Category Archives: Current Affairs

Federal Charges For Fake Organic Corn

It’s interesting and reassuring to see that apparently somebody follows up on fake organic claims, according to a story in my local paper, the Eugene Register Guard.

Register Guard regular Karen McCowan reported the man is charged with adding $193,169 to his profits by misrepresenting a conventional crop. He faces a federal wire fraud charge for allegedly selling more than 4.2 million pounds of conventional corn falsely labeled as organic.

The alleged fraud came to light after the grain milling company that bought the organic corn found ‘inconsistencies’ while auditing the corn to verify that it complied with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Organic Program regulations. “We have to have a good paper trail for organics,” a spokesperson explained.

I’m glad to see this story. I don’t know or care about innocence or guilt in this case; I’m glad to see that somebody checks these things. It seems so easy to just label foodstuffs “organic” and increase the price. Here’s a case where it supposedly happened, and, whether it did or not, authorities are following up with prosecution.

I think a lot of us worry about fake organic, or greenwashing, so we want to know that the label means something.

(image: bigstockphoto.com

Missing the Bonding Agent of Mainstream News

What an irony: when we all depended on a very few quasi-monopoly mainstream news media, news was more fact and less opinion. Who would have predicted that?

I suppose this is hard to believe, but when I was in Journalism grad school a few decades ago teachers, students, and even practicing journalists believed in news reporters separating what they thought was objective fact from what they knew was opinion. Walter Cronkite

Fact vs. opinion was important to us; we discussed at length how difficult it was to truly separate subjective opinion from objective reporting. It stood like an almost-impossible ideal, given the realities of human nature. But we believed we were supposed to try. That was basic journalism ethics.

And maybe it worked so well, back then, because it had to work. Media, then like now, was business. I don’t want to rewrite history — the businesses weren’t idealists looking out for the truth, they were about commerce. But to keep their large audiences the business side had to put up with the journalists and their ethics because bonding diverse audiences with attempts at objective truth was the best way to grow and prosper. We didn’t have a thousand channels and a billion websites plus twitter. We had one or two newspapers per city and three major television networks. We might have dreamed of the choice we now have, but in the meantime, that concentration made it good business for media to focus on delivering news to as broad an audience as possible, which meant struggling for the ideal of objective fact. That created a mainstream social history that brought people into the same world together, believing in the Walter Cronkites and David Brinkleys as striving for truth not opinion.

Fast forward and here we are in a brave new world in which we all routinely dial into media dedicated to points of view, where we reinforce our opinion with like-minded opinion presented in the same format we used to use for news, parading around as objective reporting, or (gulp) facts. Now we’re all in splinter groups. We take sides as we choose our streams. Some of us find truth in one channel, others in another channel. It’s like we all live in separate worlds, each with its own set of facts.

One thing we’ve lost in the explosion of splinter media, pulverized media, infinite interest groups, is the objective voice in the middle.

No wonder we’re polarized and partisan politics block leadership.

(Image: Walter Cronkite CBS News, courtesy of Jalopnik.com)

Education, Jobs, and the 99 percent. Who Occupies What? Who to Blame?

I’m visiting in New York this week, and yesterday I ran into two different “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrations. And was sent by a friend to this we are the 99 Percent site, an eloquent and disturbing look at that movement. screen shot. I know I don’t know what’s really going on there. And I know that what I see on that site is just one image of truth. But damn, those stories are painful to read. There is real hurt there.

And the recession lingers on. We have all those unemployed people who don’t have money to spend, the economy is still dragging downwards. House prices are still low. Sure, we have bright spots, like the startups.

It makes me wonder about the overriding desire to have somebody to blame. These are sad stories. The underlying theme is people who have followed the rules, gotten the degrees, and ended up having no jobs and no money.

And then they get to the blaming. This is typical:

Now, I struggle to pay my student loans and health insurance, while the criminal bankers and traders who ruined our lives are busy laughing and collecting their bonuses.

There they lose me. I just can’t believe that things are that simple. Because today’s protesting unemployed lawyer might be yesterdays banker and trader. And today’s banker and trader might be tomorrow’s occupy protester. How simple to just blame criminal bankers and traders, but how quickly that idea goes cascading downwards into the nooks and crannies of technology, partisan politics, and the search for the common enemy. There’s the human craving for explanations, combined with the power of simple concentrated ideas, but where does it lead? What, specifically, do they want to change? And who has the power to change it?

