The Bittersweetness of Christmas (for me)

Nine years ago, I wrote a post on a message board about my gaming habits. Each year, at the end of the year, I remember writing it and I go back to the post and re-read it to see if anything has changed.

Admittedly, I wrote it on New Years Eve. I was in a different place in my life -- early 30s, about a year removed from the 9/11 tragedy, and I had just come to the decision that my "plan" to become a teacher would not be possible. I'd suffered through a horrendous student teaching experience, and I was ready to re-enter the workforce (although, that wouldn't happen for another 11 long months).

So, first -- here's the original post:
 

I'm sitting here, going through old Abandon-Ware sites, finding vintage Commodore64 games that I can run on an emulator on the PC.

Had to run downstairs to get an old Avalon Hill catalog, because - growing up, there were SOOOO many games I wanted. Started looking through it...wow...have I grown up.

I can remember being 14...15, maybe...seeing "Pennant Race" - and "Baseball Strategy"..."Statis-Pro Football"...I remember getting ALL the games one Christmas, and just sitting there. I remember going through Street and Smiths and tearing out that amber-yellow page, which had the ad for Ultimate College Basketball...and spending what seemed like a FORTUNE at that time...

Now...hell...I have more games than I know what to do with. I have - damn...probably close to 300 different sports games...another 250-300 family and war and role-playing games. 150 PC games (with even more downloading...)

I'm ONLY 33...Was it REALLY 20 years ago that I was so wide-eyed at all that these games offered? Now, it's like an addiction -- I buy, trade, plan, plot - all types of projects, and yet, I no longer can just sit down and play ONE Title Bout fight...hell, I actually played a whole 82 game SEASON of Slapshot (and for those of you who know the game...ha ha...yes, it was a VERY silly project)...But now...wow...

So...as another year comes to an end, I find myself wondering/hoping that, at some point, I'll regain that child-like enthusiasm; instead of these games hanging like some Sword of Damocles over my head, can I ever just, simply, remember how it felt the first time I got a new game? How I looked at EACH and EVERY player card, in detail? How fascinated I was by all the rules and dice and cards and charts?

Gosh...I sure hope so...

I remember that Christmas I'm referring to. I was about 13 or 14, and I was the kind of kid that *never* went looking for Christmas gifts. This year, however, I was determined to find out that I was getting what I'd asked for. I hunted and finally found the gifts, and was ecstatic. That Christmas Day, I was in Heaven -- I played a College Basketball game, had a great boxing match. It was, possibly, the purest joy I'd felt.

Now, years later, I "collect" -- I still play; but even a new game doesn't have that feeling of "Oh My God" that I had when I was a child. My collection has grown to an unwieldy 1500 games.

This point was driven home to me when I went downstairs to organize some things, and realized, I've run out of room. And, the bittersweetness of the situation is that -- as I face mortality -- I have to accept that I'll *never* be able to play everything that I wanted.

Part of my 'goals' each year is to move from "planning to get things done" to "getting things done." For a few years now, I've had a never-ending list of things to accomplish. But, now with Nicolo in the picture, my free time is sure to wane. It's now or never to get things finished.

My first 'big" project I'll undertake will be a large inventory of my collection, with the goal of reducing it, significantly. I've done a little so far; I need to do much more. As I've said before, there'll never be a time where I'm going to say, "I feel like playing a [type of] game -- I wonder what the 27th best one I have is?" There's no need for that much.

Next year marks the 10 year anniversary for that post, and I'd really like to see a difference. I know there will be a difference on one end -- Nicolo in my life will help me rediscover the fascination of Christmas, etc.; and that can only be a good thing.

An Inconvenient Inconvenience

Just in case people were wondering, "Wow, this recent turn of positive events for Chris and Anna Maria has us curious -- I didn't think they had that kind of luck!" -- the universe righted those wrongs last weekend.

Driving home on Friday, from work, I was looking forward to my weekend. A friend was coming out on Friday evening to hang out; Saturday, we had a slew of things going on, and Sunday, we had more visitors coming to see Nicolo. My mother-in-law was visiting, as well; so the weekend was chock full o' stuff.

I left work slightly later than I usually do -- one of those things you look back on, wistfully, and think, "if only...". I take mostly back roads, avoiding highways wherever possible; primarily because I don't like dealing with most drivers.

I turned onto the main road (Rte. 25) from a side street (Beverly Road). There was one car ahead of me, and one truck behind me. We entered Jericho Turnpike (Rte. 25) with no one in front of us.

Approximately 400 feet away, was another street (Longfellow). As we approached Longfellow (with the car ahead of me in the left lane; and the truck, behind me, in the right lane, there was a grey Suzuki in the turning lane, ready to turn on to Longfellow.

Only, the car didn't turn. Instead, it stayed in the turning lane and drove (slowly) through the intersection, then, began drifting into the left lane of the main road (having passed Longfellow already). The car in front of me honked angrily and sped off. The grey Suzuki didn't even jerk back; but just kept coming over, and planted itself directly in front of me; doing approximately 5 mph.

And then, it parked.

I don't mean it came to a stop; it didn't slow down. It literally completely stopped moving, with no brake lights or any indication. Before I could even react (since it had entered the road just a few feet ahead of me), I had collided with it. Thankfully, I was only doing about 15-20 mpg (since I'd had to slow down when I saw the car begin drifting over, earlier). My car took all of the damage, completely destroying the front end of my vehicle. The Suzuki took nearly no damage; just losing its rear bumper.

I leaped out of my car, irate, and stormed over to the other vehicle. All of the occupants were easily under 25 years of age.The male driver barely looked at me; while the female in the passenger seat screamed at him. The female in the back seat (pregnant) left the car and began speaking with me. Both females eventually left the car and were extremely apologetic. Apparently, the car had not been driving correctly -- it had shifted in and out of gear three times, and, the car had mysteriously shifted into "park" while they were driving. I asked/begged why they hadn't left the main road and turned down a side road. They continued apologizing, asking if they could call anyone, did I need a ride anywhere. While I was speaking with both ladies, the male tried to move the car, but my car was still hitched on his bumper, and it wasn't safe to try to move out of the lane. I screamed to him "Dude, stop!"

