Facebook: Caveat Emptor

So you bought Facebook at $38 per share and now you're pissed because, as of the end of trading on Tuesday it was down to $28.84.  So to date you've lost about 24.11% of your original investment (I mean hey, it's not like you lost a quarter of it). And so, to the sounds of tiny violins playing around the world, one cannot help but ask, "So what are you going to do about it, eh?"

Well some of you, apparently all but devoid of any shred of personal responsibility and believing that once again you may have discovered a scapegoat, appear to be mad enough about your losses that you're suing Morgan Stanley (who was the leading underwriter of the IPO).  Listen, I'm not giving Morgan Stanley a pass on this debacle by any stretch of the imagination, but they were only helping to sell this stock for its owners in a free market that would ultimately determine (and is) its real value.

But let's face it, the real reason that your gluteus is less maximus than it was a few days ago is that you not only failed to pay attention to how the dot com bubble expanded and burst some years back, or how the housing bubble burst just a few short years ago, but that you failed to look close enough or to use your own common sense in judging whether Facebook was a profitable company before throwing your hat in the ring.

In spite of all the warning signs that Facebook has never generated a great deal of profit for its original investors (except on paper), that it's increasingly advertiser driven pages were beginning to turn people off and have them looking for the next big thing, and that it's so desperate for new sources of revenue that in some places it's charging people a fee to have their posts seen by everyone; you just couldn't wait to throw your money at those evil stockbrokers in order to get a piece of the action.  The fact that institutional investors, who are after all usually more cautious with their money and pretty savvy at turning a profit, did not leap into the lion's den beside you did not daunt nor discourage you in this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.  

Facebook after all, is a name as well known as GM ( uh hey, wait a minute ...) that has at its heart a technology as cutting edge as the solar panels manufactured by Solyndra (yeah , no wait, that's not right ...), so it's not like investing would involve real risk (like, oh say, gambling on some ethanol plants) and if things went wrong, well there must have been a global conspiracy.

My guess is that most of you are the same people who refuse to push your tin foil hats far enough out of your eyes to see the admonition in your side view mirrors that, "objects are closer than they appear" before changing lanes, the same ones who fail to read beyond introductory interest rate on the credit card application, and the same ones who don't read the fine print in a car lease about what those extra miles each year are going to cost you.

Wallowing in your underwater mortgages, you're disappointed to discover that like your attempts to win Powerball's giant jackpot, or to win back the money that you lost in lottery tickets with a trip to the nearest one-armed bandit or blackjack table, that you are now decrying your continued failure to understand that concept of gambling involves risk; and more often than not ... loss.

Have no fear however, your exalted federal government, a expert in the creation of victims in this country, is on your side (and grateful that this one wasn't their fault).  Having gained their sympathetic ear, there's little doubt that before it's all over, the House and Senate will each hold hearings on the glitches that occurred on the trading floor both during the IPO and continue on to the present.  When those are over, they'll hold some more about what information Morgan Stanley released, when they released it, and to whom.  And if the legislature cannot find the culprits responsible, no doubt the Justice Department will take up the cause after them (after all, they have a lot of investigators who aren't looking for a bunch of guns that crossed the Mexican border a while back any more).  

And while no one will ultimately be brought to justice (if there actually was any wrong doing going on), we will all be able to take heart, knowing that our government has our best interests as its primary concern.  This being the case, regardless of the lack of conspiracy or evil intent, the two respective houses of the national legislature will be able to write laws that they can tout as protection against any such occurrence happening again.  (Well they will if they can beat the president, who will no doubt be racing them in an attempt to issue an executive order to the same purpose.)   

Re-wrapped in the warm and fuzzy embrace of government regulatory protection, we can ignore the fact that no one was forced to invest in Facebook (unlike the millions that have been forcibly invested on our behalf in GM and Chrysler).  You should therefore also pay no attention to the billions of our money that the federal government continues to invest in green companies and foreign banks with equally unprofitable business plans; usually without our knowledge, and certainly without our informed consent. Take heart instead that the protections created for any future IPO releases will no doubt be so complex and onerous that no one will ever attempt one again.