I can’t help contrasting the little I know of this with what I remember of the anti-war protests I was part of in the 1960s. I was in the group that occupied the administration building at the University of Notre Dame in the Spring of 1970. How much simpler that was, compared to this seemingly infinite maze of problems today. We wanted out of the Vietnam War, we wanted to stop the draft, and we wanted the university to pull its endowment investments out of the companies we thought were profiting from the war. We had a cause, and we wanted specific changes. Most of us could have explained that in 25 words or less.

And in this case? Not hardly.

My Niece’s Question About God

What a week. Steve Jobs, may he rest in peace. On Wednesday we distributed my stepmother’s ashes. That same day my brother’s wife buried her father.

After our ceremony in Cape Cod, my brother said his daughter had asked: “why does God make people get old and die?”

Nobody there could answer that question. Several people, however, came up with variations on a common theme: that’s why it’s important that we live well. We should not waste time. Or love. Or spirit.

This morning I’m off to Yosemite with my youngest daughter.

New Game: Social Media Snooping vs. Social Media Cleansing

The other shoe dropping: Business Insider posted This Company Will Expose All Your Most Embarrassing Online Moments a few days ago. It’s about a service company that helps employers by doing a social-media online background check on a potential employee.

It was more than two years ago that I first saw a business plan for a social media cleaning service, meaning a company that would clean up all those dumb and embarrassing things college kids posted on Facebook, when they wake up to the job market and the implications. (Aside: that one was done by Kai Davis, who is now doing marketing for Palo Alto Software).

My favorite comment in this context:

What part of the word publishing don’t you understand?

I’m traveling as I write this, waiting for my car to get new brakes while on a driving trip to California. While I was driving this morning I heard a major radio station commercial for a social media cleaning service. Sorry, I forget its name, I’d like to mention it.

So the contest is on: the social media scraping service, telling your next employer every dumb comment and picture you posted online; vs. the social media cleaning service, helping you get all of that off of the web.

Shall we take bets? Who wins?

(Image: heal the bay/Flickr CC)

Disrupt Education. Save the World.

Is there any generalized institution in the world that needs disruption more badly than education? Right now there are more than a billion people under 10 years old. How well do you think we adults are doing with educating all those kids? classroom

You can’t have a leading economy and a lagging educational system

I know for a fact that you cannot have a leading economy and have a lagging educational system. You cannot lead as a country when your education system is failing.

That’s from Corey Booker, mayor of Newark NJ, educated at Stanford, Oxford, and Yale, quoted in Technology Is One Tool To Improve Education Levels Worldwide. He spoke last month at a Stanford conference on technology in education.

And what about technology in education? It seems so obvious. Reading the Stanford piece quoted there, I remembered Fred Wilson’s 2009 talk at Google on markets ripe for disruption. Education is second on his list, right after finance.

And where is technology in education?

How much do you think technology has changed public education in the U.S.? Could we measure the impact of word processing on writing, or calculators on math? I have to step away from the computer for a minute and clear my mind to remember when I was in high school and college and research took rifling through the index of periodicals, and the card catalog in the library, and finding the physical printed hard copies of everything I needed. How much has online video changed things?

The Stanford article ticks off some advances, like new developments:

  • DreamBox Learning customizes the way information is presented to pupils, an approach company CEO and President Jessie Woolley-Wilson says helps students understand multiplication, division, and other concepts more quickly.
  • Ireland-based electronic-learning company RISE operates a network of education centers across China that teach English to Chinese children using an American curriculum designed specifically for Asian students who ultimately want to attend college in the United States.
  • An online program developed by internet-based Knewton teaches math tailored to each student’s abilities. The service can “predict in advance if you’re going to fail at a concept before you ever see it.” If so, it deploys a more appropriate learning strategy
  • During the past 5 years, 181 education-focused U.S. companies have received venture capital funding.
  • Ambow Education Group is China’s first e-learning platform.
  • K12 Inc. provides proprietary curriculum and online education programs to students in grades kindergarten through 12.

But of course that’s just a drop in the bucket, a few stories. Think of what technology has done for, say, television, or media in general. Published music? Mail? Business? Then compare that to education, where our kids, in this country, still depend on teachers and books and classrooms; and in poorer countries they don’t even have that … how badly does education still need disrupting?

What bothers me is this whole topic quickly projects me back to the early 1980s when I was a market researcher for a company specializing in forecasting technology business. Some 30 years ago technology was going to change everything in education; or so we thought. We made a big deal of Control Data Corporation’s push to change education with online learning.

So is this ever going to happen?

(Image: velkr0/flickrcc)

Celebrating Independence? Read the Document.

Today is Independence Day in the U.S.

This holiday is all about The Declaration of Independence, which was signed on this day in 1776 by a couple dozen or so very brave people who were prepared to risk their lives for the political freedom they believed in.