The pregnant lady told me her name was Katie, an she was the only under-25 year old redhead that worked at the Hauppauge DMV, and if I ever needed anything -- even something unrelated to this incident -- I should feel free to contact her.

I calmed, realizing that they were taking the blame (rightfully) for the accident; and I awaited the police arrival. Here is where things get concerning for me.

When the police arrived, myself and the other driver were obviously in our respective cars. We both filled out our police reports/statements. The officer ran checks, etc., I needed a tow truck for my vehicle. At that point, I saw the guy trying to pry the bumper off his car, and I went to the police officer. I explained that they had explained the reason for the accident was that their car wasn't driving properly; and, obviously, they should not be driving away from the scene (of an accident they caused, no less!) She checked their rear window wiper and brake lights (both of which worked -- as I'd said, my car took the damage), but she did not check the driving functionality of the vehicle.

The female that had been sitting in the front seat drove the vehicle away. I realized, after speaking with the officer, that they had said the *female* had been driving (not the pregnant one, but the other one). This got me worried; although, I'm not sure why.

Clearly, they had something to hide -- why else to state that someone other than the driver was actually driving the vehicle. Perhaps the male had a revoked or suspended license; or maybe he'd already had a few accidents (or, maybe he had no license) - whatever the reason, there's obviously some reason why they told the police someone else was driving the vehicle.

On the other hand, let's say this is an insurance scheme -- and the male has already been a part of a few accidents. Rather than draw attention to themselves (by having the same driver hit several times), they spread it around. It sounds crazy, sure; but there are crazy people in the world. It's also equally crazy to be driving a vehicle that shifts in and out of gear; to drive through an intersection in a turning lane; to illegally merge into a left lane of a highway; and to park your vehicle on the highway. In that context, the premise isn't so ridiculous.

So, now I wait. I wait to hear what will happen with my car (I suppose it could be totaled, there was enough damage), and everything is done on a far slower timetable than I would like (the appraisal won't even be done for a few days; and then insurance has to evaluate the feasibility of the repairs, etc.) If it *is* to be repaired, then there's probably a week's worth of work. All the while, I'll be in a far-too-small rental car (because my insurance company actually includes -- as standard -- a rental car rider that no rental car qualifies for ($30 a day -- try finding a car on Long Island for $30 a day; it's impossible)).

I suppose I'll learn not to be too cocky -- I'd almost thought the bad part of 2011 was behind me, before this was forcibly tossed back in my face. Yes, it could be worse; I could've been hurt, or any of the three others could've been hurt. Instead, the impact was low-speed enough (their car didn't even move) and my car did what it was supposed to; crumpling around the core. No one needed an ambulance, and everyone was walking. It's just a huge inconvenience; but one that -- frustratingly -- should have been avoidable.

Daddy Isn’t So Good With the Onesies

So, many of you know that my wife and I finally had our dreams realized with the adoption of our son, Nicolo Alessandro. Things happened extremely quickly and – especially after the events of this past February (a post on that will follow) – we kept things quiet until the end.

But, now that things have progressed well, I thought I’d provide some insights into how everything happened and how things have evolved since then!

We began working with the birthmother about 3-3.5 weeks before the birth. She had actually been working with another couple, who found themselves unable to continue the process due to some life changes. We share the same adoption consultant and attorney as the other couple and our consultant (Geri Scher) immediately thought of us, and arranged a conversation between us and the birthmom.

She was extremely nice and easygoing – quite the change from our previous experience! Of course, the one concern we had was that her projected birthdate (late September) would put her in direct conflict with my sister’s wedding on October 2. And, the birthmom was in Indiana – not exactly easy commuting (as we would discover).

She was visiting her OB/GYN every few days, as they narrowed down the due date. He first thought he would induce labor on September 30 (which we thought was not a great idea – because of the impending wedding), then, he changed his mind and moved it to October 7 (much better) and then, forward again to October 4 (also good).

On Thursday, September 29, she visited him again, and he told her, “You’re nowhere near ready – we’ll just reevaluate next week” and there were no plans for inducing.

On Saturday, October 1, we had a slew of errands to run. I needed to get my brakes repaired on my vehicle, since I knew the trip to Indiana was pending. We also had a few other preparatory tasks to accomplish.

Around 9:30am, the birthmother called us, to tell us she thought she was in labor. My wife (a nurse) talked with her for about two hours, trying to determine if it was true labor or something else. Around 11:30am, she finally convinced her to call an ambulance.

The ambulance arrived at 11:40am; she got to the hospital at 11:50am; and she delivered the baby at 12:16pm.

Then, she called my wife at 12:27pm, to tell her she was heading home! My wife convinced her to stick around for a while and avail herself of the medical attention she probably needed.

Of course, this was completely unexpected for my wife and me. We moved into high gear – we hadn’t packed yet (we threw things into suitcases; I – of course – overestimated how much free time I’d have); we needed to set up care for our dog (my sister would watch her; but we still needed to transport her first); and then we had the small matter of the fact that my car was in the shop. And, we had to tell my sister that we wouldn't be at her wedding -- good times all around!

Things work out; they always do; and we were on the road by 4:30pm. We drove straight through the night; finally arriving in Indiana at 9:20am the following morning. Made a stop at WalMart to pick up some amenities for the birthmother (who had been transported to the hospital in a nightgown) and then, we were on our way to the hospital.

We showed up – tired, unshowered and looking like we’d just driven 17 hours. Somehow, they still entrusted the child to us! He was actually waiting at the front area of the nursery.

I can’t even do the nursing staff justice. Their efforts to ensure our comfort were exceptional. We were treated as well as I’ve ever been treated in a hospital (which is saying something, considering my wife is very nearly the mayor at the hospital where she works).

Of course, adoption is truly a bureaucratic process. Every agency in each state has its hands out to get its $250 in fees for the adoption. This also means you have to stick around for a few days after the baby is released from the hospital before you’re allowed to leave the state.

*******************************************************

First, some insights about where we were staying. Frankfort, Indiana is never going to be confused for New York City. The first night we were there, we wanted to go out to get something to eat (remember, we’d been up since 8am the day before; with no sleep; and no real food). We also knew it would be the last night we’d be without a child, providing us with the opportunity to go somewhere “nice” to eat.

I headed down to the front desk at the Holiday Inn Express, where we were staying (the *only* hotel in Frankfort, for the record).

