wanted to bring up a new question. That the anger we feel toward's Clementi's roommate is not in direct response to his action's, but rather, the consequences.
If Clementi simply got mad, we would have rightfully called Ravi a horrible jerk. With these results, we call Ravi a murderer. For which do you penalize?
0 comments
Upon learning about this egregious invasion of privacy, Clementi jumped off the George Washington bridge.
This is a horribly sad tragedy that you undoubtedly have read much about. But, I wanted to bring up a new question. That the anger we feel toward's Clementi's roommate is not in direct response to his action's, but rather, the consequences.
If Clementi simply got mad, we would have rightfully called Ravi a horrible jerk. With these results, we call Ravi a murderer. For which do you penalize?