Tag: politics

Will Millennials Put an End to “Gotcha Journalism” or Perpetuate It?

Category : Political Science & Economics, Technology
Posted on January 2, 2010 by Nathan Lustig

I think one of the most interesting stories of the 2010s will be whether my generation puts an end to “gotcha journalism” or makes the problem even worse than it is today.

The classic definition of gotcha journalism usually refers to an interview style where the interviewer tries to trap the interviewee into saying something that would be damaging to themselves or their cause. It has been around since the early 80s and became firmly rooted into our political and popular culture since then.

With the rise of the Internet, journalists, bloggers and citizens have taken gotcha journalism to new levels. The barrier to entry is much lower: instead of having to secure an interview with someone in order to trap the interviewee, the new breed of gotcha journalism uses the Internet to sift through all of the statements that a person has made in their entire life to try to paint them in a bad light.

Now, bloggers go through politicians’ every public statement for any misspeak or inaccuracy and then try to crucify them. It started with John Kerry being labeled a “flip-flopper,” moved to George Bush‘s butchering of the English language and more recently, led President Obama’s Green Energy Czar to quit because of statements he made almost ten years ago. When President Obama misspoke on the campaign trail, saying that he had visited all 57 states, right wing bloggers tried to make it seem like Obama was stupid. When Sarah Palin burst onto the national scene, left wing bloggers and some in the media sifted through her previous public statements to search for any inaccuracy.

It seems like 75% of the news stories I read about each day have to do with some politician getting raked over the coals for some statement he just made that is different from a statement he made a long time ago. Many times, the person leveling the charge is a fellow politician, along with the media and the blogosphere.

My generation is the first generation to be online from an early age. We first interacted with email, then instant messaging, then social networks and now blogs. We created (and are still creating) vast amounts of data about ourselves, much of which is stored online. We have archived AIM conversations from when we were in 6th grade, digital pictures from high school and college that are online and we all have our dumb Facebook wall posts that we made throughout our college years.

Many of us have blogs on wordpress or blogger and many more have microblogging accounts on services like Twitter where we make observations and pithy comments about our daily lives. I know I’ve changed alot since I was in 6th grade and I assume I will change almost as much between now and the end of the 2010s. During the next decade, as people in my generation get older and become leaders in business, politics and culture, will we still be subjected to gotcha journalism like our public figures are today?

One argument is that since everyone has all of this content online, we will become desensitized to people’s dumb or incorrect statements from when they were young. Everyone has pictures of themselves on Facebook that they wished never made it online. Everyone is going to have a poorly thought out wall post that could be taken out of context, or a pithy remark on Twitter that does not stand the test of time. Anyone who blogs about anything interesting will be majorly wrong about something. Will millennials become bored by the new gotcha journalism because everyone has something online that could make them look bad?

On the other hand, millennials may just make gotcha journalism even worse than it is today. Since everyone has created gigabytes of online content, bloggers and the media will have an easier time digging up dirt on anyone who enters the public eye. Imagine being able to see the new candidate for Governor at a boozy college party or getting a transcript of his AIM conversations with his best friend or girlfriend from high school. The media, bloggers and most of all, the citizens will eat this stuff up. Ratings will go up and everyone will be happy, execpt for the public feature.

I hope that my generation helps start the shift away from gotcha journalism. I can’t imagine being shocked by the vast majority of the dirt that someone would dig up about a public figure online. I hope that millennials are willing to allow people to change their opinion and not be called a flip-flopper. I hope we will cut public figures some slack when their college photos get published to the major blogs and their old blog posts come back to haunt them. I’m not optimistic, but I am hopeful. If not, we will have some really boring politicians, business leaders and public figures!

Do you think millenials will help stop gotcha journalism or do you think the problem will get worse?

December Books

Category : Books
Posted on December 26, 2009 by Nathan Lustig

I read three interesting books in December. All three of these books actually made me think, which doesn’t always happen. The first two books were an amazing contrast and I think I wouldn’t have enjoyed them as much if I had not read them back to back. Here’s my thoughts on my December books, Infidel, Three Cups of Tea and Soccernomics.