“Hi, my wife and I were looking to head out for dinner; do you have any recommendations?”

“Sure, are you looking to eat out; or bring food in?”

“We’re probably looking to eat out – it’ll be the last night we can do that easily.”

“Oh, well, you’re in luck; we have an Applebees right in town!”

“Hmmm… Well, Applebees is good; but I have those at home; anything else?”

Dumbfounded look.

So, off to Applebees we went.

The next night, with Nicolo in the room, we wanted to bring food in. I went back to the front desk.

“So, my wife and I were interested in recommendations again; we’re looking to bring food in tonight.”

“Fantastic, Sir – what are you looking to have?”

“Well, we’re actually in the mood for Italian.”

“Great, we have lots of excellent pizza places – 3Ds Pizza, Arni’s Pizza; Pizza King…”

“Are these ‘pizzerias’? or do they serve dinners, as well?”

“Well, they have sandwiches, too!”

“But, do they have dinners?”

“What do you mean?”

“So, say I wanted a nice chicken parmigiana with ziti or penne?”

“Oh [extended pause] … Well, we have an Applebees!”

*******************************************************

So, once we were able to leave Frankfort (after I drove the birthmom to court, to officially rescind her rights), we did. Tuesday night, we headed to Indianapolis, where we had made reservations at an Extended Stay (as we had, erroneously, thought we’d be room-bound, cooking meals, etc.).

We checked in and checked out as quickly as we could. While the hotel was old (understandable), it also just stank of transience. It would not have surprised me to find a dead body in the closet.

Thankfully, the manager was exceptional and worked with another facility in Indianapolis to not only get us a room; but also to get us one at the same rate. We checked in to the Homewood Suites and experienced – again – some of the nicest people (then again, people love babies; and they REALLY love people who adopt babies…).

We ended up doing nearly no cooking in the room (aside from toasting English muffins each morning) (although, thankfully, the suites were still cheaper than a normal hotel room). By Thursday morning, we’d already received notice from the attorney in Indiana that Indiana had signed off on our paperwork – all that was left was New York’s approval. Feeling pretty confident about things, we headed to the Indianapolis Zoo Thursday afternoon.

While at the zoo, around 3:15pm, we get a call from our attorney. He asked where we were (and, after we said, “Um, Indiana”, he asked, more specifically, where.) We told him we were at the zoo. He then asked if we had a fax machine handy (huh?), and that there was ONE more piece of paper left to be filled out. And, if we could get it signed (oh, and NOTARIZED (double huh?)) by 4pm, we could leave.

Thanks for all the advance warning.

We finally made arrangements to have it faxed to the Indiana attorney’s office; and we hauled ass to get there (on the complete opposite side of Indianapolis). We got there by 3:55; but the faxed, notarized copy did not get back to NY until 4:01, and – as such – they wouldn’t approve it.

Making matters worse, in speaking with the Indiana attorney, the form was something that should have been completed *months* ago. Both attorneys told us we were *probably* okay to leave (but, when I asked my attorney to provide something in writing, he declined; and said, if we did leave and were ‘caught’, he’d deny ever telling us we could leave – classy).

We went back to the hotel and did some research on ‘leaving before actually receiving permission’ (even though both attorneys stated that permission *would* be granted; the form was something silly that referenced how we knew, entering into an adoption, there were no guarantees – something that was also moot, now that the birthmother had stood before a judge). We elected to wait, and so – rather than leaving at 4am Friday morning (and arriving home at a reasonable hour); we had to wait to leave until nearly 10:30am (after hearing from our attorney), and arrived home at 3am, Saturday.

*******************************************************

So far, there hasn’t been an enormous change to my life – admittedly, my wife has handled 90 percent of the caregiving. We did have two baby showers this past weekend; which resulted in most of my house looking like a Babies R Us warehouse.

I have changed diapers, though; and tried to dress him. Some clothes are easy – others (like the afore-mentioned ‘onesies’) are just debilitating. It’s sobering to try to squeeze his head through the onesie, only to have him look at me with a face that says, “Good God, I hope I make it to three years old.”

My wife has taken it on herself to be the one that wakes up in the middle of the night for feeding (I’ve done so, sparingly, on weekends); but mostly, since I’m still working, she takes care of the feeding (although, it’s a misnomer to say I *don’t* get up – as he’s gotten older, his ‘cry’ has become far stronger … he might even be able to wake the deaf).

I’ve been able to keep most of my social commitments; but there has been expense (mainly the fact that our ‘fall cleaning’ has stalled out). Still, I’m a huge fan of structure – and I’m optimistic we’ll return to something like that (since we all need it).

Most importantly, however, today marks ONE MONTH since Nicolo was born. That is both amazing and humbling in my eyes. In only a month, I’d have a hard time envisioning a world without him (of course, I can easily envision a world where he sleeps through the night – that doesn’t make me a bad person, I hope)!

The Marshmallow Test

I have to confess, I only learned about this a few weeks ago. Apparently,sometime in the 1960s, a psychological study was started at Stanford University, which examined children's willingness and ability to delay gratification. A child, about 4 years old, is seated at a table with a giant marshmallow on a plate. The researcher tells the child, "You can eat this marshmallow now, or you can wait 10 minutes. If I come back, and the marshmallow is still there, I'll give you another marshmallow and you'll have TWO!"

The researcher leaves and the resulting agony/internal conflict is videotaped (and, eventually, placed up on YouTube).



As I watched this, I was fascinated. But, as I tend to do -- I started to think about the larger perspective. How interesting it is to watch these children agonize over something as simple (to us adults) as whether to eat the marshmallow. The stress and pressure they put on themselves is reminiscent of life-altering decisions adults have to make. And, you can't help but be envious of the children -- how great it would be, again, to have the most difficult decision in your life be simply holding out for 10 minutes, so you can double your marshmallow bounty.


Credit where credit is due -- I read about this for the first time on Bill Simmons' new Grantland website. His discussion on the phenomenon is far more detailed (and humorous) than mine.

What do YOU think about when you see this (especially if it's the first time you've seen it....)?

Why I Don't Really Like Baseball Anymore

For years, I was a huge baseball fan. More than any other sport, baseball has a robust history, and it was my sport of choice growing up.

