When Obama Wins, Thank a Republican
by Brendan Delaney
According to Joe Scarborough on Meet The Press this morning, Newt Gingrich’s recent Republican Primary win in South Carolina was not so much a victory for Newt Gingrich as it was a primal scream by Republican voters against the Republican Party establishment.
Newt Gingrich wins South Carolina Primary
As a former Republican myself, I can identify with those who are so frustrated with their own party that, in order to send a message of contempt to their party leaders, they would be willing to nominate a completely unelectable candidate like Newt Gingrich. I sent my own message to the Republican party in 2007, when it came time for me to renew my drivers’ license. At that time, when given the opportunity to change my political affiliation, I opted to become a Democrat. I did this because I didn’t want to be associated with a party that I felt no longer represented the best interests of anyone I knew. I was also highly disillusioned by the way they so cynically rammed through a candidate as unqualified, and unintelligent, as George W. Bush (whom I did not vote for, btw). The election of George W. Bush allowed the Republican Party to take care of their cronies in corporate America, and also set in motion many of the policies that led to the dismal state of our economy today. And while they may have secured the White House in 2000 and 2004, they sacrificed the allegiance of people like me - people who believed in the Republican party and its ideals, before the Republican party cast aside those ideals in favor of catering to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
So now I am a Democrat, but it hasn’t exactly been a match made in heaven. I’m a big fan of American business, and I’m not a huge fan of unions. These are two qualities that put me at odds with a lot of card-carrying Democrats. While I’ll concede that unions are great, if you happen to be in one, they also drive up prices for the rest of us, which leaves less money in our pockets, less money for spending, and ultimately, less jobs in the economy. Business, particularly small business, is the lifeblood of our economy. It creates 80% of the jobs, and generates tax revenues that fund many of the government programs that so many Democrats are fond of. The lifeblood of our economy is not big corporate America, which, in cahoots with the financial sector, seems increasingly intent on sucking the wealth out of the middle class, hollowing out our country from within, and lining their pockets with ill-gotten gains. They have done this with the blessing of the Republican Party, which has assisted them by channeling their political donations and lobbying efforts.
So when I left the Republican Party in 2007, it was because I came to realize what many Republican Party members are just now learning - that the Republican Party doesn’t represent the best interest of the bulk of Republicans. Instead, they are controlled by, and work in the best interest of, large corporations and the big banks in the financial sector. Republican Party leaders cynically cloak their true motives with messages of “freedom” and “job creation.” And they perpetuate the notion that it’s more American to be a Republican. Unfortunately, a lot of Republican Party members believe just that. But, as the South Carolina Primary has proven, a lot of them are starting to wise up.
If Joe Scarborough is correct, then the “primal scream” heard in South Carolina is, in effect, a protest by Republicans against the Republican Party establishment. And it’s not the first Republican protest we have seen from within the ranks of the party. To date, there have been three Republican primaries, and there have been three separate winners. And the very existence of Ron Paul as a semi-viable (though ultimately doomed) candidate is a form of protest as well. His enduring success, despite the best efforts of mainstream media to ignore his existence (a topic itself worthy of a lengthy blog post), only further serves to demonstrate that Republicans are in the throes of an internal revolution. And revolutions, as Republicans know, are never good for business.
At the end of the day, what we have learned (the net-net, in business-speak) is that the Republicans have shot themselves in the foot, and it's potentially fatal. In 2012, Republicans have a tremendous opportunity to take back the White House, and they are squandering it. They sold out their own party, and created an environment that is ripe for exactly what they are hoping to avoid - a two-term Democratic president. As a result, the Democrats aren’t going to win the election in 2012, the Republicans are going to lose it. So, for all you Democrats out there, when you’re dancing in the streets in November after Obama is re-elected president, be sure stop for a moment and thank those who made that victory possible - the powers that be in the Republican Party.
Rand Fishkin – Thoughts on Anchor Text
Rand Fishkin's Main Points
Pictures from Wall St Protests
My company recently moved to the financial district, so I have a front row seat to the "Occupy Wall St" protests.
I Want Out of Klout
by Brendan Delaney
Twitter's Complicity is Reckless
Klout is a site that claims to measure your influence in social media. Based on your activity and interactions on Twitter, it assigns you a number from 1 to 100. People with higher scores are considered better influencers, and they're rewarded with free stuff from advertisers. If they keep their Klout score high enough, they keep getting free stuff.
Most people seem to think that Klout is pretty harmless. It's a marketing scheme; a way for brands to connect with those people most likely to influence others to buy their stuff. And it's clever. But there's more to Klout than meets the eye. And not in a good way.
For starters, it's not an opt-in service. They rank everyone on Twitter. If you have a Twitter account, you have a Klout score. Don't believe me? Check it out for yourself. Go to www.klout.com/yourtwitterusername.
- Unfortunately, you can't cancel Klout
So, when I signed up for Twitter, I didn't know that I would be automatically enrolled in an enormous online contest without my consent. Had I known, I would have thought twice about joining. Will employers take my Klout score into account some day? Will I be turned down for a job because my Klout score isn't high enough? I would never want to work for a company that takes my Klout score into account, but that's beside the point. I want to know who died and made Klout the central authority on social media.
