By Posted on Posted in Arts & Entertainment, General Commentary, Shel's Personal Life, Uncategorized

As it happens, tonight is the final run of a play that I’m in, about the courage of one Christian scholar, Johannes Reuchlin, who defends Jewish holy books from the German Catholic church’s attempt–with the aid of a converted former Jew, Johannes Pfefferkorn–to confiscate and destroy them.

The play is called “Burning Words,” by Peter Wortsman. It’s based on real events, and the main characters show up in a Google search.

The author has been present for the entire three-show run, doing talkbacks after the show.

Last night, he spoke movingly of the play’s relevance for our time. He cited fundamentalist zealots of several major religions who have gotten into positions of power, and who have tried to foist equally crazy schemes on the rest of us, including the destruction of ancient and irreplaceable iconic art (such as the Taliban’s wanton despoliation of an ancient Buddhist monument in Afghanistan).

I’m proud to be a little part of this small effort to bring free speech and freedom of worship issues to the foreground.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Energy & Sustainability, Uncategorized

Fascinating article in the New York Times about changing zoning trends regarding parking in urban cores, and especially near transit stations.

Although condominiums without parking are common in Manhattan and the downtowns of a few other East Coast cities, they are the exception to the rule in most of the country. In fact, almost all local governments require developers to provide a minimum number of parking spaces for each unit — and to fold the cost of the space into the housing price.

The exact regulations, which are intended to prevent clogged streets and provide sufficient parking, vary by city. Houston’s code requires a minimum of 1.33 parking spaces for a one-bedroom and 2 spaces for a three-bedroom. Downtown Los Angeles mandates 2.25 parking spaces per unit, regardless of size.

Today, city planners around the country are trying to change or eliminate these standards, opting to promote mass transit and find a way to lower housing costs.

As a New York city native who used to draw my proposed extensions to the subway system in my spare time, I’ve always been a strong advocate of public transit (and of bicycle commuting), and one of my only regrets about moving to our wonderful house in the country is that a car is essential to get anywhere. Neither mass transit nor bike is a realistic commuting option with the steep hills, narrow shoulders, and high vehicle speeds along our road, though in special circumstances I do bike to get someplace once in a while. And of course, I work from home but I still have to drive my son to school. And my wife and I ill sometimes go through many hoops in order to coordinate our schedules so we only need to take one car to get places.

Many cities are well set up for public transit. Even in car-crazy L.A., I’ve found it easy to get around on buses and trains. And in New York, Boston, or Washington, I’ve usually found it actually easier to get around on transit than by car–although Washington’s case is peculiar, where extending the Metro resulted in an ugly pattern of car-centered retail development, and accompanying gridlock, along the suburban rail corridors. In most of Europe, of course, transit is the expectation and private car commuting is an option exercised by only a small fraction. Even very small cities, such as Rostock, Germany, have a well-developed and much-used public transit network.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, General Commentary, Politics, Uncategorized

Two brief excerpts from this New York Times story:

RedState.com, the conservative journal, heralded a “massive meltdown in Pennsylvania” early in the day, citing “widespread reports of an electoral nightmare shaping up in Pennsylvania with certain types of electronic voting machines.”

Among the litany of issues cited at Talking Points: computer problems that caused long lines in Denver; polling stations that stayed open later in Indiana after voting problems and delays; votes for Claire C. McCaskill in the Missouri Senate race that somehow registered for her opponent, Jim Talent; complaints that crashed an Ohio county phone system.

In short, our work is not over even with most of the votes counted.

I think the time has come for a mass movement around electoral fairness. We have the right to now that

  • Eligible voters are able to vote
  • Once they’ve voted, their votes are counted accurately using systems that cannot be hacked

    Watch this space. I will be contacting voting rights experts to help draft legislation, and then asking them to help contact mass-advocacy groups such as MoveOn and yes, its conservative counterpart RightMarch to create a massive bipartisan push for fair elections.

    The goal: Passed in 2007 and implemented in time for the 2008 elections.

    • Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, General Commentary, Politics, Uncategorized

    Yesterday’s big gain for the Democrats was a vote for peace, for ethics, for election process reform (most visibly in Ohio and Florida, where Ken Blackwell and Katherine Harris, architects of Bush’s questionable victories in 2004 and 2000, were soundly defeated) and for competence.

    It was also, in many places, a vote for positive campaigning, Voters repudiated at least some of the candidates who put out the most vicious attack ads, including Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, who lost the governorship of Massachusetts after 16 years of continuous Republican rule, and Rep. Nancy Johnson of Connecticut, who lost her seat.