Today, while I still appreciate the history and lore of the game, it’s nearly impossible for me to root for a team (or even watch a game on TV) anymore. I still enjoy going to games – minor league games more than professional; but that’s consistent with my overall sports interests (I prefer college basketball to pro basketball; college football to pro football, etc.).

And, this past week, a number of situations arose that caused me to become even more disillusioned with the sport. But, that got me thinking – what were the steps that started my fractured relationship?

Free agency – all sports have this, but baseball started it and is the worst culprit. Don’t get me wrong – I don’t necessarily have a problem with players moving teams, from a business-viewer perspective (i.e., the reserve clause probably WAS illegal on some levels). But, as a fan, I long for the days when players spent their entire careers with one or two teams. And, those days are long gone – there are but a handful of players who will do that (and, all too often, the loyalty isn’t returned by the team, either…)

But, even more than the loss of a player spending his career with one team (I mean, how do you root for a “team” when the roster makeup changes by 50-60 percent each year?), the impact really hit home when it came to money. Obviously, if you’re going to woo someone to play for your team, it’ll cost you, and the salaries in baseball (and all sports, admittedly) have increased at a pace that dwarfs any business in America. And, who gets to pick up the slack? The fans, of course.

Strike – I wasn’t even a teenager for the 1981 strike, which lasted 50 days. But I was a young adult for the 1994-95 strike, which really drove a strike through my heart. If I had to point to ONE situation that had caused me to fall out-of-love with baseball, it would be the 94-95 strike, which devastated the sport (even more than the steroids scandal, which, in the grand scheme of things, doesn’t even enter this list).

It’s reminiscent of how I was feeling last year, while I was looking for work. I decided, although I could do my job for ANY company, it was important for me to work for a company with a cause/mission/principal I could get behind. This came to a head when Cablevision began its litany of assaults on Scripps, causing viewers to miss many shows (same thing that happened with ABC and FOX). And, each time, Cablevision’s PR department had to craft message after message to show that they, in fact, weren’t the villains. It was all the other person’s fault. The viewers were the only losers. And, I thought to myself, how dismal it must be to come to work each day and craft passive-aggressive messages over what amounts to pennies.

And that brings us to this past week – first, the All-Star Game (being held tonight). A few years ago, the All-Star Game was revealed for its true purpose – effectively nothing – when a tie game was left as a tie, for the first time in history. The following year, the commissioner decided the winner of the All-Star Game would earn home-field advantage in the World Series. Now, the All-Star Game isn’t the festival it was when I was younger (interleague play killed that, too, which probably deserves its own entry here, but, quite honestly, I was disillusioned before that), but no fewer than 16 players – four from the NY area -- banged in “hurt” for the game (Mariano Rivera, Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, Jose Reyes – the batters were actually voted as starters by the fans).

Again, the fans suffer.

But, the coup de grâce was this past weekend’s complete mishandling of Derek Jeter’s pursuit of 3000 hits.

The game on Friday evening was rained out – unfortunate, and certainly something that happens in July.

The game COULD have been rescheduled as a straight double-header (e.g., fans come in for the first game and stick around for the second) simply by the Yankees saying, “this is what we want to do.” The opposing team would have no say in that decision.

However, the Yankees decided, instead, to propose a split double-header, where the teams play one game; the stadium empties, and then fans are re-admitted for a second game in the evening. They did need the Devil Rays’ consent for this, which the Tampa team did not grant.

On the surface, this seems almost sensible – why have the teams play back-to-back when they could rest for an hour or two in between. But, the Yankees were quick to squash that misperception:

When asked why the Yankees chose not to play a straight doubleheader Saturday, general manager Brian Cashman said: "Gate. We're not interested in losing, going from 81 home games to 80."

Wow. So, once again, it all comes back to money. Doesn’t it always? So much for Ernie Banks’ great mantra – “Let’s Play Two!” and so much for the days of Ty Cobb, Nap Lajoie and Honus Wagner where they played each day because they had a calling and they thoroughly enjoyed the sport. The idea of sitting out a game – an all-star game, or even a “meaningless” regular season game, never occurred to those players, lest they end up like Wally Pipp.

Yes, a great deal of that mindset had to do with the fact that there was no free agency (as we covered before) and perhaps that bordered on the illegal from a business sense; but I’d fully support a move where players weren’t motivated to head to a team due to money; but rather, because a team was the best fit or offered the best chance for that player to succeed or win.

It’s not unprecedented; Greg Maddux did that in 1992, signing for $6 million less with Atlanta instead of choosing to play for the Yankees. "Greg, above all, wanted to win," said his agent, Scott Boras. “The Braves offered him the most substantial degree of assurance of taking the World Series.”

And, while that didn’t turn out the way Maddux had planned, entirely, the Braves did make three World Series during his tenure (half as many as the Yankees – but the Yankees of 1996 were a markedly different team than the one of 1992, when Maddux made his decision).

In the end, I’ll probably content myself with reading the history, playing Strat-O-Matic (where contracts and contentious negotiations don’t enter into the equation) and avoiding the game today – it’s far more interesting in the rearview mirror.

Facebook Killed the Blog, Part II

So, I found myself wondering the other day about Facebook's impact on blogs, again.

When blogs first hit the scene, some 13-15 years ago, they were really, the only gig in town. If you wanted to interact socially, it was blogs or forums or nothing.

Now, of course, Facebook (and Twitter, to a far lesser degree) is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Way too many people view Facebook and social media as completely synonymous (which, they're not).

So, here's an example.

My blog, obviously, is public-facing. Anyone can find it, read it, comment on it. I don't restrict the viewing of the blog to anyone.

But, when I promote the blog, I do it on Facebook, a lot of times. When my friends want to comment, they do that in response to my link post on Facebook; *NOT* on the blog. The net result is that 90 percent of the comments to my blog don't actually make it TO my blog; they're restricted to my circle of friends on Facebook. And, any other viewers might not see that a good deal of my posts actually generate a number of comments.

Now, ideally, blogs are meant to be viral -- viewers should read them, comment and share -- and by doing that, the readership grows. But, Facebook continues to make that less conducive. Now, in some cases, it's understandable that people don't want to post publicly (maybe they want to send something to me directly; and they don't want everyone to see what they've written). And, that's the bigger risk of social media -- the fact that the web makes things archivable and findable and permanent.