Infidel – Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Infidel is one of the most powerful books I have ever read. It is about Ali’s path from Somalia to the United States, with time spent living in Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Germany and the Netherlands in between. Without giving away too much of the book, Ali was born into the Somali clan system and was raised as a devout, conservative Muslim. She faced incredible hardship during her life including living multiple war zones, abusive parents, female circumcision, forced marriage, an internal struggle with her religious beliefs, death threats and so much more. Her story is so incredible that if it were written for Hollywood, you would think it was fake.

A little background. When the Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was butchered by an Islamic extremist in broad daylight in the Netherlands, the terrorist stabbed a 5 page note to Van Gogh’s chest. The note was addressed to Ali and included a fatwa, or holy order, calling on Muslims to kill her. The books tells Ali’s life story that lead to this horrific conclusion.

While reading the book, I found myself questioning how anyone could believe in cultural relativism, especially if they read Ali’s story. I see cultural relativism as a continuum. On one end is the people who say “our values are right, other values are wrong.” The other end is people who say “all cultures are equal, we must respect their practices, as their values are as good as ours.” I’ve gone back and forth along the cultural relativism continuum for a long time now, but after reading Ali’s book, I am falling much farther toward the first end of the spectrum. I think that my reading of cultural relativism is now something like this: I can understand why people have the values that they do in different countries, but I believe that there are universal human rights and truths that everyone should adhere to. For example, I can understand how someone born in the rural, tribal hinterlands of Somalia could believe that female circumcision is the right thing to do, but I don’t believe it’s wrong to try to stop the practice.

I’m probably not doing a good job of explaining myself here, but I believe that Infidel is one of the most interesting books of the 21st century and potentially one of the most important. I highly recommend Infidel.

Three Cups of Tea – Greg Mortenson and David Oliver Relin. After reading Infidel, I dove right into Three Cups of Tea. I had never heard this story, but after reading the book, came away inspired. Three Cups of Tea is about Greg Mortenson’s quest to build schools and improve the quality of life for children, especially girls, in rural Pakistan and Afghanistan.

In 1993, Mortenson, an American, failed at summiting K2, arguably the world’s most difficult mountain to climb. Mortenson got lost climbing back down to civilization and wandered into Korphe, a tiny mountain village in Northern Pakistan. He was sick, tired and lost, yet the impoverished Muslim villagers nursed him back to health and gave him amazing hospitality. After living with the villagers for about seven weeks, Mortenson was able to go back home ot the United States. But before he left, he agreed to return and build the villagers a school to educate their kids, especially their girls.

Fast forward to 2009, Mortenson has built over 130 schools and countless clean water projects, women’s centers and self improvement facilities in rural Pakistan and Afghanistan. His schools have educated over 55,000 children in an area where America is not all that well liked. Mortenson has succeeded in helping these children by sheer personal grit, determination and amazing perseverance. He has spent years in Pakistan and Afghanistan, braving some of the most dangerous places in the world, in order to help children get an education. He believes that books, not bombs, will make the world a safer place in the future.

Mortenson is now one of my personal heroes because he has done so much good, without any official mandate. Mortenson is a charity entrepreneur. He has gone into an area that had a huge need and filled it as best as he could. I truly believe that Mortenson deserves a Nobel Peace Prize and believe he will get one within my lifetime. If you want to be inspired and read about one of the most amazing people on this Earth, read Three Cups of Tea. I can’t recommend a book any more highly.

SPOILERS: After reading Infidel and Three Cups of Tea back to back, I really wanted to hear what Ali and Mortenson would think about each other. By the end of Infidel, Ali believes that Islam needs to have a reformation because many of the core tenants of Islam advocate violence, oppression of women and a “backward” outlook toward the word. She does not seem to believe that there are moderate Muslims, only religious Muslims and secularized Muslims. The does not seem to believe in the concept of the “silent majority.” These ideas are completely understandable if you lived in her shoes and lived the life that she did. They may even be completely correct, but I am not so sure.

Mortenson’s story seems to prove otherwise and provides signs of hope. Although he is kidnapped by the Taliban and threatened by some religious Mullahs, the vast majority of people he meets are devout Muslims that are good people. They are clearly not secular and are very religious, but do not have any problem with an infidel like Mortenson. In fact, many of them are willing to put their life on the line to protect him. Additionally, these rural Pakistani and Afghani Muslims are willing to educate their girls and the girls are willing to learn. Mortenson’s example of how education can help people break free of poverty is incredibly powerful and I think Ali would agree that what he is doing is amazingly important. I would love to be a fly on the wall if the two of them would ever have a candid conversation.

Soccernomics – Simon Kuper and & Stefan Szymanski. Soccernomics is nowhere near as heavy as the previous two books, but is still very interesting. Kuper is the author of Soccer Against the World, another book I read this summer, and is back at it again. Soccernomics is the Moneyball of soccer. The authors try to bring statistical analysis to the pitch, just like Michael Lewis did in Moneyball. The authors tackle why England always seems to fail at major tournaments, which countries overachieve and underachieve and who will be successful in the future.

My favorite part of the book is the section about Olympic Lyon, currently one of the most successful clubs in Europe. Just like Moneyball, the authors show why Lyon can be such a good club with limited resources. Lyon goes against conventional wisdom and is incredibly active in the transfer market. They have a stable front office and only buy players who are between 20 and 22 and are among the top 2-3 players in their country or are Brazilian. Once the players sign with Lyon, the club spares no expense to help the players adjust to living in Lyon and French culture. I found it amazing that other clubs, even the richest in the world (Chelsea, Man U, Real Madrid etc) don’t do this. They simply sign the player and hope he is able to adjust. Third, Lyon sell players as soon as they show any sign of deterioration and never try to sign center forwards, as they are the most over valued players in the transfer market. If you liked Moneyball or like European soccer, Soccernomics is the book for you.

Note: If you are interested in donating to Greg Mortenson’s charity to build schools in Central Asia, check out the Three Cups of Tea website.

Beata’s Travels: Why Don’t More Americans Travel Internationally?

Category : Travel
Posted on December 17, 2009 by Nathan Lustig

Note: This is the second guest post by one of my best friends, Beata Rak. Here is a link to her first, about her travels in Europe. After graduation, Beata moved to London, got a job as a tour guide and bartender at her local pub and has traveled around Europe and the Middle East. After living in London, Beata moved to Australia to continue her adventure, where she currently lives.

In my travels I have come across pubs in London that have been around since 1666, churches in Paris built in 1207 and have seen pyramids in Egypt built in 500 BC. It makes you realize how young America is. It also makes you realize how rich in culture America is because it is truly a mix of nationalities from all over the world.

I think every American should Google their last name and find out a little bit about why their ancestors immigrated to the US. Even if its just to understand the origins of the name and historically understand what was going on in the world at that time. Then go out to those places and see where your family comes from. It will make you respect your great great grandparents more and will make you prouder to be an American. Visiting Berlin and Krakow truly made me saw the struggles my parents faced growing up in post WWII Poland and then it made me understand why they fled communism. Plus, you will add to the very low number of Americans out there traveling.

Another issue I wanted to bring up. American backpackers!! Where are you? I have been traveling for a while and the number of Canadians, Australians and British people I meet far outnumber the Americans I meet. And in Australia? I can’t tell you how many Americans I did run into who have told me, you are the only American I have met traveling. Americans do travel yes, but just not to the same degree as other countries. WHY? We have much more people that Canada, the UK, or Australia.

Is it really because we are such a big country that when we want to travel we can just go to Florida or Colorado? That we really do not need to leave the country to vacation? Is it money? Perhaps, but there are people who can afford Hummers so there are people who can afford to travel. Non-American backpackers claim its America’s size that keeps Americans in its borders. I do not agree with this. I think it is time. Few Americans have the time to travel. And I think it is a shame. What is eating up all of Americans time? Is it work? School? To do lists? I don’t know, I could attempt to blame it on corporate America, but I know that wouldn’t be fair, or entirely true. This is a topic I have thought about a lot and will return later too. It needs much more contemplation.

Only 20 percent of Americans even have a passport. A shame. Truly a shame.

—

After reading Beata’s email, I decided to include my response here.

So why don’t more Americans take time to travel? I’ve seen it time and time again on my trips to Europe. There are tons of Europeans and Australians and even a fair amount of Brazilians and Chinese. I’ve seen about the same number of Canadians as Americans, yet Canada is about 10% the size population wise as America.

I don’t think it is size. I think there are many factors. First, work and vacation time. Americans get the least amount of paid and unpaid vacation of any developed country. Most companies start new employees with 2-3 days of vacation for the first year, whereas Europeans get at least a month. Americans are putting in ever longer hours to keep up with the Jones’. This leads into my next point.

Materialism. There is a huge percentage of Americans who would rather have things than experiences. They would rather spend their money on a big screen tv, a new Hummer or a house with an extra bathroom. It seems to me that many people in the rest of the world would rather spend their discretionary income on experiences, rather than things. Many Americans think in terms of things, rather than experiences.

Third, the bastardization of American exceptionalism. I think that there is a decent sized chunk of the US population that thinks “America is the best, why should I go anywhere else.” Whereas previous generations thought that America was great but still respected and wanted to experience the rest of the world, it seems that currently some think the rest of the world isn’t worthy of our time and energy. This change is sad. It’s the same phenomenon as when people made fun of John Kerry for speaking French when he ran for President.

Is Your City Startup Friendly?

Category : Entrepreneurship
Posted on November 23, 2009 by Nathan Lustig

I was talking with a few people at the last High Tech Happy Hour and the last Capital Entrepreneurs meeting about what makes a city startup friendly. We came up with a short list, but I’ve been thinking about it ever since. What makes a city startup friendly and how can cities that are not startup friendly make changes to become more startup friendly?

Startup friendly cities need to have a high density of smart people. Potential founders of startups need other smart people who could be potential partners, contractors or employees. Most cities that have a high density of smart people happen to be cities with large universities that attract a huge supply of smart people each year. It helps that these cities have universities because it’s even better to have young smart people, rather than simply smart people. Young people can afford to take bigger risks and are more willing to work longer hours for little or no pay than older people who may already have families, mortgages or other obligations.

Another helpful characteristic is low cost of living. If founders can live cheaply and find cheap office space, it makes it much easier for a startup to get off the ground. Additionally, having a low cost of living allows startups to stretch their investment dollars much further. Employees, rent and just about everything else is cheaper. I talked to one Madison-based founder who has successfully sold one company and is on his second startup who believes that Madison’s low cost of living is one of the most important reasons why his company succeeded and his competitors did not.

Access to affordable office space in a business incubator is another key characteristic of startup friendly cities. Business incubators are an important asset for startups, especially if they are affordable. Unfortunately, many incubators I’ve seen end up charging close to market rates. Incubators are an important step for startups because they are usually the first move from working out of the founder’s bedroom. They also provide camaraderie, connections and bring startups out of isolation because the rest of the people in your office are also running startups. It’s much better for a startup to move into an affordable business incubator with other startups, rather than move into an affordable office space next to a lawyer, construction contracting company and a non-profit.

It is extremely important for startups to interact in a community of other startups. Having other entrepreneurs around, especially entrepreneurs who have been successful in the past, is important because founders can ask for advice when they have problems. A mentor program like MERLIN Mentors is very important because it matches up experienced people who have been successful before with inexperienced startup founders. These mentor programs not only build a community of startups, but they provide specific feedback to startups and help them overcome challenges that they might not if they were left on their own.