    I actually had two personal friends running for Congress this time: Tony Trupiano in Michigan and Jeeni Criscenzo in California, both endorsed by Progressive Democrats of America. Both lost, unfortunately. But it was exciting to see them go this far.

    Now, it’s up to the Democrats to actually put forth an agenda of peace, ethics, elections that can be trusted, competence, and positive focus. We will be watching!

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Uncategorized

    An Election Day message:

    At the core of democracy is the idea that citizens can vote, and their votes will be counted. Unfortunately, for at least the past six years, that lofty ideal seems to be at variance with reality. This year, the election is in process as I write this–and the number of posts crossing my desk that raise serious concerns about the validity of the process is just plain shocking.

    You want examples? I’ll give you examples from five different states (note that I’m not passing judgment of the accuracy of these claims, which I have not personally investigated–but it does raise a whole lot of suspicion):

  • Virginia: dirty tricks include fliers that tell voters to skip the election, calls to registered voters falsely informing them that their poling place is changed or that they are not allowed to vote. Oh yes, and how about ballots that make it almost impossible to vote for the Democratic candidate for Senator.
  • Ohio: a spurious telephone poll that accuses the Republican gubernatorial candidate’s opponent of hiring a child molester–on behalf of the same candidate who, as Secretary of State, has presided over the disenfranchisement of some 500,000 likely Democratic voters
  • Maryland: Report on security flaws in election machines was apparently sanitized by the company’s own executives and hidden from governmental authorities
  • California: The most widely used voting machine has a button that allows multiple votes–although election officials say they’ve trained poll workers to watch for suspicious behavior or extra beep tones (hard to imagine how that will work in a busy, crowded, noisy poling place, however)
  • Nevada: A Reno voter had to sue a voting machine manufacturer on the grounds that her vote wasn’t being recorded or counted (this quote is from her press release; the link is to the official complaint)

    • the Wyle
    Laboratory December 2004 test results of the AVC Edge with VeriVote printer that she
    and other Washoe citizens and most of Nevada voted on in 2004; and will again in 2006. Wyle tested the machines for reliability and certified the AVC machine suitable for Nevada voter use. Axelrod says Wyle’s operational, test and evaluation records reveal that test machines “ failed to operate when subjected to electrical surge, electromagnetic radiation and electrostatic discharge; overall standard reliability testing failed at 4, 8, and 10 hours causing the machine to lock up; VeriVote printers slipped out of alignment and/or repeatedly jammed and stopped printing even though the machines read “Printing Ballot Selections; and VeriVote Printing paper folded up on itself accordion style”. Axelrod also says, “Wyle engineers found that, “ongoing review of individual VeriVote paper receipts produced during testing show that a font size change had occurred on multiple occasions which in turn caused some of the information on the printer receipt to be found missing.” Axelrod also says that, “Wyle Laboratory suppressed and failed to print out VeriVote serial number data of machines under test so that printed rolls could not be traced back to the specific machine from which the voter receipts were printed.

    There’s more–a lot more than these five states. But that’s enough for now.

    Democracy: an idea whose time has come…in the U.S., too.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Uncategorized

    From the Christian Science Monitor, regarding Lesotho’s once-moribund, now resurgent clothing industry, and how it shifted toward ethically clean clothing:

    But at the same time, an alliance of companies, NGOs, government representatives, and others were trying to find ways to protect the country’s industry. Already, some brands had improved working conditions in Lesotho to answer concerns about sweatshop labor. The group realized that if Lesotho could start aggressively marketing itself as an ethical source of clothing, it could retain and even grow business. “Ethical trading gives you a competitive edge,” says Andy Selm, regional textile and apparel specialist at ComMark Trust. “You can attract a better quality of customer.”

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Media Ethics, Uncategorized

    When I saw Robin Williams’ movie yesterday (see my previous blog post), one of the coming attractions was for “Shut Up and Sing,” a movie about the Dixie Chicks and their battle to avoid being completely suppressed after one of them made a public remark opposing the GWB administration. It was a great trailer; Dina and I put that movie on our go-to-see-it list.

    Lo and behold, today I stumbled on a story (via Alternet) that NBC has refused to air a promo for the movie because it “disparaged President Bush.” You can find stories here with every point of view from conservative Matt Drudge to various left-wing bloggers.

    You can also see the spot–a much-condensed version of the trailer I saw–by clicking here.