I thought about this a lot last year, while I was out of work -- ensuring that what I posted in various places made sense given the venue (in other words, public forums demanded one level of self-imposed privacy; Facebook demanded another; email conversations could be less concerning). I went back over my internet history and ensured that anything I had posted in a public setting was appropriate and suitable.

I basically subscribe to this version of internet privacy (something we all should follow), and I see the value in being more careful (even now that I'm no longer looking for a job). But, I think you need to know the setting you're in -- this doesn't mean you have to completely change your online personality, necessarily; it just means that, perhaps, that highly off-color joke is better served through email than on Facebook.

One of my favorite communications professionals, Shel Holtz, has a great saying -- "New media do not kill old media" -- and that's certainly true. All of these media work together -- email has a place; blogs have a place; and Facebook has a place. Unfortunately, I wonder if blogs have overstayed their welcome -- not really from a functional standpoint (I still think they're outstanding forms of communication); but from an audience perspective.

Should I Be a Vegetarian? (Your Thoughts -- warning, long post!)

A few months ago, a friend of mine revealed that he had become the Suffolk County head of an organization called Move On! – an anti-war movement. I was quite envious because there aren’t that many things I feel that passionately about, in my own life.

So, I started thinking about what issues I did feel that passionately about; and – around that time – I started noticing even more advertisements and news stories about animal abuse. And I realized, I feel that strongly about that issue.

In ascending order, here is my hierarchy of ‘heinousness’ in regards to animal abuse (and, sorry, ahead of time, for the non-communications bent this blog has taken, recently – I’ll actually have a professional-related piece for my next post … I promise!)

7. Slaughtering animals for food.

Make no mistake, I still think there’s something a little wrong with people who do this; but compared to some of the other entries on this list, this is fairly benign, I suppose. I cannot imagine spending EVERY SINGLE DAY killing animals. I simply cannot. It’s especially perplexing because, well, to be blunt, we don’t NEED animal protein to live – many, many people are vegetarians, and they live extremely healthy lives; in fact, the lack of red meat in your diet severely reduces several health issues.

And, now, Marc Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, has revealed that, for 2011, he will ONLY eat meat that he has personally killed.

What troubles me (apart from sadists, which comes later) is the barbaric ways we use to execute the animals. I can almost – ALMOST – accept humane, pain-free killing (almost); but in some cases, the killing is anything but. Crab legs, for example – we have established machines to slice off the legs, while leaving the animal writhing in pain. Then, it’s tossed into a bin to die (it takes too much time to kill it; so, instead, they just expire, eventually).

And don’t get me started on veal.

Still, there’s hope – scientists are already working on “growing” meat (similar to how we create yogurt). I had joked about this years ago; but now, it’s actually a reality.

6. Animal Neglect

I have to put this one this low because, in many cases, the individual is mentally ill. There are many stories about people who are found to have 27 cats, 6 dogs, a cheetah, a parrot and 4 gerbils – all running around loose. These people are ill. I have 3 cats and a dog, and I already think that’s close to too many.

So, this entry is just for the people who are mentally ill. Still, they’re not without blame; someone should be monitoring them, etc. – but, I think this failing is with everyone (if they don’t have family, then the government should be intervening – in  no way should you be able to amass that many pets).

5. Hunters

This isn’t a case of “wow, I think hunters aren’t that bad;” but more of a case of “wait til you see what follows.” Thankfully, we do have *some* laws that restrict hunters, and most hunters seem to be interested in eating what they hunt. Still, I bristle when this is referred to as a “sport.” When a thug kills a policeman, who has a bulletproof vest and a gun, we don’t say the criminal was “the better sportsman” – we call him a killer. Call it like it is. When we outfit animals with guns, armor and/or anything else to truly combat the hunter, I’ll call it a sport; until then, it’s killing. The biggest risk the hunter has is being shot by another hunter, or going home empty-handed. Boo-hoo.

4. Animal MEDICAL Research

This is a tricky one; but, I have to think, we’ve evolved our computers well enough to be able to emulate a human reaction to medicine, etc.

I can remember reading an article in my local paper years ago [stop reading this paragraph if you’re squeamish]: It outlined a method how they tested for stroke medication. Of course, to do this, they had to  CREATE a stroke; which they did, on chimpanzees, by removing its eyeball. While it was awake. OK – now they have a stroke victim, which they can operate on.

The fact that the story still sickens me, years later, speaks to the vulgarity of the story.

3. Luxury Items and Animal PRODUCT Research

Yeah, I’m looking at you – fur-wearers and consumers of makeup that performs animal testing. It’s one thing to eat meat. It’s another to say, “Thank God there’s penicillin,” but, there’s a whole different level of contempt for those who continue to purchase the goods made by massive killings. Harp seals, for instance; who are beaten – but not to death – then skinned alive, to be left bleeding on the ice – probably praying something will eat them to put them out of their misery.

2. General Savagery

In all of these cases, one prays that there are sane people operating in those fashions. Still, we constantly see stories about the truly deranged that delight in their jobs – those who take sick pleasure in being more vicious than necessary when it comes to slaughtering animals – kicking them, torturing them, etc. One can only hope there is a special, even-lower-level of Hell for these individuals.

1. Sport/Entertainment

Here, I’m referring to dog-fighting, cock-fighting. I’ve noticed an uptick in the last few weeks on advertising from the World Society for the Protection of Animals. Again, this is some horrifying stuff – bear baiting (where the teeth and claws are removed; the bear is tethered to the ground and dogs are encouraged to bite it until it dies – for spectators’ amusement). And, of course, bull-fighting (where, even if the bull DOES win (against the fighter and his SWORD), the bull is still put to death – hey, congrats on your win!).

And, of course, I find as much fault with the spectators of these events as the participants.

Whew – so, where does that leave me?

Years ago, I had a book – The Book of Questions – which asked thought-provoking questions. One question (if I recall correctly) was along these lines:

If someone offered to pay you $100, would you tear the wings off a butterfly to kill it? Would you step on a cockroach?

And, the answers are obvious (and so should be the point – life is life, yet we’ll step on a cockroach for free; and we’d probably decline the $100).

So, is that the case? Is life really life? If so, why do we not get equally upset at seeing a cow (or chicken) killed for our food, as we do watching a dog clubbed to death in Thailand (where it will also be food)?

