Drug Naming Gone Too Far?

As a product marketer, I appreciate embedding messaging in your brand. Celebrex makes me want to celebrate. Viagra makes me feel more vital.

But have we gone too far when we have prostate medicine named FloMax?

5 bucks goes to the person who can suggest the best new drug name ... Post on the blog.

On Taking Notes

Now that I am back at work at NarrowStep, the TV over the Internet company, I find myself drinking from the firehose, rapidly taking notes while learning a new industry. Here is a tip that makes my notes much more organized and productive.

1. If an item is particularly important or insightful, I put a star next to it.


2. If an item requires further research or resolution, I put a question mark next to it.


3. If an item requires follow-up, I put a ballot box (open square) next to it. When the item is completed, I check it off.


4. If I have assigned a follow-up item to someone, I put an open circle next to it (similar to the ballot box but a circle rather than a square). In the notes, I indicate who is responsible. When the item is completed, I check it off.

Now you can quickly scan your notes for important points, questions, or tasks to follow-up on. No, I can't believe I am writing on taking notes. Yes, this has made a HUGE difference in my ability to organize my thoughts and not let anything drop through the cracks. Try it. You won't go back.

Clinton Strikes Back

I hope to God some of the invertebrate Democrats took notice of Bill Clinton's interview with Chris Wallace. Could the Democrats be developing a backbone in this election season?

The question: "Why didn't the Clinton administration do more about Osama Bin Ladin?" Put on your seatbelts ...

Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBwrqcgfEXI

Part II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rz4OgaVABQ


You can agree or disagree, but I applaud the chutzpah!

Invasion USA?

The "logic" being thrown around by the White House is astounding. In justifying the new bill on the treatment of terror subjects, the White House is hanging its straw hat on semantics. Let's not even touch how the proposal of an "annual review" of the suspect's case is a thinly veiled joke. But catch this - they are justifying the suspension of habeas corpus, one of the fundamental aspects of our legal system that prevents unfair imprisonment, on the basis that we have been invaded!! To quote Bradford Berenson, former associate White House counsel:

“There was a physical invasion of this nation on Sept. 11,’’ Mr. Berenson said.

“Is that invasion still going on?’’ asked Senator Spector.

“If there are still Al Qaeda cells at work here, it is,’’ responded Mr. Berenson.

Based on that criterion, the invasion will never end, just like the War on Terror will never end. Or the War on Drugs for that matter. There will always be terrorism, smaller groups exerting violent force using guerilla tactics because they can't prevail in open battle. Just because you call it a war, doesn't it is one.

Logically the White House is setting a precedent to throw out the Constitution - forever and whenever convenient. Over time, I think all of the creative circumnavigation by this administration will be deemed unconstitutional. From wire taps without a warrant, scanning emails without consent, to holding prisoners without trial, re-establishing precedent will take time.

In the meantime, can someone release the White House LSAT scores?

Politics: The Truth is Out There

It's much easier to attack politicians with half-truths and marketing slogans than to take a meaningful stance. Summoning the memories of the John Kerry campaign immediately brings up "flip flop" in my head. Fantastic marketing, poor democracy. Where are the savvy political marketers that can move beyond the age of sleazy car salesman to a level of sophistication?

With politics being a multi-billion dollar business, where is the candidate that has a web site that explains his/her stance on every issue? Distributed video clips of such discussions that can be consumed by the news or bloggers? A blog that takes stances, defends unwarranted attacks, and explains each vote that they make in the House or Senate?

Oh, it’s right here with Hilary Clinton or Bill Frist. Well, almost.

Contrast that to Jeb Bush with literally no information. ?!? Or take a look at George Bush’s stance on the environment. So 8 years, and all you can talk about is a marine park in Hawaii? At least there is a picture with Bush and a tree. You can really sort out the BS. For fun, compare against the minority leader Harry Reid. No pictures, but a lot more than you will want to read. I need a summary. Talk about a track record.

But let’s not pick on trees and Bush’s because that is partisan and too damn easy. How about Charles Shumer? Is that 5 month old content? One NY Senator isn’t eying the presidency or reelection. Clearly a lame duck. This voting season I am ranking web sites.

With voting season here, how much research are you doing on the web? Do you just vote along party lines? What about the primaries? Do you know the candidates? Do you know the issues? Don’t be uninformed and apathetic (previous post). Spread the word!

Jesus Was a Democrat

Continuing on religion, politics, and hypocrisy from the last post, I wanted to add something that has bothered me for a while. What separates Christians from Jews and other religions is their belief and study of the New Testament. In a single sentence summary, I would say that the New Testament through the story of Jesus as the son of God sets forth a new paradigm of morality based on “turn the other cheek” and greater compassion and understanding compared to the Old Testament’s crueler “eye for an eye” sense of justice. This could be one-dimensional or simplistic, but if you have a better single sentence, I am all ears.

Jesus would be against the war in Iraq, the notion of nation building, and democratization through violence. He would invest heavily in diplomacy, and welcome immigrants, even illegal ones, and provide paths to citizenship. Jesus would be against torturing prisoners or deporting them to torturing states.

Jesus would be against the death penalty. Jesus consoled sinners and would be for drug counseling and against “three strikes and you're out.” Jesus helped the poor and asked the rich to repent. He would be for progressive taxation and against dividend cuts for the rich. Jesus would be for more social programs rather than less. He would pour more money into the public school system. Jesus would share his healing hands and nationalize health care. And with a penchant for turning water into wine, maybe he is a little like Ted Kennedy without the driving record.

On the other hand, Jesus would be pro life, (maybe) for a religious government, and would teach religion in schools, although not to dictate morality for the sake of condemnation. Then again, he taught openly rather than imposing his views on others.

Overall, wouldn’t Jesus be a Democrat? How is it that the Republicans have hijacked Jesus and made him a big business, death penalty loving, you’ll burn in hell slurring, war monger? Either the Christians aren’t very Christian-ly or I have the New Testament and the Old Testament really bass-ackwards.

It's Time for a Little Humility

The only thing scarier than a fanatical Islamic cleric talking about jihad may be a fanatical Catholic talking about jihad. The Pope’s recent address enraged Muslims around the world leading to violence including the shooting of a nun. In quoting a medieval Catholic prince, the Pope described Islam as “evil and inhuman” in an address he described as designed as “an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue.” Well done, sir. I say, well done.

The Pope retracted some of his statements by saying he was reading a medieval text “which do not in any way express my personal thought.” Well, then why did you read it? So what you are saying is that this was an antiquated and inaccurate text as opposed to the more antiquated, but accurate Bible?

The whole affair from the initial speech to the apology stinks of hypocrisy. Any Catholic who demeaningly quotes that Muhammad “command to spread by the sword the faith he preached” has little understanding of the violent history of the Catholic Church. And the speech was “largely criticizing the West for submitting itself too much to reason” according to the NY Times. The Church has a long history of attacking science and reason, from imprisoning scientists for suggesting that the sun is the center of our solar system hundreds of years ago to attacking the volumes of scientific evidence for evolution today. History has shown that over time, science and reason has won most of those battles. Maybe it’s time to be using more reason than less, be more tolerant and a little more humble.

Perhaps the most interesting storyline here is that this is the first time (!?!) in recorded history that a Pope has apologized for his remarks. It is shocking to me that religious leaders are still highly regarded as infallible. They may be walking the path, but everyone has missteps.

The primary dimension by which I regard and respect organized religions is by their tolerance of other beliefs, in essence their own humility. I respect Buddhism and generic notions of personal spirituality and have gradually more objections as you approach Catholicism and then Islam.

Why is it so hard to understand that as long as you call the other person an infidel, an evil doer, or tell them they are going to hell, you are building barriers, not bridges. You are creating wars, not building peace. You are causing suffering.

Well, if the Pope can finally apologize for his remarks, maybe it’s time for us all to admit that we could be wrong. And by us, of course, I mean you. Just kidding.

Blog Vacation

I am off to the Virgin Islands for a week. Unless I can and want to blog from my Motorola Q, there will be a bit of a hiatus. So in the spirit of restoration I will share with you a story the US President of Narrowstep (TV / video over the Internet) relayed to me.

