Quixote Views

Let’s be careful out there…

chuckmattina — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:46:30 +0000

I read about two cyclists that were hit by cars this weekend – one was a 38-year-old woman who did not survive. She was hit at 7:10 pm by a driver who said that she was blinded by the sun. The other was hit at 6:00 pm – the sun shouldn’t have been a factor with this one.

Spring has sprung, which means there’s a lot more cyclists getting back on the road now. I’m no dummy – in a collision between a 2,000+ pound car and my 18 pound bike, I know which will win. That’s why I do the best that I possibly can in terms of keeping to the right of the road, obeying traffic laws, trying to stick to roads with bike lanes and not riding too late in the evening. All I ask is for a little more caution and patience on the part of drivers so we both can get home safe and sound.

Let’s both share the road. And let’s all be careful out there…please.

And so it begins…

chuckmattina — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:06:21 +0000

The lies and distortion are upon us, and we’re a full year away from the presidential election! Consider the following ad from Mitt Romney:

Romney’s new 60-second ad uses footage from an Obama campaign event in Londonderry, N.H., in the final weeks of the 2008 race, when the Illinois senator and Democratic nominee was making his case to voters on the economy. Among the lines from that speech recycled in the Romney ad is Obama saying: “If we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.”

The trouble with this is that what Obama actually said was: “Senator McCain’s campaign actually said, and I quote, if we keep talking about the economy, we’re going to lose.” Obama was quoting an unnamed campaign advisor for John McCain. Romney’s campaign did provide the full context of the quote in a release announcing the new ad Monday night. But for those of us watching, there is no such disclaimer.

Regardless of your political bent, this is just flat-out wrong. I for one am mortified that candidates for the highest office in the land revert to deceit as blatant as this. Shame on them. In beating each other up, they beat up the psyche of America.

Wouldn’t it be great if all politicians treated us with the respect that we, as voters, deserve? And wouldn’t it be great if we all rose up and demanded that they stop this nonsense? Of course, it would be too much for them to take heed and listen…

This ad makes me angry, sad, and incredibly worried about the next 12 months.

We deserve so much better…from all politicians, regardless of party.

What Reebok should teach the politicians

chuckmattina — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 12:56:11 +0000

OK, so here’s something that I don’t get at all. Reebok’s TV commercials stated: “It’s the shoe proven to work your hamstrings and calves up to 11 percent harder and tone your butt up to 28 percent more than regular sneakers. Just by walking.”

Well, seems like the FTC had a little problem with that, which means that Reebok has agreed to pay $25 million to settle charges from the FTC that ads for their EasyTone and RunTone shoes were misleading.

Let’s fast forward to the upcoming debate season. How many misleading claims do you think we’re going to hear as the presidential campaigns get into full swing? It makes my head hurt just thinking about it – heck, if you’ve watched any of the recent Republican ‘debates’, you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Which makes me wonder – if Reebok gets slapped for misleading claims about your legs and butt, shouldn’t politicians get slapped for misleading claims about: the economy, jobs, the debt, the other guy’s record, etc. , etc., etc.??? Let’s give FactCheck.org some real teeth, and let them assess fines for half-truths, misleading statements, convenient omissions, and all-out lies. Maybe they could be standing on the sidelines during speeches and debates and throw penalty flags when a real doosie comes out. Who knows – maybe more people would actually watch the debates if penalties were called on-the-spot!

I don’t know if my butt is 28% more toned or not, but it’s nice to know that the FTC is so concerned about my butt that they’d go after Reebok. However, it sure would be nice if someone was just as concerned about the facts and the truth when it comes to political discourse and political advertising. If the FTC can go after Reebok for the claim in their commercial, why can’t (or won’t) they go after politicians who run equally misleading ads on TV???

Sadly, we may be more concerned about the truth when it comes to our butts than we are about truth in politics.

Of Bites and Weiners

chuckmattina — Wed, 15 Jun 2011 13:05:25 +0000

When I was a kid, if I broke the rules I feared my dad’s belt or my mom’s wooden spoon – guess mom was not a fan of pants or belts back then. Either way, if I did the crime, then I was going to pay with some time with either source of pain. But I learned my lessons, that’s for sure.