    Hmmmm. Sounds suspiciously like the old Divine Right of Kings theory and its dictatorial corollary that you weren’t allowed to criticize the royal government without severe consequences, if you ask me.

    Earth to NBC: It is NOT the job of the media to sanitize controversy. It is, in fact, the job of the media to investigate the news and report it, even if that means exposing a government buried in corruption, lies, and power grabs. With far too few exceptions (one of whom is NBC’s own Keith Olbermann), the large corporate media have not been holding their end of the bargain. But still, whether or not they act like it, the mainstream media should be (as the Quakers say) “speaking truth to power”–not helping to protect that power from ever hearing criticism.

    As it is, it is utterly shameful that the American people have allowed their protests to be marginalized and their picketers herded into enclosures far form the targets. I call that un-American and unpatriotic, and I salute those brave Americans who continue to defend the right of protest. Including the Dixie Chicks.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Arts & Entertainment, Business Ethics, Ethics in Government, Uncategorized

    Just saw this movie today. Not only is Williams brilliant as the comedian running for President–and dealing with the ethical dilemma of his life–but the movie makes wonderful points about vulnerability of electronic voting machines, ruthlessness of certain corporations, politicians of both major parties and their all-too-cozy relationships with special interests, and more.

    No matter what your politics, it’s a great romp making serious points. Ideally, see it *before* the election. And tell your friends.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Abundance and Prosperity, Uncategorized

    Andrew Bourland, founder of ClickZ and a very successful entrepreneur, did a wonderful blog post on how proud he was of his competitors, and how their strategy of offering great information all year round made their expensive conference a very easy sell.

    So chances are good that they are one of the resources you would have turned to, along with Business Blog Consulting, for information and guidance on business blogging. You might have bookmarked us both in your list of RSS feeds you check regularly, and if you haven’t already, you should.

    But something may have happened around mid-August or September when you were reading all those great articles that Teresa, Steve, DL and our very own Dave Taylor regularly write: you might have noticed they had a conference coming up.

    And then as time progressed, you might have thought you ought to go… and then, if you were one of the smart and fortunate ones who wisely reserved a seat at their conference this past week

    This is something I’ve been writing and talking about for many years, especially in my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First.

    Disclosure: I “know” Andy virtually because we were both active participants for many years on the now-defunct (and sorely missed) Internet Sales Discussion List.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

    By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Media Ethics, Uncategorized

    By coincidence, I received two pieces of e-mail today that both deal with the question of how
    much disclosure is appropriate when someone takes up a cause and is quietly paid to do it.

    First, a ray of hope from the Word of Mouth Marketing Association: a proposed list of 20 questions marketers should ask themselves to determine if their buzz campaign is ethical–and prefaced with these instructions:

  • Ask these questions before launching any word of mouth marketing campaign.
    Get answers from your agencies and vendors, as well as from their subcontractors.
    Think about the risks to your reputation before you cross any ethical lines.

    • Remember: Consumers come first, honesty isn’t optional, and deception is always exposed.

    Just as an example, # 8 of the 20 asks,

    Do we forbid the use of expressly deceptive practices from our employees/advocates, such as impersonating consumers; concealing their true identities; or lying about factors such as age, gender, race, familiarity with or use of product, or other circumstances intended to enhance the credibility of the advocate while deliberately misleading the public?

    This is a draft, and they’re actively soliciting public comment.

    But then the other post was a note from blogger BL Ochman about “flogs”–fake blogs–in support of Wal-Mart, by people who were paid by the retail giant’s PR firm to be in support of Wal-Mart and until recently didn’t disclose this relationship.

    She cites a much more in-depth article about the situation.

    That post says, in part,

    As a result of the new transparency, every entry on the blogs is now credited to one of three contributors: Miranda, Brian or Kate. A click on these single monikers reveals biographies of [the PR firm] Edelman employees Miranda Gill, Brian McNeill and Kate Marshall, whose clients include Working Families for Wal-Mart, the sites say.

    While noting that he was speaking in generalities and not to this specific situation, Dave Balter, president of the Boston word-of-mouth marketing firm BzzAgent, said: “Even if you’re doing the right thing but you know you’re going to deceive people, you have to do everything to make sure it’s completely transparent, and any tactic that crosses that line you’re doing a disservice to the brand [and] the consumer.”

    Now, Edelman has decided, finally, to disclose these relationships. What were they thinking trying to hide them?

    My suggestion to the floggers: go back and read those 20 questions from WOMMA, and try to answer them honestly. Otherwise, people will answer them for you, and it may not be pretty.

    Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail