When O’Donnell laudably experimented with to focus the audience’s awareness onand hopefully previous, Charlie Sheen trainwreck interview, courtesy of the tragic undertow that threatens to pull Sheen beneath for wonderful, I was overtaken, not through the pulling on the thread, in addition to the voracious audience he serves. It did not make me depressing, it manufactured me angry.
When it comes to celebrities, we can be considered a heartless country, basking within their misfortunes like nude sunbathers at Schadenfreude Beach. The impulse is understandable, to some degree. It can be grating to listen to complaints from persons who benefit from privileges that most of us can’t even think about. In the event you can’t muster up some compassion for Charlie Sheen, who can make far more cash for any day’s operate than the majority of us will make in the decade’s time, I guess I cannot blame you.
Along with the fast speed of occasions on the web as well as the advice revolution sparked by the World wide web, it’s particularly simple for your know-how marketplace to assume it’s exclusive: often breaking new ground and undertaking things that no person has ever done before.
But you can get other types of corporation which have currently undergone a lot of the exact same radical shifts, and also have just as excellent a stake while in the long term.
Get healthcare, for instance.
We sometimes presume of it being a huge, lumbering beast, but in reality, medication has undergone a series of revolutions in the previous 200 years which might be at the least equal to all those we see in technologies and info.
Much less understandable, but even now within just the norms of human nature, is the impulse to rubberneck, to slow down and consider the carnage of Charlie spectacle of Sheen’s unraveling, but of the blithe interviewer Sheen’s daily life as we pass it inside proper lane of our daily lives. To become straightforward, it could possibly be challenging for customers to discern the big difference amongst a run-of-the-mill attention whore, and an honest-to-goodness, circling the drain tragedy-to-be. On its personal merits, a quote like “I Am On the Drug. It is Termed Charlie Sheen” is sheer genius, and we can’t all be expected to get the full measure of someone’s existence each time we hear a thing humorous.
Extremely fast forward to 2011 and I am wanting to examine usually means of being a little more business-like about my hobbies (typically new music). Through the conclude of January I had manned up and started to advertise my blogs. I had created a number of totally different weblogs, which had been contributed to by good friends and colleagues. I promoted these actions through Facebook and Twitter.
2nd: the little abomination the Gang of Five about the Supream Court gave us a yr or so back (Citizens Inebriated) in fact contains just a little bouncing betty of its personal that could very perfectly go off from the faces of Govs Wanker, Sacitch, Krysty, and J.O. Daniels. Because this ruling extended the idea of “personhood” to equally companies and unions, to test to deny them any appropriate to operate inside of the legal framework that they were organized underneath deprives these “persons” on the freedoms of speech, association and movement. Which means (as soon as again, quoting law school trained relatives) that both the courts really have to uphold these rights for that unions (as particular person “persons” as assured from the Federal (and most state) constitutions, or they've to declare that these attempts at stripping or limiting union rights ought to utilize to important companies, also.
Thought the ZH famiglia would enjoy this comment from my old friend Sol Sanders, who has been watching China long enough to actually remember Mao. I read Chinese history as an undergrad and worked as a banker in the semi cap equipment market, which is now dominated by Asian nations. But the export market that China and its neighbors depend upon has never come back. Is China the next Egypt? A version of this column is scheduled for publication in The Washington Times, Monday, Feb. 14, 2011. -- Chris
Follow the Money No. 53: Rolling the dice in China
By Sol Sanders <solsanders@cox.net>
When scientists get further along with epigenetics, they may discover the Chinese have two unique DNA: a gambling gene, and another for hospitality. The first, of course, explains why Macau is odds-on favorite for replacing Vegas as No. 1 world gambling champion. The second suggests why few escape the lure of a Chinese campaign to win visitors’ hearts and minds.
Looking at a new determined shift in Beijing’s economic strategy, one has to chalk it up to that gambling gene. Intoxicated with turning into “the world’s factory”, Beijing plans to sail right past their successful collaborative development with foreign multinationals. Its new strategy literally amends Maximal Leader Deng Hsiao-ping’s dying instructions two decades ago to hide their capacities until they had achieved his four modernizations.
One can only chalk up Western businessmen naiveté to that second suspected Chinese gene, the ability to vamp any visitor. Of course, Frederick Engels, Karl Marx’s more literary companion, explained it all more than a century ago. He foresaw that on the way to the gallows, the capitalists’ greed would drive them to compete with one another to sell the rope to their executioners.
From mid-summer last year Chinese authorities – as a muddled but highly informative U.S. Chamber of Commerce report concludes – shifted from defense to offense. Years of studying their acknowledged total dependence on foreign technology has culminated in proposing 16 new megaprojects. With them they aim:
1] To provide new opportunities for stealing foreign technology. Now, before any technology can be introduced into China, it must be intensely “studied” -- in fact, stolen even before it enters the market. Another is increased allocation of “patents” to Chinese firms with virtually no verification, making it virtually impossible to pursue legal indemnification for losses.