After all, it's only been the case that for thousands of years (going back to before the glory days of the Roman Empire) that we've heard the Latin warning, "Caveat Emptor" .... "Let the Buyer Beware".

I Unlike 'Like'

I find that I am growing increasingly uncomfortable with the word 'Like' these days, and while I know that this was not always the case, it took me some time to recognize that this issue goes back many years. 

For those of you who intend to read on; you must recognize that blog writing (especially my weekend efforts), is a form of therapy for me.  And trust me when I tell you that no one needs weekly therapy sessions more than I do.

I suppose that it began many years ago, during the halcyon days of my youth.  Full of vim, vigor, and a hormonal state that could only be considered balanced by comparing it to the current federal budget; I occasionally found myself in the company of members of the fairer gender.  (This is not a simple as it might appear, especially for someone whose High School days were spent in an all-male establishment for the most part.)  Embarrassed, tongue-tied, and completely unable of coherently expressing myself (a condition into which I far too often relapse, even these many years later), I usually found myself able to stammer out after considerable effort: "You know, I uh, like you." 

Conversationally and emotionally stunted, and apparently without the lyrical ability that is said to be gift of the Irish nature, I was however occasionally able to rise above this stammering foolishness far enough for the occasional:  "No, I mean uh, I uh really like you."  (I know. Most of you are now in shock and amazement at the level of  Shakespearean prose that I was capable of, even at this early age.)  As time went on, eventually I was able to rise to even greater heights, occasionally allowing the word 'Love' to pass my lips (though undoubtedly still not understanding the concept, and probably in the forlorn and doomed hopes of 'getting lucky'); and eventually I managed to almost forget how uncomfortable I was with the word 'Like', though never quite completely.

Years later however, I found myself again confronted with this dreaded word, often in far more precarious circumstances. "Of course I like the bedspread with little purple flowers on it dear", was likely to be found coming out of my mouth with mild aversion, but without conscious effort.  "Certainly I would like to go shopping with you dear; and of course I'd like to stop at the Art Museum afterward to spend hours viewing the traveling exposition of 'Shoe Art' afterward," slipped from my lips with only an occasional grimace or muttered imprecation.  "Yes dear, I really like the way you've fixed this ... what kind of meat is this again?" might also found being spoken around the lower extremity usually found stuck in my pie hole, with the unpleasant taste coming as a combination of the foot, the disingenuous nature of the remark, and the dish in question.  The stammering that usually accompanied such pronouncements usually doomed the attempted domestic tranquility being sought and increased my distress at the use of this word.

Update and Disclaimer:  None of the sentences listed above was ever actually used by me during either of my marriages  ...  No, really.

Just when I thought I had put these troubling and traumatic experiences perhaps forever behind me (along with a couple of marriages) along came Facebook, and the use of the word 'Like' became an unrelenting and recurring nightmare.  Rather than my own fumbling occasional uses of the word in failed attempts to comprehend emotions that I rarely understood; I was now subjected to a veritable barrage of this four letter word that must be used to convey a cornucopia of emotions and opinions.  

When a FB friend put a link up, was my unvoiced 'like' an expression of appreciation for the information provided, for the opinion expressed by this friend about the link, or both?  Would a failure to give this vote of confidence (no relation to the novel of the same name) be seen as a lack of solidarity or worse, as an expression of disdain for something they found meaningful or informative?  When two FB friends shared a link, was I required to like both, and would a slight be incurred by not doing so?  When putting up my own links and other nonsense, would I in turn take offense myself in not being 'liked'?  Did comments that were made on such material similarly require a 'Like' to show acknowledgement of their interest or affirmation?

Making matters worse almost simultaneously, was the peculiar speech pattern that was once again appearing in so many around me, one that I had thought to have seen the end of with "Valley Girls" and similar movies about teenagers in  shopping malls fading into the oblivion.  Instead, I once more found myself besieged by acquaintances, co-workers, and random strangers who insisted on connecting random thoughts in sometimes even more random sequences of phrases to form discourses molded around 'Like'.  Declarations that, "Like we were going out the other night, and like you'll never guess what happened.  It was like the craziest thing that I'd ever seen before, and like you know I've seen some pretty crazy stuff.  So anyway, we were just like sitting there ..." engender the same feelings in me as fingernails on a blackboard or my the vibration of teeth being drilled for cavities (without anesthetic).  

Worse still was realizing that by such constant exposure, I too was occasionally being drawn into similar (and because of my recognition of them), even more painful declarations.  Hailing back to the memories of social suicide that I committed through the use of this word in irrational in often pathetic early attempts at the social graces, I now found myself committing linguistic suicide in abortive attempts to communicate the simplest of ideas to other members of either gender.  Horrified at my inability to articulate the simplest concept or idea without bastardizing it into what will undoubtedly be the main soliloquy of Hollywood's next retread of a unoriginal ideas "Valley Girls - The New Mallenium", I actually began to contemplate a vow of silence rather than see myself sink to a level of communication only previously dwelt in by members of the inarticulate 'Occupy' movement.

Lest some of you begin early celebrations of my potentially quiescent future however, let me add that while indeed on the brink, I believe that I've pulled myself back from the edge of despair and unintelligible communication.  That which cannot be changed must be endured, and that which does not kill us makes us stronger.  I realized that I must therefore soldier on as best I can.  This does not mean that this word has gained new found favor with me; but the awareness that until the current benighted conversational trend runs its course, there is little that I can do to ameliorate the current bastardization of the English language.  I will therefore attempt to use this word only within proper context (and when forced to do so by the exigencies of Facebook).  

Until further notice therefore, I choose to 'Unlike' 'Like'.    

Getting Too Much Facetime

I got on Facebook again this morning, something that I seem to do almost every morning, often for reasons that I don't entirely understand.  I was able to get a much needed update on some friends and family that don't see nearly often enough or haven't seen in a while (which is why I signed up for Facebook in the first place).  In some cases, I was also able to see into some parts of their lives far deeper than anyone should get to or have to, but those are choices that each of us have to make in the use of social networking.  There were even, as there always are, some bits of wisdom and clever witticisms to be gleaned from the literary efforts placed in the status of many of those on my friends list; something that being a scribbler, I always appreciate and enjoy.

There were also the usual (inevitable) requests to repost something as my status in order to prove I was a true friend or to show the world that I cared.  (Just to be clear, in most cases I do care, but usually not that much.)  Unfortunately, I have placed reposting requests in the same pile as the emails that I'm supposed to forward to 5, 10, or 21 different friends in order to have my wish granted or good luck come my way.  (Of course, the fact that I have such a pile may in some way explain why none of my wishes have been granted and why good luck has not come my way; but I am content with my choices.)   

Listen, putting up a link to a news story (especially on something not widely known and from a credible source) and you're providing a service to your friends.  Put up a couple of links together on interesting tidbits, and you maintain your status (pun intended) of still mildly interesting and informative.  Put up three, regardless of content in the same hour, and you're starting to push my 'annoying' button.  Put up more than four in that same hour and I will probably push the 'ignore' button and stop really noticing what you've put up.  

As for those of you on my friends list who puts up half of the video music library that you've just discovered in the hopes that I will enjoy an evening of listening to obscure artists, musicians who've been dead for 20 years, or genres of music only popular in places I've never been to; let me tell you that I subscribe to Pandora in order to listen to what I want to and that the non-stop links have caused me to stop caring whether you've put anything up or not.

Please don't get this wrong or get offended by my comments. (No, that's wrong.  Go ahead and get offended if you want to, that's your Facebook right. But while you're feeling a little put out, put up a little less.)  It's not that I don't like you or some of the stuff that you put up, but everything has limits.  (Well, everything except the collective stupidity and aggressive ignorance of the American electorate; but that's an entirely different subject.)  While I'm willing to take a drink from a hose, especially when thirsty, I'm not even vaguely interested in attempting to do so from a fire hose.