It leaves me at a crossroads.

For years, I’ve avoided confronting the issue – I never read Fast Food Nation or visited a slaughterhouse. I chose the ostrich approach. I’m not quite as cavalier as my wife (who definitely subscribes to this mentality), but I’m definitely sensitive to it. Should I *be* a vegetarian? I do love the taste of chicken. Should I be more like Marc Zuckerberg? Probably not.

In the end, I think it comes down to humane treatment. If the in vitro meat was successful, I would eagerly switch; but, wouldn’t the animals still be killed? Sure they would.

When I was younger, I used to send money all the time to the harp seal charity; before learning – of course – that probably fewer than $.05 of each dollar I sent actually went to the cause. I like PETA’s mission; not-so-much a fan of their approach (since most are now labeled as lunatics); so where does that leave me, again?

I ask, legitimately, as I would like to do something to further the cause; but I know I’m weak-stomached enough to not want to immerse myself into the darkness that this subject presents.

Thoughts?

How NOT to Use Facebook

Obviously, as someone who works in communications, I’m pay special attention to the way various companies communicate with their customers. And, as someone who saw the value of social media long before there were such vehicles as Facebook or Twitter, it’s always both entertaining and disappointing when someone really doesn’t get it.

Take, for example, the Long Island Wine and Food Festival.

For a small, regional event, there are nearly 1700 people who like/follow it online. That’s good.

Last year was the first time the event was held, over a weekend in June. Not sure how many people actually attended; but starting last September, they started priming the pump for this year’s event. It started by asking people to vote for them for “Best North Fork Event.” And, by November, they were requesting recommendations for the 2011 event.

From then on, about once a month (or more frequently), they would post something on Facebook about “Hope everyone is looking forward to the festival,” or “The 2011 Festival is right around the corner.” Each time, you had an opportunity to head to their website.

Let’s visit, shall we?

That’s it – you can send them an email; or submit your email to get on their mailing list. No information on last year’s festival; nothing. And, the page has been like this for months. Each month, another post would go up on Facebook, directing visitors to their website.

Starting in mid-May, things start to spiral downhill:

May 14 – “Looking for information about the festival” – and a link to the page.

You won’t actually find any information; but you can send us an email or join our email list (which, by the way, why can’t the information in the email list *be* the information sent out via Facebook? I digress).

May 15 – the same link posted.

May 19 – the same link posted.

May 19 – “We would like to let you all know that it is confirmed, the festival has been postponed for this year! Hopefully we will see you all next year! Enjoy the summer! There are tons of great wineries to visit and restaurants to enjoy! Check back often for updated information. Don't forget to join our email list!”

 

Wow – so in nearly no time, everything is off (but, you can still join the email list).

 

So, I did what any other engaged customer would do – I posted a comment; basically asking what happened and how surprising it was, after the marketing blitz, to see the event canceled.

 

My comment was deleted.

 

So, I posted again; asking “when was it postponed until?”

 

I received back a response, “indefinitely.”

 

I posted again, “why?” And, then another 5-6 people posted after me, asking much the same thing, and expressing their disappointment.

 

That was 17 hours ago; so far, no response.

On so many levels, this is a complete failure from a communications standpoint. If there was an issue with the festival that could be addressed; you have 1700 people who have already said, “I want to see this happen” – tap into that network. Secondly, why the lack of transparency? This isn’t a cure for cancer or equally valuable trade secret; you’re putting together a weekend for tourists. Be honest with your audience – what’s the reason for it not happening? Is it lack of interest; is it lack of volunteers? Of course, posting through social media to ask people to go to your website to sign up for an email newsletter than will be delivered to my email periodically is so incredibly behind the times – you have 1700 fans on your facebook page … communicate with them directly!

But, then again, no one asked me.

The Rapid Decline of John Grisham

***SPOILERS AHEAD***

I can still remember when John Grisham's "The Firm" came out -- it was an instant best-seller and a book I rapidly read through.

Secretly, I suspect, I'm a frustrated would-be lawyer. I don't think I'd really enjoy *being* a lawyer, but I do think I enjoy thinking about being one. Consequently, I find myself drawn to legal thrillers (as Grisham used to write).

"The Firm" was a good book - for 90 percent of the book. I felt he copped-out a little at the end, by making the main antagonist, essentially, the Mafia.

Of course, this wasn't his first book -- he had an earlier one -- but this was the one that put him on the map.

Quickly, Grisham began pumping out books - more quickly, perhaps, that anyone this side of James Patterson.

And, some of them were really pretty good -- "Runaway Jury" is still one of my favorites by him, "The Client" was pretty good, as well.

But, somewhere along the way, Grisham became a fan of the non-ending ending. And, that's disappointing.

He first veered away from being, what I would consider, a legal writer, some time ago. And, for sure, that diminished some of my interest. He stopped focusing on the nitty-gritty and his books became more of a "soap opera starring lawyers" genre. But, at least the endings were fulfilling.

I just recently finished two of his books -- the first, "The Associate" was an utter disappointment. A young lawyer, who had witnessed/been an accomplice to a rape years earlier in college, is 'recruited' by computer hacker thugs to steal information. He finally gets the FBI involved, and a sting is set up, but the cons catch on and flee, never to be heard from again. In other words, a lot of nothing happens.

From the book's Wikipedia page:

Janet Maslin of the New York Times stated, "Mr. Grisham so often writes similar books that the same things must be said of them. The Associate is true to form: it grabs the reader quickly, becomes impossible to put down, stays that way through most of its story, and then escalates into plotting so crazily far-fetched that it defies resolution. Kyle McAvoy is another of the two-dimensional yet terrifically likeable heroes who come to life on Mr. Grisham’s pages only to evaporate later. It’s easy to predict what choice Kyle will make at the end of the novel. It’s impossible to imagine, let alone care, what his life will be like once the improbably wild furor surrounding this one lone law-firm recruit is over."