2] To restore the primacy of the SOEs, the state-owned enterprises, those giant behemoths notorious for their inefficiency and corruption but powerful political entities. Massive funds [$25 billion] -- out of the huge 2008 stimulus package, originally aimed at warding off contagion from the world financial crisis – have been allocated to the SOEs to produce “indigenous innovation”
3] To continue to ensnare foreign companies, Beijing will suggest in return for continued tech transfers, they will get a share of the growing Chinese markets. They will also be offered participation in new technologies in China using government funds. But increasingly “import substitution”, that protectionist policy which crippled much of the third world before “globalization” became fashionable, is government policy.
Beijing’s new turn is loaded with risk. The history of Chinese innovation during the current boom is miserable. Eighty percent of China’s major firms do not have R&D at all. One reason may be it has been so easy to rent or steal needed foreign technologies. But there may be even more important – if difficult to evaluate – cultural factors.
Although China was historically leader in basic scientific development, simply said, the Europeans picked up on those breakthroughs to initiate the industrial revolution leaving China behind. Why? The answer to this question is perennial among scholars. One answer lies in China’s intense bureaucratization, in part arising from the need for huge collective enterprises – largely for water control. Another, of course, is Chinese learning has always put the emphasis on rote memorization and an inordinate, even religious, respect and adherence to what has gone before. It may be no accident, as the Communists used to say, now bereft of its Marxist-Leninist-Maoist dogma Beijing is turning back to Confucianism. [A statue of Confucius was recently installed in Tien An Mien square alongside a huge portrait of his greatest adversary, Mao Tse-tung.] With its emphasis on ritual, Confucianism represents the antithesis to the restless European [Greek] mind. An even greater threat to the new effort to produce originality may be the all pervasive corruption permeating Chinese life today which means vast sums promised R&D will go astray.
China is also taking other risks. Despite an intense campaign, Beijing has not been able to lure home more than a few prominent scholars among more than 62,000 Chinese in the U.S., many in technological research. With ties in both cultures, they have been critical to transferring technology. The new Beijing strategy may jeopardize that relationship as American business, reluctantly, and the U.S. government becomes increasingly cautious about China deals.
True, economic development in East Asia was always full of warfare over intellectual property. Japan, Taiwan and South Korea have been major culprits. But the Chinese pour salt in the wound by offering products overseas based on stolen technology. Thus California’s former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was talking to the Chinese about proposed federally subsidized high-speed rail based on their theft from three foreign companies that had cooperated in creating them in China. At the moment, Washington is grappling with the proposed purchase by Huawei, a Chinese entity with military connections, of an American IT company with the Pentagon as a client.
Beijing’s gamble if successful would insure continued giant leaps forward but like Mao’s infamous economic plays, this one could prove catastrophic.
The top donor for the University of Connecticut’s football program is apparently displeased with the hiring of their new football coach and wants their $3M donation back.
The rich individual previously decided to “donate” a large sum of money to this program, and because of that, he feels he has the right to influence what decisions the program makes. Look at these quotes from the donor:
- Burton called the situation “a slap in the face and embarrassment to my family,” and said he planned “to let the correct people know that you did not listen to your number one football donor.”
- “We want our money and respect back.”
- Although he was not seeking veto power in the hiring, he “earned my voice on this subject” as the program’s top donor.
- “You are not qualified to be a Division I AD and I would have fired you a long time ago. You do not have the skills to manage and cultivate new donors.”
This person does not work for the university or the athletic program in any capacity, yet because he wrote the biggest check, he feels that he has the power to impact school decisions. In this case, he’s angry that his opinion was ignored, but I’m sure that other schools in similar situations would actually let the donor’s opinion impact their decision. The scary thing is that I don’t know which is worse.
My first experience working in sports was with a college athletics department, working under the Assistant Athletic Director for Marketing and Revenue Generation. I was very fortunate that this school had a progressive marketing department where I was able to manage a CRM system, oversee digital and email marketing efforts, and dive in to some very interesting analytical projects and decision making. To this day, I am very thankful for that experience.
However, once I had finished up my year-long fellowship, I decided that college athletics wasn’t for me, and that was for one primary reason – development (the arm of the athletic department that handles alumni donations). I had the feeling that to really succeed within a major Division I athletic program, you needed to be involved in getting those rich alumni to donate more and more money. Budgets were always tight, and getting that donor money directly into the hands of the athletics program was crucial. This aspect of the job did not appeal to me, so I focused my efforts on professional sports opportunities.
This situation doesn’t exist with professional sports teams, If a company is paying that type of money, it’s for something very specific (suites, sponsorships, media, etc.) and that purchase does not include the ability to influence team operational decisions. In this particular case, the donor ended up ultimately retracting his statements, but the threat for the school was very real.
This will always be a unique aspect of college athletics, and I know that a lot of people in alumni development enjoy the challenge. It is a complicated blend of marketing, customer service, public relations and fundraising. But when I see a story like this, it reminds me about why I decided college athletics wasn’t the right spot for me.
Source: http://removeripoffreports.net/ online reputation management
The ultimate in repairing a bruised reputation for business
No comments:
Post a Comment