Two men were chopping wood in the forrest. One man was furiously tolling away without pause while the other took a 15 minute break every hour. At the end of the day, the woodsman that hadn't taken a single break noticed that the other man's pile of wood was bigger.

"How did you chop more wood than me when you took so many breaks?" he asked.

"On my breaks I was sharpening my axe."


Off to sharpen my axe ...

Idea Wars: Death by a thousand cuts

In Internet marketing, you need to evangelize your brand and your idea across a broad range of channels: on organic search engines like Google, pay per click advertising, in the blogosphere, in related portals and magazines, podcasts, and of course on your own website, which is your personal megaphone. A breadth of exposure accelerates the viral spread of an idea, although as Gladwell points out in The Tipping Point sometimes it only takes a few mavens.

Killing an idea is pretty much the same. You can't always go full frontal against an idea like evolution, because there is a whole lot of evidence supporting it. In fact, no one has ever tried to dispute it verbally to me - although I sure would enjoy the opportunity, especially after my trip to the Galapagos. Instead, you need to attack it subtley in the schools by changing the wording: "possible" or "alternative" theory. You need to nominate people of faith to the highest levels of the FDA even those who have "written books and articles encouraging women to turn to prayer and scripture to help heal ailments such as premenstrual syndrome, postpartum depression and eating disorders.. " And you need to cut off the people who want to learn about evolution in college.

The NY Times reports today that "somehow" evolutionary biology got removed from the list of majors that is eligible for government grants for low income college students. It was an error, and one that should be corrected soon enough to deny this year's applicants. What's odd is that the list of majors is automated, there shouldn't have been any deliberation or human intervention. But somewhere someone intervened. and thus it seems there was a motive. What is ethically unconscionable for the Department of Education is going to be erased as a "clerical error."

It's unintuitive to campaign for something we take for granted such as evolution, when we share 96 percent of the DNA with a chimp. You may think it is a moot point. But here is the real, shocking truth - 64% of Americans believe in creationism, that God directly created humans. No ape ancestors at all, a complete contradiction of evolutionary theory. So it isn't quite a "tyranny of the minority" so much as a scientifically illiterate populace. Now seems like the time to increase investment in science education, the very point of the above grants.

For the creationists, it's a subtle campaign to bleed evolution to death: a death by a thousand cuts.

Asleep at the wheel, on line, and at the baggage claim

In response to the foiled London liquid terrorism plot, US airport security has been stepped up. Of course this is yet another late response to threats that have already been identified. It’s not like they didn’t know. Hell, it’s not like I didn’t know either. I have always known ways around security if I wanted to take down a plane. Still the FAA finds itself miserably unprepared and without a plan to install equipment to detect liquid explosives. It all seems like a farce, especially since the regulations tell you exactly how to smuggle liquids on (prescriptions, baby formula, etc.). And frankly, it’s just really frustrating as a frequent traveler.

So frustrating in fact that I begin to wonder how much America is willing to push back against unwarranted levels of inconvenience caused by incompetence. You now have to arrive 2 hours ahead of time to major airports, especially because you almost have to check baggage – the cardinal no-no of business travel. And because people just aren’t prepared, flights are invariably late, tacking on even more time onto your trip.

Even worse, airlines aren’t prepared to handle the estimated 20% additional baggage. This weekend they had to kick-off 6 passengers off my Delta commuter plane because we exceeded the weight limit. Then, because of miscalculation, they had to remove 15 additional bags. So tack on some more waiting for your bag that never comes. I am still waiting for my 15 lbs bag as I type, while I watched people walk off with 60 lbs “overweight” bags. Apparently common sense doesn’t apply to baggage control.

I don’t expect anyone to speak up against the FAA or the airlines; Americans’ patience for being manipulated is astounding (Note: I filed a complaint). But I do expect the number of air travelers to dip, especially for shorter segment flights – business travel. In a world where digital collaboration is getting increasingly more feasible, this is the wrong time to piss off travelers.

I am shorting the airline industry, but oddly enough, this is the first time I have felt that the security measures are effective. But affectivity and reasonable convenience are two different things. Both are required for a successful airline industry.