Somehow, this "non-ending" apparently has become his go-to manuever. Following "The Associate" I immediately read his next novel, "The Appeal." This had a lot more grit to it. Town in Mississippi has been the site of toxic dumping that resulted in a cancer level 15x the national average. Two small-town lawyers win a $40 million lawsuit against the manufacturer, who is then approached by a firm that helps "win/fix" elections. Through less-than-honorable ways, the firm helps a candidate who is more sympathetic to the plight of manufacturer's liability win an election over a previously heavily favored incumbent. The verdict is overruled; the case is dismissed; and the manufacturer goes on, happily ever after.

Now, what this *doesn't* tell you is how much Grisham builds up the protagonists -- the two lawyers that are struggling to keep their firm (and the hopes of 300+ clients awaiting the outcome of this case) -- to be extremely sympathetic. The antagonist -- the CEO of the manufacturing company -- is near-devil-like. Even the patsy candidate is barely likeable. The lines are drawn very tightly.

Of course, at the last minute, the new judge has a personal tragedy in his life that -- we think -- may help him make the *right* decision (and uphold the verdict); although, as I was reading the book, I kept thinking what a convenient (and, as such, ridiculous) premise this was -- the weekend before he's set to make his decision, *something* happens to make him rethink HIS ENTIRE LIFE.

But, it's even worse than that; even faced with this new information, he still makes the wrong decision, and the bad guys ultimately win.

Admittedly, both of these books, on some level, were inspired by real-life information. And, I'm certainly not one to say "the good guy always has to win." But, I'm trying to determine why Grisham seems to think it's more important to keep his audience in suspense; as compared to the characters in his novels.


Easy for me to say, of course; considering the wide array of New York Times bestsellers I've penned already; but a reader can only know what he likes -- and I'm starting to feel like Grisham has been mailing it in for a while.

With the move of Richard North Patterson away from legal thrillers and into more political stories; that effectively leaves Scott Turow as the only true legal-thriller writer I know of (and he only comes out with books every 4-5 years, it seems; although "Presumed Innocent" is still the gold standard of legal mysteries).

Anyone else have any favorites in the legal thriller arena that I should be checking out?

Continuing on the Theme of Exemplary Customer Service

So, last week, there was an advertisement in our local paper for Petco, which was offering $20 off dog beds. Our dog has had her bed for quite a while, and we thought we might buy her a new one, but there was no information as to the price (just $20 off). So, I headed to the website to see if it was listed, and lo-and-behold, there was an option for a website chat.

 Here is the transcript to my "customer service" session: I think the transcript says it all...

Thank you for choosing PETCO! One of our representatives will be with you shortly.

You are now chatting with April.

April: Hello!  I am a PETCO Customer Relations Representative.  How can I help you today?

You: Hi - there is an advertisement in your weekly flyer for $20 off 'select PETCO oval pillow dog beds' -- do you know what the regular price of those beds might be? Where can I find them on the site?

April: May I know where did you see this advertisement?

You: weekly flyer - I'm on Long Island. Page 5

April: Thank you for waiting. I'll be with you in just a moment.

April: I'm sorry for the delay. I'll be right with you.

April: Thanks for your patience!

[total of 5 minutes]

You: ok

April: As much as I want to give you the regular price of that item. I'm sorry but we don't have the price list in our local PETCO store. However, I can advise you to call the store.

April: Can I have your ZIP code please so I can give you the phone number.  

You: Well - is it on the website?

April: I'll be right with you.

April: I'll be right with you.

April: Thank you for waiting. I'll be with you in just a moment.

April: I'm sorry for the delay. I'll be right with you.

April: I'm sorry for the delay. I'll be right with you.

April: Thanks for your patience!

[10 minutes goes by]

April: I'm sorry but we don't have online promo for $20 0ff.

You: Sigh...

You: No -- I'm asking -- do you have the bed, the product, online. Then, I can see what it is, what it's filled with, etc.

April: I will send you a link to a page that contains that information.

April: Beds.

You: there are 223 beds there

You: which is the bed that is listed in the flyer?

April: I'm sorry but we don't have the the list of promos that our local PETCO store have.

You: interesting

You: so, out of curiosity - and, no offense intended - but, what purpose does this chat serve?

You: If you're unable to tell me about products sold in your stores....

April: I can advise you to contact the store for more info.

You: but, I could do that without being on chat

April: I'll be right with you.

[5 minutes goes by]

You: Why would I just spend - approximately - 25 minutes in a chat window, to learn that, ultimately, the chat exists for the sole purpose of telling me to call the store?

April: I apologize for the inconvenience.

April: Thank you for waiting. I'll be with you in just a moment.

April: I'm sorry for the delay. I'll be right with you.

April: I'll be right with you.

[total of 15 minutes]

Sorry, our chat session has ended due to circumstances beyond our control. Please feel free to chat with us again if you need further assistance.

You're Overqualified to Provide Our Customers with Good Service

So, I have a few blog posts in the pipeline -- all of which are a little more serious (and lengthy), but I'm delaying the publication until a few other things work themselves out.

With that in mind, here's a true story from this past weekend.

I had to get my car's oil changed, and the appointment ran a little long. I was going to be late getting back home to meet my friends, so I decided to quickly run into White Castle to grab some take-out -- figuring fast food was the way to go.

I walked in and ordered a simple order -- 4 cheeseburgers and fries. The total came to around $7 or $8, and I pulled out two $5 bills to pay the cashier. I then thought that I might need the smaller bills for later in the day, so I asked for the $5 bills back and handed her a $20.

Her: Why are you giving me this?

Me: I think I need the smaller bills for later, so I'd like to pay with a $20.

Her: But, I already entered in $10.

Me: That's okay; just give me back the change listed there, plus $10 - it's the same thing and your drawer will be the same.

Her: I don't think I can do that...

Me: [head cocked to one side like a dog hearing a weird sound]

Her: Just give me back the $10.

Me: Well, if you can't do that, then cancel the order and re-ring it in. [again, this wasn't a large order...]

Her: I don't think I can do that.

Me: I'm pretty sure you can do that.

Her: I'll be right back.

She now leaves and heads to the back to talk with a manager, I guess. She's gone about two minutes (which is an eternity when you're already late). She comes back.

Her: Do you still want this order? The four burgers and fries?
Me: Yes.

Her: Okay, can I have the $10 please? [so, basically, nothing has happened yet]

Me: I can give you the $20.

Her: I need the $10; I've already rung it in.

Me: Okay, so cancel that order and ring it up again.