Now, I’m not advocating capital punishment by any means. But I don’t think that the proverbial timeout chair has had the same impact on society that my dad’s belt and mom’s wooden spoon have had on me.

Cases in point: Game 1 of the Stanley Cup finals. A Canuck bites the finger of a Bruin, on camera and for all the world to see. Does he get reprimanded by the league and told to keep his mouth shut and sit out a game? No way. Not even sure if he served any time in the penalty box (hockey’s version of the timeout chair) for his misdeed. Instead of doing real time for his crime, he goes on to score two goals in the next game, including the game winner.

Second case in point: Rep. Weiner. What he did was flat out wrong – maybe not legally, but socially. I’m pretty sure that most (if not all) of the belts and spoons I took as a kid were for social infractions and not for breaking any actual laws. I believe my parents called that character building. Weiner decides to go for some counseling (his version of the timeout chair) rather than doing the right thing. When you let it all hang out like that you deserve the consequences, and in this case the right thing to do is to resign. Zip up, go home, and start over.

My parents never seemed to hesitate in metering out punishment – and in the end, that was a good thing for me. Does it seem to you that our society is somewhat afraid to meter out punishment today?

So I have to wonder…has the timeout chair made us soft rather than swift and decisive? When it comes to bites and Weiners, I have to think the answer is yes…

Be the Change

chuckmattina — Tue, 10 May 2011 11:39:50 +0000

‘Be the change you want to see in the world’ is one of my daughter’s favorite sayings. Yesterday, I got a better sense of what that really means as I watched six intrepid young women prepare to embark on a nearly 24-hour trek to spend part of their summer working in three different orphanages in Kenya.

They each came with a suitcase full of clothes and toys for the children – which doesn’t sound like much, but it will mean a lot to the kids when you consider the fact that Kenya is a country whose annual GDP per capita is just $1,600 USD, which is 3.4% of what it is here in the U.S. They each held bead sales to help raise additional funds for the orphanages. And they each showed up with the belief that they can help change the lives of a few children by helping them get what they need to be adopted and cared for. They’ll know they’ve done their job when just one child winds up getting what they hope for – an identity, a home, a family, and love.

The Internet has made it easy to be a nation of whiners. A nation of complainers, not a nation of doers. If we don’t like something, we post about it or we put it in our daily status. That’s not being the change at all. It seems like it’s more part of the problem than the solution.

It took a group of college-age women to remind me to be the change I want to see in the world. To be passionate, not just loud. To act instead of posting. I hope that I have the courage, drive and will that my daughter and the other young women demonstrated yesterday. I may not be able to change the world, but surely I can change something for the better.

Godspeed, ladies. And thank you for being the change for the children you are about to meet.

Please stop the insanity & let the TSA do their job!

chuckmattina — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 12:54:02 +0000

They had a spokesperson for We Won’t Fly on CNN this morning, who made the point that passengers are our best line of defense on airlines today. Unfortunately, the example he used was the underwear bomber, who he said was stopped by none other than you and I – the flying public.

Am I the only one who finds this blather to be complete and utter nonsense? Hello – had the full-body scanners been in place, the underwear bomber never would have made it on to a plane in the first place!! Sorry, We Won’t Fly, but your credibility just got flushed somewhere over the Atlantic.

Oh, and the radiation scare they are trying to spread? Does We Won’t Fly inform you that the radiation from one scan is about the same as a person would get from flying for about three minutes in an airplane at 30,000 feet, where atmospheric radiation levels are higher than on the ground? No – didn’t think so. Or that the amount of radiation from a scan is vastly lower than a single dental X-ray? Ooops, left that out as well…

As for those at We Won’t Fly that expect to count on me to be a better line of defense than a full-body scanner, I’ve got some advice – please pick a different seat. I’m an airline narcoleptic. I fall asleep before the wheels are up, and typically stay sound asleep for the duration of the flight. Sorry, We Won’t Fly, but the full-body scanner is a much better bet than counting on me for your safety in the air.