Learn to pace yourself and your postings and you will not only maintain a receptive audience, but probably one that looks forward to your next effort.  Learn to keep your audience begging for more and they will appreciate you more.  Learn not to tell us everything you know at once, and we will be astounded by the depth of you knowledge.  Learn to limit your efforts, and you won't have cranky old bastards like me complaining about it in public.

OK, that's enough ranting this morning.  If you will excuse me, I would like to get back on Facebook to post a link to this effort (ironic, isn't it), and for what I'm really interested in ... cute little pictures of cats (which, since I"m allergic to them is the only way they remain cute) and grown men crying over the performance of their favorite college or professional football team.  

(If this posting causes you to 'unfriend' me, let me say before you get back to Facebook to do so that it was nice knowing you.)


.

The Social Network Nitwits

Well it's official. In spite of all the disingenuous and deceitful protestations of innocence, careful skirting of the truth, and half-denials, Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner of New York has admitted not only to sending the underwear picture that has become such a sensation on Twitter; but apparently a number of other questionable photographs and 'tweets' as well. In a typical political mea culpa, the Congressman threw himself on the mercy of voters. That he did this after only days ago looking into cameras and attempting to spar with the media (when not actually lying) is not cause for our pity but our scorn however. 


And so with this admission, we see yet another politician begin his final fall from a combination of moral ambiguity and an inability to separate their public (and electronic) lives from their private ones. Weiner has not only lost his chance to become the next Mayor of New York (if Bloomberg ever agrees to leave), but will be damn lucky to hold onto his Congressional seat. The House ethics committee will next take up the faux pas and foibles of Rep Weiner, and they are more than welcome to them. 


Perhaps those with similarly duplicitous natures and questionable moral judgment will better understand him; for he is not alone in his questionable behavior. Far too many of them (and us) are guilty of exposing our ... feelings out there on Twitter and Facebook in the hopes of garnering attention, receiving accolades, and sometimes engendering sympathy. And while we usually get what we ask for, it's far too seldom what we want or really need. 


Attention: 
Absolutely! Put your words, feelings, and personal life out there like a guest on "The Jerry Springer Show" and there's little doubt that those who follow you on Twitter and Facebook will notice. Quite frankly, it's a train wreck that's hard to turn your eyes from. 


Accolades: 
Yep! Those can come as well. (I've been especially guilty on this one.) Playing with words and manipulating the English language in the hopes of appear clever or creating a minor piece of verbal art is fun. Sometimes it even works. More often however, it's simply a different form of train wreck, as sarcasm and irony are left behind in the keyboard. Attempt this at your own risk, as the repercussions can be more far-reaching than you realize. Then there are those who stoop to re-posting the efforts of more inventive minds. They do little more than trace over the lines of the Mona Lisa and expect to be credited as an artist. It's as intellectually laudable as any other form of plagiarism and as creative as line dancing. 


Sympathy: 
Not so much ... Oh don't get me wrong, there are those day-to-day tragedies whose frustration gathers some 'awwws' when aired in public. There are even some actual misfortunes that become easier to bear when shared; and where solace can be received with help and advice to be received from friends, electronic or otherwise. Most of us will even share some bitter laughter along with our compassion when life from time to time seems to paint a target on someone we know or care about. 


Excessive hand-wringing and drama however, will eventually wear thin the understanding of a saint (not that I know any personally) and are to be avoided at any cost. Those conducting their private lives on the Internet in the hopes some level of fame (like Rep Weiner) run a number of terrible risks in the attempt, which include (but are not limited to): 


* A law of averages which has determined that eventually you will make a mistake between the private and public lives you live and humiliate yourself (bad enough) or perhaps others who don't deserve it (much worse). * Airing a private grievance in a public venue, while self-satisfying, is unlikely to produce the result intended; and far more likely to produce its opposite. * When we share information with friends, we often forget that it's not only shared with friends of friends automatically; but that it's going to be out there in cyberspace forever, just waiting for the opportunity to jump up and bite us in the butt long after we've forgotten about it. * Even the most sympathetic of souls runs out such sentiment at some point, and those attempting to continue to draw from this well are far more likely to gather scorn than the sympathy they crave. * There is such a thing as 'too much information' about any of us. The reason that people have both public and private lives is because they are different things. They need to remain so. 