Her: I don't think I can do that. I'll go back and check again [as she heads back to the back again]

Me: I have faith you'll figure it out [as I walk out the door to head to Wendy's]

Wow. What bothers me even more about this (even more than the colossal ineptitude shown) is the fact that I *know* there are unemployed people who -- at this point, would TAKE a job at White Castle to help pay bills. Yet, they're repeatedly turned away for being over-qualified.

So, I ask -- does White Castle (or any employer) really get it? Isn't it worth hiring someone who is overqualified and will still come in and do a good job for you for however long; as compared to hiring someone who's happy to work for the wages, and is going to cost you business and cause blogs to be written about the customer service experience you offer?

I think the answer is pretty clear.

Why Politicians Make Good Marketers (and Vice Versa)

So, I happened to catch a news broadcast this morning (I think it was on Good Morning America). The show featured an interview with a politician whom, apparently, was in a bit of a pickle last year. In October, he was "going through some things," and it resulted in nearly a quarter of his staff resigning.

So, he went on GMA this morning to set the record straight. What we learned was the following:

1. He's in a good place now.
2. He's taking care of his two kids.
3. He's taking care of his 88-year-old mother.
4. He got help.
5. He's in a good place now.

That's it -- over and over, regardless of the questions asked of him, his answers were the same: some variation of those answers.

And I got to thinking, most politicians are just good speakers (and some aren't even that!). Most don't actually write their own material -- they have speechwriters to do that for them. The only thing they're asked to do is speak effectively (and in the case of today's speaker, even that was a challenge). So, I thought, why aren't more marketing professionals turning to politics? An original thinker -- someone who can actually *think* of what to say, and say it effectively, should be a slam-dunk.

Much like how I did in grad school -- when you're able to write effectively, you're already 10 or 20 percent better than everyone else. I sat there, with my mouth wide open, listening to this politician spew the same stuff out over and over. And then I envisioned his speechwriter, who probably advised him to "mention" these few key points; doing the facepalm, while he heard his politician repeating the same lines over and over, like a trained parrot.

It's interesting that the older I get, the less "awed" I am by professions/people -- celebrities; politicians; doctors -- there's no mystique to them, anymore. Today's broadcast was another stark reminder....

The Greatest Disappointment of My Adult Life

Hi, my name is Chris, and I now find myself strangely addicted to reality shows.

For YEARS, I avoided such shows, commenting on the drivel that lazy TV networks were pushing out at viewers who lapped up the content. As a writer, I was particularly disappointed, since I saw the movement as a decided step away from quality writing on television (like The West Wing, The Shield, Lost, etc.).

So, when Survivor first came out, I avoided it (and, still haven't seen an episode yet). When Big Brother and The Amazing Race were introduced, I continued my mantra (despite the fact that, apparently, The Amazing Race was well done).

But, let me back up for a minute. Really, although I consider my new-found "love" for reality shows to be a recent development, it actually started a LONG time ago. I watched the first season of The Real World in 1992 (wow, that hurt, I could've sworn I was in high school when I first saw that show -- not already a college graduate!). And then, a number of years ago, when I had a prolonged stretch of unemployment (and, unlike this past stint, I actually did lapse into mild depression), I found myself staying up late at night, drawn to shows like The 5th Wheel and ElimiDATE, primarily due to the cringe-worthiness of the contestants and the decidedly mean-spirited approach taken by the show.

But, then I got a job, and that period of my life went away (and, the shows got canceled), which enabled me to get back to good television.

When we first got the Food Network, I was drawn to shows like Iron Chef America -- I don't like to cook; not one bit; but I do like to eat. And, there was something appealing about seeing great food being made, with the pressure of time AND the competitive angle.

So, officially, my first "reality" show that I began watching religiously was Chopped. Unlike Iron Chef America, the contestants really only have the time we see on the show. They get four semi-random ingredients per course, and they must make an appetizer, entree, dessert in 20-30 minutes (including plating). They have no knowledge of the ingredients beforehand, and after each course, one chef gets "chopped."

From there, it was only natural that I'd find Top Chef -- which I consider to be the best cooking show on television. The competitions are innovative, and they do an outstanding job of showcasing personalities of the chefs as well as the cooking (so, you're actually invested in the chef and his/her progress throughout the show).

Continuing on the award-winning path, I next discovered Deadliest Catch, drawn by the ravings of my friends, and also the dilemma facing the show last year. It's probably the most "real" of any reality show, which continued to fuel my belief that I wasn't betraying my commitment to quality television.

Then, along came American Idol.

Drawn, initially, by the fact that EVERYONE I knew was watching it, I wanted to see what the big deal was. I caught the last few episodes of the year Adam Lambert finished second, and then, watched last year's show in its entirety, each week (I even posted about it last year!). While I find the early stages laughable (done primarily to make people both laugh and become invested in the contestants), I like the competitive angle that emerges. I'm finding Steven Tyler to be decent; but I was one who really enjoyed Simon's bluntness (and, it'll be interesting to see how this year progresses).

I could live with that as my reality diet, I think; but -- the last weekday I was home before starting my job, I started watching a Jersey Shore marathon, and -- much like a bad car accident -- found myself drawn to the show as well. Mind you, my own personality is nothing like those on the show; I think I find myself in awe that people actually function that way; but it's an interesting study on our population (and, of course, I posted about this show, as well, earlier this year).

I think I'm tapped out of reality shows now. I am watching American Idol again this year (and disappointingly, my favorite contestant from last year -- Charity Vance -- who was eliminated in the Hollywood Round, apparently met the same fate this year (based on spoiler lists leaked on the 'Net that detail which top 40 contestants advanced out of Hollywood Week)). Never mind that though, Charity seems to be doing JUST fine for herself (she has five songs on iTunes, and has been described as Katy Perry with her pop sensibilities; but with a better voice, better song creation and more introspection in her lyrics -- that's not a bad combination.

Here's one of her videos (I can't stop humming this song -- so advanced for an 18/19 year old). I'm reasonably sure she'll have a great, long career, even without American Idol on her resume.

(Sorry I've been posting far less than before, and -- even more damning, my recent posts have all been slightly less serious than I'd intended. I do have a lengthy, fairly serious post in the pipeline (probably the next one), and I may have another two posts, upcoming, with some semi-big announcements!)