To those that agree with the propaganda be spread by those at We Won’t Fly – thank you for not flying. I’m glad you’re not on board.

This Thanksgiving, please put your junk in the trunk

chuckmattina — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 23:40:08 +0000

I must say, I am amazed at the ‘debate’ over the full-body scanning at airports and the enhanced pat-downs introduced by the TSA – by the way, only to those who refuse to go through the full-body scanner. Salacious headlines flying around include ones like, “TSA’s new groping and fondling policy.” Just another example of the some of the quality journalism that sadly exists in our country.

So, leave it to the yahoos to come up with National Opt-Out Day, which they describe as follows:

It’s the day ordinary citizens stand up for their rights, stand up for liberty, and protest the federal government’s desire to virtually strip us naked or submit to an “enhanced pat down” that touches people’s breasts and genitals in an aggressive manner. You should never have to explain to your children, “Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it’s a government employee, then it’s OK.” The goal of National Opt Out Day is to send a message to our lawmakers that we demand change. We have a right to privacy and buying a plane ticket should not mean that we’re guilty until proven innocent. This day is needed because many people do not understand what they consent to when choosing to fly.

My suggestion for those in favor of National Opt-Out Day would be to please opt out of flying and leave the rest of us alone. I travel way too much, and the Saint Mary’s medal that I wear around my neck has never set off a single metal detector. Not once. I went through a full-body scanner last week, and sure enough, they saw it and checked it out. That they spotted it and checked it out made me feel good – they should pat me down to make sure that it was no threat to others. In other words, the system worked. And that’s a good thing!!

The sensationalism surrounding this drives me absolutely nuts. The government’s desire is to strip you naked…being touched in an aggressive manner…groping and fondling your ‘junk’ (like the TSA agent woke up that morning just hoping to touch that guy’s junk), bringing children into the argument…and the guilty until proven innocent stuff. Does checking your ID before serving you alcohol mean that you’re presumed guilty until proven innocent? I don’t think so, and I don’t imagine the Opt-Out organizers would think so, either. So how does checking you for explosives or other dangerous material before allowing you to board a plane mean that you’re presumed guilty until proven innocent? Couldn’t you make the same exact idiotic argument for traditional metal detectors??

There are full-body scanners in only 69 U.S. airports, and many of these airports also have the traditional metal detectors that you can go through. If you don’t want to go through the full-body scanner, here are your options: pick a different line, pick a different airport, or put your junk in the trunk and drive. Those are your rights – please exercise them and be quiet!

Me? Strip me naked and pat me down – I’m all for getting to grandma’s house safely!

Whipped Cream Ads

chuckmattina — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 12:24:48 +0000

Here’s a very typical scenario. Client wants new advertising. Agency develops some new campaigns. They get taken out for testing with consumers. The consumers see one campaign as unique, different and funny – and hey, who doesn’t need a good laugh these days? Agency gets client to pick said campaign because it is “out of the box” – but it also may be the whipped cream on a pile of poop. As Mona Lisa Vito said in My Cousin Vinny, “It’s a technical term, look it up.”

Whipped cream on a pile of poop means you’ve likely picked the best of the worst. It also probably means your campaign is off strategy, and that you’re going for the laugh rather than the sale. Examples?

Capital One credit cards. Do you really want to carry the same credit card as a bunch of bumbling neanderthals? Is that the image you want to convey when you pay for something? Tell you what – when I decide to stop showering and wear animal skins in public, I’ll be sure to apply for my Capital One card. Funny? Mildly. Aspirational? No way.

The old “yo quiero Taco Bell” campaign. Boy, when I’m hungry, I really want to get the same food that is coveted by a scrawny dog! I guess that since dogs have such discerning palettes (we’ve all seen what a dog will happily eat), I’m supposed to think that I’ll love it because a chihuahua loves it. Unique? Yes. Strategic? No way.

E-Trade. Let’s see…I’m supposed to be confident about becoming my own stockbroker and risk my life’s fortunes using E-Trade because a snarky baby can use it. Clever? Actually, no…its been done before. Smart? No way.