They were freedom fighters, fighting for their rights.  They changed the world. They wanted to vote instead of just obey.

The signing was courageous. The document they signed is a very beautiful document, very powerfully written.

We hold these truths to be self-evident…

  • that all men are created equal,
  • that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
  • that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
  • That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
  • That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

That’s the core of it. Even the introduction is well written …

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

So today we celebrate their courage, their resolve, and their revolution. Here’s hoping that the 300-some million of us that live here today can live up to the idealism and courage they showed back then.

If You Should Have Done it Then, Do It Now

I really like this:

The best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago. The second best time is now.

As you can tell from the illustration here, that’s an African proverb, and I got it from Jim Connolly on twitter, and he got it from Paul Sherwen, also on Twitter.

(Aside: this is another illustration of why I like Twitter and how I use it – as a window to what some people I respect are saying, writing, and suggesting.)

There’s a clear business lesson here. How often do you not do something today because you should have done it long ago? I do that more often than I want to admit. I think most of us do.

A smart young former student of my entrepreneurship class, looking for a new job, didn’t take up social media a year ago because he didn’t want to look like a beginner. But that was a year ago and he still hasn’t. But if he’d started then, he wouldn’t look like a beginner now.

I did the same damn thing with blogging. When I first really thought about blogging it was already 2005 and I kicked myself for not having started in about 2001. So net result was I didn’t start blogging. On the other hand, at least I finally did start in 2007, which means I now have four years of it, and 1,232 posts published (counting this one).

Don’t not do it now because you should have done it sooner. Right?

Memorial Day, Draft Lottery, Reality TV, Flags

(This was first posted here three years ago.)

I woke up yesterday in Portland (OR), in a condo near the top of W. Burnside. The area has a series of cemeteries, dark green rolling hills, breaking up the otherwise thickly forested landscape. It had rained all night, so there was a thick mist cushioning the quiet hills. It was early Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, not a lot of cars around, very quiet. Through the mist I could see the U.S. flags dotting the graves on the hills. Random patterns. A lot of the graves have flags today.

Later in the day we drove by, commented on the flags. How many from this century, Afghanistan, Iraq? Hard to tell. They’d be so young, somebody said.

Whether they died in 1943, or 1969, or 2007, they were all so young.

Switch to reality television. 1969. The draft lottery. They put the 366 possible days of the year in transparent plastic eggs, one each for each possible birthday. The put them all into a giant transparent barrel like we see in lotteries these days. They spun the wheel. They drew a date. Those of us born on that date got a number.

My number was 243. I didn’t get drafted. I didn’t go to Vietnam.

By 1969, most of us opposed the Vietnam war. We talked about what we’d do if drafted. Al became a conscientious objector, emptied bedpans for two years. I was engaged to be married, but that was not going to get me out of the war. But a January birth date did.

It turned out later that somebody did a statistical analysis on the draft lottery and the dates. They started on January 1 and threw them in from there day-by-day to December 31. The later birthdays tended to be on top. Or so I read later.

But we didn’t oppose the people, our peers, who fought. Whether it was their choice, or not.

Few in my generation chose to go to war. One who did, who graduated with me from Notre Dame, chose ROTC. Traveling around Europe, he collected military paraphernalia. His father was in the army. His grandfather had been in the army. He volunteered to be a helicopter pilot, and he died in Vietnam. In his helicopter. We weren’t that close, I heard about it later. My memories of him are of a 20-year-old kid having a wonderful time during a year in college abroad, laughing, drinking Austrian beer, learning; as alive as any memory could be. What a terrible loss.

Memorial Day, patriotism, flags, wars. Protests, anti-war, opposition. Memorial Day isn’t about war, or politics, or patriotism, or whatever might be the opposite of patriotism. It’s definitely not about flags. It’s about young people who died, and the people left behind who loved them. And all the people who endured it, risked their lives, went through the hell of it, for whatever reasons.

I lucked out. I won the reality TV of the last half century, the 1969 draft lottery. And I thank God for that. And honor and respect the ones who went, for whatever reasons. And hope that we can end the present war without causing chaos, and more death and suffering; and that we never fight another war again.

Quick Dollar View of National Priorities

Andrew Sullivan posted this as Infographic: Tax Breaks vs. Budget Cutson his Daily Dish blog on The Atlantic. He traced it back to this possible origin, which has a lot of detail at the bottom about sources and assumptions. I apologize for politics, not my normal fare on this blog, but it’s such an eloquent chart; I couldn’t resist.

I had to ask myself: is this what our priorities are?