 All of that being said, I want to thank Rep Weiner and all of the rest of you out there committing social suicide while attempting this twisted form of social networking. The fear that you produce through your spectacular failures is an inspiration to many of us (You know, like the movie "Jackass"); and a cautionary tale to be learned from. And as the human race has managed to mature in its use of so many technologies, let's hope we can find a happy balance with this one. Let's continue to find ways to stay close to friends and family without airing all of our dirty laundry in public. Let all say of us that we know how to socially network well, and have not, like Rep Weiner, become a Social Network Nitwit.

Facebook Acquaintances

"Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence; true friendship is a plant of slow growth, and must undergo and withstand the shocks and adversity before it is entitled to the appellation." 
- George Washington 


Though not the social person that perhaps I should be, I do spend time on Facebook occasionally. It's not that by contributing to this social networking site in such a limited fashion, I am in any way attempting to be snotty. It's just that carrying the burden of being a Curmudgeon (a burden much easier to bear quite frankly, than the excess pounds that I force my feet to carry) means that a certain level of cantankerousness is a required part of the job description. 


Of course like many before me, I quickly succumbed to the seductive pleasure involved with adding Friends to build up my list. Attempting to boost my ego by a vain effort at building up the numbers of those on my Friends list however, caused a moral dilemma between my ego's desire to feed itself from the numbers game and the rather strict concepts of friendship that I have always had. 


In the spirit of full disclosure and with a fair amount of mortification, I will admit to you the unfortunate fact that my principles lost the early battle. I found myself adding family, friends, friends of family, friends of friends, and complete strangers in the self-deceiving belief that I could build up my weak self-esteem by growing these numbers. (I know, the weak self-esteem thing is rather difficult to believe about me, but is true nonetheless.) 


The strange thing is that in spite of these almost Herculean efforts, I never even managed to cross the 200 threshold of Facebook Friends. The guilt of even this however, soon began to take its toll; and I found myself however feebly, fighting back. Almost without conscious effort, I soon found myself wining the war by eliminating people from that list; those that I had never met, would never meet, and whose lack of personal introduction I was indifferent to. I have some pretty definite principles where friendship is concerned, and ultimately they won out over my unprincipled weakness. 


That is not to say that I don't already have a fair number of people that I consider to be acquaintances. They are those that I have met on one occasion or another, that I have perhaps shared a brief encounter, conversation, or cocktail with; or that I have possibly enjoyed a casual working relationship with over the years. Friends however are something entirely different. A Friend is a person that you know a good deal about. They are someone that you have spent time with, shared ideas, history, and above all trust with. They know your family and you know theirs. They are people that you would lend money to without hesitation and though with a bit more anxiety, likely borrow money from. They are people you have invited to your home and whose home you have visited. They are people who are often more likely to know what you will say and how you react to a given situation long before even you do. Most importantly, they are people that you not only care about; but care deeply for.  They are not however, people with whom your only connection is Facebook. 


Don't get me wrong. This is not to disparage the concept of Facebook itself, as I find it a fascinating bit of technology. It allows me to keep up with the goings on of an extended Family that I see far too seldom, but whose health, welfare, and happiness are nevertheless very important to me. It also allows me to keep up on the goings on of many Acquaintances who I see even less often, and who (as I said) I do care about. With Facebook, I enjoy seeing the triumphs and tribulations that they go through, the achievements that they celebrate, and even share sympathy with the losses that they mourn. In the process doing so, I am occasionally even able to offer a pithy comment or two regarding such circumstances (where appropriate, of course), something which can be gratifying both as a person and as one who aspires to be a writer. 