Another important aspect of an entrepreneur community is free networking events like the High Tech Happy Hour and Capital Entrepreneurs. Events like the High Tech Happy Hour bring smart people together who are not necessarily focused on entrepreneurship and startups, but are fertile ground for finding employees. Local, free entrepreneurship groups like Capital Entrepreneurs offer founders of startups a place to meet others who are doing what they are doing. It also creates a community and gives founders of startups some semblance of co-workers. Starting a startup can be lonely if you do not get out and interact with others who are facing the same challenges and dilemmas that you are.

These free networking events provide a way for experienced entrepreneurs to mingle with people who are just getting started. Experienced entrepreneurs set an example and show everyone in the city that starting a company is viable. They can also provide advice, but simply having experienced, successful entrepreneurs in your city makes your city startup friendly. Cities like Boston, San Francisco and Seattle have these networks. Others like Madison and Boulder are just getting started, but are on the right track.

These experienced entrepreneurs can introduce inexperienced founders to professional service providers like lawyers and accountants who are willing to help entrepreneurs. It also helps if your city cultivates a network of experienced, flexible professional service providers. These service providers should be willing to take equity, give discounts or defer payments into the future for startups that they think are going to be successful. It is extremely helpful if startups can still get top notch professional services, without breaking the bank during the company’s research stage.

These professional service providers can help startups gain access to capital that they need to fund their business. Ideally, a startup friendly city will have VCs, angels and other rich people who are interested in investing in startups, but not all cities must have all three. A strong network of professional service providers who work with entrepreneurs can make introductions to rich people who are willing to invest. Some startup friendly cities can be heavy on angel and rich individuals, but light on VCs. Another way cities can help entrepreneurs is by advocating for small business loans and other alternative ways of funding.

Startup friendly cities generally have support programs in place for entrepreneurs. They tend to have low taxes. It is much easier to start a startup in a city that does not have 10% sales tax, like the city of Chicago. The state of Wisconsin provides a 25% tax credit to angel investors who invest in certified Wisconsin startups. Wisconsin also offers low interest loans that are forgiven if the startup fails. Both of these programs help entrepreneurs succeed. Other states have implemented programs that fund early stage startups.

Finally, many people who start statups generally like living in cities. They like walking to work and living in tolerant environments. They like to be able to meet in coffee shops, go to interesting restaurants and enjoy life with their peers. It’s best to have good weather. Low crime and good schools are also helpful. Overall, creating a city with high quality of life keeps the three most important ingredients, experienced entrepreneurs, rich people and smart, young people, in one place.

Cities can begin to implement policies that help foster entrepreneurship. Cities can start by creating a business incubator for startups that offers offices (with windows) at 50% discounts. They can start to create mentor programs like MERLIN and create entrepreneur networking groups like Capital Entrepreneurs. Service providers can start offering discounts or equity for service deals. Once one service provider has success offering this deal, it quickly becomes the industry standard. I’m not advocating that government do all of this. People who want to see their cities become more friendly to startups have to do some of the work themselves.

Government does have a place. It can offer incentives for startups to move to their cities. It can lower taxes or offer government programs that provide easier access to capital. It could create a new business incubator and it could help create a community of entrepreneurs by publicizing entrepreneur success stories or the local startup community. Government could help make cities more startup friendly simply by being more friendly to startups themselves.

Characteristics of Startup Friendly Cities

Figure out if your city is startup friendly. Rate your city on a scale of 0-2 for each characteristic and score total the score at the end. 0 means that your city does not do it at all, 2 means your city does is very well.

Access to capital
High concentration of smart people
Low cost of living
High concentration of rich people
Network of experienced entrepreneurs
Mentor programs
Low cost startup incubator
Low taxes
Governemnt support
Flexible professional service providors
Free networking events
High quality of life
Tolerant, vibrant, walkable cities
Large universities
Culture of entrepreneurship
Educated workforce
Good weather
High concentration of science and technology workers
Direct national flights
Entrepreneurship advocacy groups

I would say Madison, WI gets a score of 23/40. Milwaukee gets a 13/40. San Francisco gets 36/40.

How startup friendly is your city? Do you agree with my list? Do you have any characteristics to add?