And then there are individual executions within a campaign that are definitely whipped cream ads. Geico is obviously running out of ideas. There’s now an ad where a mature woman mistakes the gecko for her cheating lover. Is it me, or is it creepy to think that they’re suggesting that some grown woman has been out cavorting with a six-inch lizard? How in the heck did the client approve that ad?

Ask your target consumers which ad campaigns have motivated them into some sort of action. Which campaigns have caused them to re-think a brand or company in a more positive way. Which ad campaigns speak to them as individuals – they’ve captured a truism that is important to them as people. Then ask if the campaigns you’ve developed do any of these things. If not, send the agency back to the drawing board.

Otherwise, have fun with your whipped cream. Just be careful, because when it melts, you’ll be left with…well, you know, poop!

By the way…would love to know which ads you think are whipped cream.

Against Indifference – Lessons from a Holocaust survivor

chuckmattina — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 12:41:38 +0000

“The opposite of life is not death – it is indifference.” Elie Wiesel

My daughter and I attended a lecture by Elie Wiesel this weekend at UNC. Mr. Wiesel is the author of NIght, a book that chronicled his time spent as a teenager in the Auschwitz and Buchenwald concentration camps. Several things stood out about what he had to say, including:

We are living in a world of indifference, and Mr. Wiesel challenged the students in the audience to change that. As a point in fact, ask someone to tell you who is running in the midterm elections this November. They may not only not know, they will likely tell you they don’t care. Indifference. Do we take the time to really understand the new health plan, the tax issues before us, the national debt, the reasons our troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan? Indifference. Unfortunately for us, the opposite of indifference has become ugliness – public shouting matches, rude behavior, name-calling, lies and half-truths. There seems to be no middle ground.

In my opinion, indifference is the biggest social problem in this country today. An indifferent and apathetic society is not one that will continue to move forward; rather, it will stagnate and become stale.

Mr. Wiesel also talked about how today’s youth have access to more information than any generation before it – pretty humorous coming from an 82-year-old! But notice that he said information, not knowledge. Which was his point. Knowledge is the active and cognitive act of making sense of information – it takes time and effort to distill vast amounts of information into knowledge. How many of us are really in search of knowledge rather than information?

Lastly, he posed a question: What if my past becomes somebody’s future? What a powerful – and scary – question. Thankfully, we weren’t indifferent back in WWII. Are we capable of being indifferent today? I believe that was Mr. Wiesel’s point…

Mr. Wiesel is a soft-spoken octogenarian. I’m glad that my daughter and I took the time to learn from the wisdom of his words and experience.

For one hour on a beautiful Sunday afternoon, we were not indifferent.

Too bizarre to be true…but it is!

chuckmattina — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 21:26:51 +0000

A woman is suing Google because she claims walking directions that she got from Google Maps led her to a highway, where she was struck by a car.

Mind you, Google provides the following disclaimer for its walking maps (which is still in Beta right now): Use caution – this route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths.

Ignoring any shred of common sense and apparently not being in the possession of the least bit of human intelligence, the woman was struck by a car on Utah State Road 224. Rather than admitting her stupidity, she sued Google and the driver of the car to cover her $100,000 in medical damages, as well as punitive damages – ostensibly for emotional and mental injuries (which may be pre-existing conditions – Google’s lawyers and insurance company may want to check for that.)

I bike. If I get a bike map from Google Maps or MapMyRide.com, I have the common sense to check them out and adjust them according to my comfort level with the roads suggested. Sometimes it means back-tracking to a safer road. Funny how that seems like the better option to me compared to biking along or across dangerous roads.

This reminds me of a 27-year-old that hid in Sea World until they closed, then jumped in the whale tank to swim with the whales. He got eaten. His parents sued because Sea World didn’t have the right signage. Yeah…that’s what caused him to get eaten, alright…poor signage.

Taking responsibility for one’s actions. There’s a concept! Too bad there are way too many knuckleheads out there that would rather sue than admit they’re…well, knuckleheads.