John Zogby, in an AJC article, describes political content on the Internet as :
"There's no regulation. There's no objective standard for truth. There's unlimited ways to get away with just about anything," said John Zogby, a New York state-based political pollster. "It's here to stay, and it's growing by leaps and bounds every election year."
And this environment is different from TV how? Zogby misses key differences between TV and the Internet:
- You can filter the Internet
- You can talk back to stories on the Internet
- You can change the story on the Internet
- You are in control on the Internet
To compete in this new economy, you must continually learn by:
- Gathering information (Aggregate)
- Process information (analyze/synthesize)
- Apply information in context (knowledge)
Just a note to myself as I ponder my navel this am
Gary Hamel, director at the Woodside Institute, pens a column in the WSJ about Google and its growth rate. In his conclusion, he writes:
Google seems to have grasped the new century's most important business lesson: The capacity to evolve is the most important advantage of all.
He posts at Voic.us a scathing criticism on the efforts of Georgia newspapers to use the web.
He is right. Enuf said. On to the roast!
Several authors have talked about the long history of the Bush family and oil. Kevin Phillips in his latest book, American Theocracy, makes no bones about the fact that the current Middle East policy is in fact a geopolitical strategy devised by Dick Cheney on behalf of the Oil Industry in the late 90's. But, if you have any doubts how the public feels about the price of gas and Bush — look at this graph, thanks to Political Insider, created by Stuart Eugene Thiel. Any questions?
For all the talk in the political sphere of taking personal responsibility in health care, precious little is being done to prepare people to learn about healthcare options. However, such lack of discussion doesn't negate the argument that self-education on health issues works.
An obituary for Dr. Tom Ferguson, found in today's New York Times, discusses Dr. Ferguson's passion for helping individuals understand their health care needs and options. His daughter credits Dr. Ferguson's willingness to "tweak" his doctor's directions, for managing his case of multiple myeloma, for extending his life.
"Being a doctor, he was ahead of the game," Ms. Dreiss said. "He kept with the traditional party line and did what doctors told him he should do but tweaked their advice in his own way. He read widely, worked out his own doses and was not afraid to experiment; when he heard about a clinical trial involving thalidomide, he called the drug company and told them he wanted to be in on it. He lived far longer than most people with this disease do."
Andy Grove, co-founder of Intel, documented his efforts to learn more about prostate cancer so that he could participate in managing his affliction. This 1996 Fortune magazine story highlights his efforts and is a testimony to his success (Mr. Grove is a survivor).
Bottom line, Dr. Ferguson's thesis is correct. So, how do we teach people to learn, to manage the information critical to their success – even survival?
WSJ column by Andy Kessler, The Design Economy, posits that perhaps the stock market knows how the economy works better than we do as it zips past the behavior models we expect it to conform to.
Perhaps here's how the world works these days. No need to borrow billions and build big ethylene plants anymore. You invent something here (chip, movie, iPod, medicine, financial instrument), email the design overseas for manufacture in $1-an-hour factories (OK, not financial stuff), and then ship it back for consumption. Sure, this runs up trade deficits, and our precious dollars leave the country, but that's only half the story. Those dollars come back and invest in the U.S. Most go into long bonds, 10-years and 30-years. That's why Alan Greenspan left with a puzzled look on his face. Foreign buying is keeping long rates low; the yield curve is flat.
Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal opines in today's issue that blogs may so reduce our inhibitions to the point we will live as though we are all residents of South Park.
Mr. Henninger seems to try to stay calm despite his jump to that conclusion. Nevertheless, his concern is amplified by many, especially those from the fundamentalist religions, who believe the Internet must be regulated or we will all face moral extinction.Because so many fail to see the Internet for what it is, many fail to see the Internet for what it is. It is and can be the message board on the public square (of course, executions were held for those who dare post treasonous messages, back in the day). It can be the greatest invention mankind has seen since the wheel. And, it can be regulated to death by those same people who see Harry Potter as a design to get children into witchcraft instead of the fire lighting their imaginations and creating one of the greatest revivals in reading in recent memory.So, we can choose to take our society into the dark ages, or to go forward into the knowledge ages. Our choice.
The first two posts are indicative of where my head is today. Let's face it — if you don't analyze what you learn, you know nothing…
That's what Bernanke says – (original source is today's WSJ — subscription required)
"Good data support community growth and development by helping to identify previously unrecognized market opportunities," Mr. Bernanke said. "Free markets can be a powerful source of economic development, but markets work less effectively when information about potential opportunities is absent or costly for private actors to obtain."
The WSJ is kind enough to provide the link to Mr. Bernanke's remarks found at the Federal Reserve site.