http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2005/12/20051219-6.html

When I transferred into public schools in the fourth grade, I was just three weeks into the semester when the teacher told me point blank, in front of the class, that I was a freak and I didn't belong there. I didn't get much pleasure from that -- took years to shake that stigma.

Sadly, all it takes it a distinguished-looking counsel to call the executive leadership together, and completely ignore the Crisis Communications protocol. "Here, this is it. This is all you say. Just this. Trust me. I went to school for three extra years, and all of those classes on estates and trusts and taxes and torts and contracts and negotiations automatically give me God-like powers in understanding better communications and how people will react to information we present. Did I mention I am a lawyer?" Which we all know is a crock, but until you've got the buy-in at the top, AND someone advocating for real-time responses to real human questions, then you'll never have someone in the room when the attorneys throw their weight around. I hesitate to call this a communications crisis, because some would then blame the practitioners.

Good luck, Peter. We'll be watching.

Lovely, every last one of you, inside and out.

While we're at it, let's bring our Congress-weasels home and let them vote from their districts. http://ike4.me/ocp

Great point. Additional dimensions are often necessary to give context to a data set. We recently added that to something as simple as a threat matrix, by not just plotting the relative likelihood and magnitude, but including the anticipated drift over time. Just adding a vector arrow can make a chart more useful.

Well, at least Obama announced he was bringing home the troops! (...on the same exact timetable that Bush announced years ago. Doh!)

As I had to tell some others... "That planet is pronounced 'YOOR-uh-nuhs,' so your sign really isn't that funny!"

Bless you for saying it. We're actively separating our Monitoring and Analysis functions (we use Analysis instead of Measurement to highlight that difference further) by putting them in different departments. Our goal is to train up by the end of the year a team in customer service who will handle the minute-to-minute monitoring, and will be able to engage where it makes sense. Outside of that, though, Measurement and Analysis need to exist far outside of the hamster's wheel, lest you allow recency bias to cause overcorrection.

I've been trying to get this idea stolen for almost two years: http://ike4.me/odtv

Magnificent!

That's why I want to bring Congress home. All of them. http://ike4.me/ocp

Spot on, David. Let's also look at the long-term implications of Google's strategy. By going with a "social layer" as you describe it, Google+ doesn't have to go toe-to-toe with Facebook, and doesn't have to replace it. Eventually, Facebook will either stumble, crumble, or fade to irrelevance as some new technology bypasses the need for a walled garden. It won't be next year, but online empires are ripe for overthrow in 10 years. Google+ gives Google a way to stay nimble and flexible, adding new techs and services with the minimum touch necessary. They exist as standalone entities, making incorporation into the +System a matter of alliance or outright purchase. For instance, Facebook bought Friendfeed to grab the people who could scale certain types of features into the whole. Google+ builds those features outside, with a +bar to unite it all. Which architecture will be more nimble? Which architecture involves less investment for the casual user?

Redbox + Green Hornet = answer to the question: "Can a movie be worth less than a dollar?"

Dan, I know this post is old... but I just came across it. I finally got an answer on March 30, but it wasn't positive. Nor was it helpful, nor was it specific: http://ike4.me/o180

I agree with everything, but the experiment that got you there. White Tees are a commodity, and Websites aren't used to sell commodities, because there is too much noise in the marketplace. The people making money selling white tees are likely doing it as a B-to-B provider, or are succeeding at a retail level. They are dealing with economies of scale that make it impractical to seek out "onesies and twosies." You're not finding them because they aren't trying to be found. Back to the main point, I find it funny that companies trying to fill positions roll out a set of "job requirements" that not only are impossible to meet given the relative newness of the technologies, but rely on psychological attributes that are most often exclusive. "WANTED: Deeply creative artist, self-starter, who functions within teams and always makes deadline."

Sorry, Valeria, but I was looking for the Tip Jar for this post...

Ah, your sin isn't in sharing the statistics. The data DOES NOT LIE. No, your unpardonable sin is in your title. How DARE you come to such a hateful conclusion. Women are NOT weaker than men, even though they average 37 pounds less muscle, 5 pounds more in fat, 72 percent of lower body strength...

warning - use of cannabis has been shown to cause unintended side effects, such as: - loss of sleep - cravings for snack foods - incarceration - prolonged staring at the television - cravings for snack foods - surfer speak - Pink Floyd concert flashbacks - prolonged staring at the television - cravings for snack foods - poverty - loss of ability to play Jeopardy - loss of ability to play Wheel of Fortune - loss of ability to name a vowel - Vanna's what, like 60? - cravings for snack foods - unemployment - loss of that new car smell - loss of sleep - memory loss - cravings for snack foods

Well, *that* didn't go very well for us, did it...?

Gary, I have had a real problem with the Worshiping Transparency Flock (WTF). They see the source of friction as governments and agents who ought to be operating completely in the open. Let's say we know that Boris Yeltsin has a mistress that he meets on Monday nights, and gets more drunk than usual on Tuesday. That means there are certain kinds of communications that we ought not engage on Tuesdays when he's hung over. According to the WTF crowd, Yeltsin ought to not be a drunk. But the issue isn't whether he's hung over on Tuesdays, it's what we do with that information, and our speculation about the competitive advantage. According to Wikileaks supporters, WE should not be allowed to have internal memos about our Yeltsin suspicions, because they aren't above board. Yeah. WTF?

Always an honor to be included!

David... Back in my TV days, I was asked to moderate a panel for a local association. It was about two months after the 2001 terror attack, and they wanted to focus on that. It was an ideal topic for a panel, because there were so many divergent directions from which to draw. We had 7 or 8 people on the dais, representing the FBI, the TSA, and even a rep from a cruise line. I thought I did a decent job of stitching together the transitions, keeping the conversation flowing, and incorporating everyone's input. It was about a 90 minute session, and it has spoiled me on what panels can be. That panel worked because it gave us the Google Streetview Immersive Camera perspective. The people who attended got much more than if an individual presenter had tried doing it in a linear way. There was back and forth, progression, and healthy discussion about why different segments of the business and government world were responding in the manner they were. Most panels today are only drawing on the surface, and aren't thinking multi-dimensionally. Most topics are not conducive to what a panel can bring. My advice on panels? Mothball them. As you're putting together a conference, when you find a topic that no presenter will touch because it is beyond their individual comfort zone, then maybe you have a use for the tool. (Just picked up Resonate the other day... can't wait to get into it.)