I am likewise usually amused when I become privy to some part of the TMI (Too Much Information) that some are wont to share on this site. It's not that the situations themselves are amusing, but it's sometimes gratifying to recognize that I am not the only person on the planet leading a life that's mostly tedious and for the most part boring. I do sometimes wish however, that I could have multiple lists on Facebook. I would like one for Family, another for Friends, a third for Acquaintances, and maybe even a final one for people that I only know through this social networking site. 


Don't misunderstand me, I know that Facebook allows one to put up such relationships (like Family) and keep these lists on their site; but somehow the concept of allowing companies on Internet to know and remember more about me than I am capable of remembering myself seems not only intimidating, but potentially dangerous. 


So when I once again put up the link to this posting on Facebook, you will know that as always, I did so with a bit of trepidation. I hope that my Family and Friends will know and understand that this is just one additional element to a confusing personality that even Sigmund Freud would undoubtedly shake his head and walk away from smiling. 


I hope that my Friends will likewise shake their heads, and be both amused and bemused by what they have either long known (or at least suspected) about my rather quirky nature. As for my Facebook Acquaintances, well you'll just have to make the best of all of this; recognizing that this is simply an example of the kind of crap you should have expected and were going to periodically subject yourself to when you agreed to be my Facebook Friend.

Internet Impulse Control

A student in the Kansas City area was dismissed from a nursing school over a photo of her posed with a placenta they were studying in class that she posted on Facebook (a judge later reinstated her to allow her to take exams). Two high school teachers were fired from their jobs in NYC after posting inappropriate messages to students, and a third remains out of work after posting a photo showing her kissing a former student. A woman in Connecticut was fired from her job as an EMT after criticizing her boss and posting it. College professors are beginning to ban cell phones (and even laptops) from classrooms; calling them more a distraction than an aid as students use them not only to take notes, but to keep up their social networking. 

It's a growing sign of the times and of the technology that we use and sometimes abuse in a never ending cycle of dependency. Like most other addictions, such behavior often leads to poor impulse control ... and eventually to exhibitions of foolish behavior. While no less prone to such behavior (and having perhaps shown a past predilection for it in other ways), I find myself with little guilt where social networking is concerned. 

The limited wisdom that I have attained has fortunately been second hand. This is not to say that I am not active on things like Facebook; but only to say that perhaps being a generally more private person, I tend to limit the things that I am willing to share. 

As some of you now reading this will know, I put up a link to each of the postings to my blog on my Facebook page. I do this in a vain and perhaps vague attempt to lure the occasional new reader onto the site (not that I get any monetary reimbursement for doing so), and to notify those who regularly read it that another of my unscheduled efforts has occurred. I likewise share the odd picture taken or sent my way and what I consider to be the occasional clever thought that I come up with. (Wait, maybe that should be the other way around.) What you will not find from me however are the times that I get up or go to bed, the things I eat, the opinions that I have of my bosses or employers, or the status of my love life; none of which quite frankly would make very interesting reading. 

I exhibit this limited forbearance for no other reason than to keep me out of trouble (something that I have not proved particularly adept at over the years). I'm not afraid, but instead cautious; since I recognize that what we're talking about are not only issues of personal privacy, but that of others as well. I do not have the right to violate that privacy, and in fact have obligations to respect it. As is often the case with increases in our access to technology and with our ability to communicate however, there is far too often an interval between gaining it and the ability to use it wisely. 

We've only had the telephone since 1876, email since 1971, the first hand-held cell phones since 1973, and the first phone with web surfing capabilities since 1996. Facebook came along later still in 2004, and Twitter in 2006, so it's only in the last few years that this perfect storm of instant communication technology has been at our fingertips. Small wonder that we're still figuring out how to do little more with it than stupid human tricks. 

While I fear that all of the final answers on the subject will likely come from generations far younger than mine, there might be something that those of us with thinner and grayer hair might have to offer in the way of wisdom. We might suggest that using this marvelous ability to communicate might be better served by doing less of it. We might offer the opinion that a little mystery about our lives for friends and loved ones is anything but a bad thing. We might say that telling everyone of every waking thought that we have serves no one, especially ourselves. 

Maybe its time that we all did some sort of a 'preview' of what we are about to share before actually doing so. Maybe its appropriate that we attempt to think about how others might view our personal gems before placing them in these all too public settings. Maybe its long past time that we realized that every peccadillo and indiscretion that we place out there in cyberspace will remain there long after we have achieved room temperature. Certainly therefore, using a little internet impulse control might be the best impulse any of us are capable of.

Face Time

Recent sales training that I'm doing has brought to mind many of the things that I have learned about the subject over a long career in the field (though contrary to popular belief, it is not true that I sold lumber to Noah). I was reminded that much of the sales being done these days is in fact consultive sales; which strangely enough entails not selling anything at all to a potential customer, but instead seeking to remove the impediments that keep them from making a purchase that they should. 


Even if the final result is not possible however, the relationship building process that occurs in the sales process is a valuable one which can lead to future benefits for both parties. The only way to succeed in such an effort is by getting face time with the customer. In fact, there is nothing more important to success than such face time. In this day and age and with all of the available means of communication however, this does not necessarily mean being face to face with that potential customer (though that is certainly the preferred method), but also in finding any opportunity to exchange ideas. In order for the process to take its course one must build a rapport with a customer, discover that customer's needs, and attempt to find a way to help that customer fulfill them (hopefully, but not always, with the product or service that you are getting paid to sell) by showing them the benefits that you can offer and their value to the prospective customer.  


Once upon a time, political candidates likewise understood this. They took every opportunity to get face time with their constituents. Whether it was shaking hands at a local event, giving stump speeches at 'rubber chicken dinners' (rubber chickens having less chance of passing on salmonella), or most especially at candidate debate opportunities. These latter not only provided the chance to showcase the candidates views and opinions, but did so in such a way so as to allow them to distinguish themselves from their opponents. 


It worked for John Kennedy over a more experienced Richard Nixon. It worked for Ronald Reagan over both incumbent Jimmy Carter and challenger Walter Mondale. It worked for Bill Clinton over the senior George Bush. In fact, study and prep for debates became one of the most important parts of running a political campaign for many years. It mostly seems however, that such is no longer the case. 


Candidates sometimes seem reticent to appear in public, lest an irreverent constituent or inconvenient question rear its ugly head. (Can you say "Joe the Plummer"?) They seem to desire to avoid anything other than carefully scripted events with restricted guest lists, lest it backfire and show up on You Tube. They certainly seek to control anything and everything said by and about them, lest a stray soundbite derail their carefully crafted campaign efforts. (Can you say, "Boo Ben Konop"?) Campaigns today seem to have become all about Facebook sites and and media buys; all carefully crafted to give out the required message of the campaigns ... but even with all of this control, they seem to get it wrong. 


When did the message stop being "I believe as you do" and start becoming "My opponent does not believe as you do"? When did it become more important for a candidate to frame their opponents message rather than their own in the first place? When was the last time that you saw a political commercial on TV that did not show the opponent of the candidate as much, if not more, than the one paying for it? How can any candidate expect to win when the only face a voter remembers is that of the opponent they paid to show them? 


Techniques have come and gone over the years and many different practices have fallen in and out of favor, but two things always seem to hold true: 
1. Mention the competition as seldom as possible (and not at all if possible) to keep from drawing attention to them. 
2. Maximize you face time with the customer. 


If politicians would like to understand why it is that they are suffering from such a general lack of popularity these days, perhaps the failure to follow these two simple rules might have something to do with it. If politicians seem somehow to fail to get their message out, in spite of all of the media available to them, perhaps it's because they have lost sight of the simplicity of these rules. 


If good people fail to get elected when they should, perhaps it is not a failure of funding (though money seems to be the greatest concern of both those running and those seeking to control elections these days), but a simple failure to maximize the available face time with their constituencies in the days running up to an election.