But let's not overreact. Perhaps my fears are unfounded. It's not like I can't opt out of it, right? I mean, if I send Klout an email saying "please cancel", they would be happy to oblige. Right?
Wrong. You can't opt out. And if you email them, they will tell you that.
And that scares me.
In short, Klout has created an account for me without my consent, harvested my tweets, and assigned me a grade based on the nonsense I post on Twitter. It's impossible for me to opt out, and everyone in the world can see my score. Employers could use my Klout score as an evaluation tool, and a lot of people take it seriously. Yikes.
But let's not forget...the real guilty party here is Twitter. Their complicity in all this is truly mind boggling. They're making a huge mistake - they violate their users' trust. Because right now, a signup for Twitter is basically a signup for Klout. You can log into your Klout account by using your Twitter credentials, even though you never signed up for Klout. Since Twitter is silent on the matter, I guess they're saying that if you don't want a Klout account, don't sign up for Twitter. It's as simple as that.
Clearly, Twitter needs to put a stop to this. If you want a Klout score, you should have to sign up with Klout. The fact that you're automatically enrolled and can't opt out is practically criminal. Eventually, they may change that. Klout says that they'll be introducing a set of privacy controls in the future. But they don't say when, and I shouldn't have to wait. I want out of Klout. And I want out now.
Google+ and The Social Media Backlash
by Brendan Delaney
Let's face it. A career in online media isn't always all that its cracked up to be. One of the challenges we face is staying on top of the endless stream of new media ventures launched by startups and established companies alike. Each new venture promises to vanquish rivals and reign supreme. But most end up being mere pretenders to the throne.
Brendan Delaney
However, staying informed is important. Many of us wouldn't have gotten as far as we have without a natural curiosity for new developments in online media. Staying informed helps us avoid that deer-in-the-headlights look when a client casually mentions a new website or mobile app. It gives us common ground, and helps establish us as thought leaders. That's why, when an old college buddy offered via Facebook to send me an invitation for Google+, I had to jump on it. Now, four days later, with five "adds" to my name, my inner dialogue is full of questions. Why am I doing this? Do I really need another social network? Aren't I happy with what I already have? The answer is, I think I may have hit the wall on social media. And I think I'm not the only one.
Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of the "Big 3" social networks - Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. I don't like to brag, but with 267 Facebook friends, I am well over the average number of 150. (Though well under my wife's total of 400. Doh!) Frankly, I can barely contain my contempt for my real-world friends who aren't on Facebook. I wonder, do they ever get dizzy, watching the world pass them by?
On the professional side, I'm very active with LinkedIn. I'm in sales, and I find myself on LinkedIn at least 10 times a day...prospecting mostly, but also reading updates and checking who has viewed my profile. And I use Twitter on a personal level to follow comedians, and on a professional level for sales and marketing. With one of my Twitter accounts I have cleverly amassed nearly 7,000 followers. Which is easy to do, when you can purchase them for a penny each.
So clearly, I know what I'm doing. But when I recently got an email from Flickr saying someone had added me as a contact, I couldn't help but roll my eyes. Flickr? Really? Isn't that the site that I had to join because I wanted to view a friend's wedding photos?
So for me, the time has come to draw the line. I'm sure that market research experts have a term for this...probably "social media fatigue" or something equally nondescript. Whatever it's called, it's fair to say that I don't want to be involved in any new social media. Enough is enough.
Looking back, I suppose I first came to this realization about a year and a half ago, when Philip Kaplan (aka PUD), founder of AdBrite, launched Blippy.com, a service that allowed people to publicly display all of their credit card purchases. I found myself wondering if that was perhaps a bridge too far. Why would anyone want to share that information? To PUD's credit, the venture was strong out of the gate. He secured millions in angel funding. It got tons of press, and even a mention on The Colbert Report. It turns out that there are a lot of people who are perfectly willing to share their online purchases with the world. But evidently there weren't enough. Blippy shut down in May.
So now I find myself asking similar questions with regard to Google+. Why would anyone need another social network? How many balls are we expected to keep in the air? Are the three major social networks not enough? Google+ is asking us to to juggle four balls. I say no thanks.
Like most people, I have better things to do than learn about a new social media platform, even if it is something I think I should be doing for my career. Sometimes being a leader in your industry means championing new ideas. But other times it means knowing when to pass on something because the investment isn't worth the benefit. This is one of those times.
So sorry Google+, I don't want to be your friend. I'm happy with what I've got. I connect with my personal friends on Facebook, my professional contacts on LinkedIn, and I follow my favorite comedians on Twitter. Google+ is just another also-ran that I don't have time for.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way. It's just a matter of time until we experience a social media backlash. And Google+ may open the floodgates. It's possible that we're already starting to see it. Seth Green openly mocks the Google+ marketing efforts on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, saying that people who join it are part of "the new technological mafia". That's not a great start for the the company that claims its motto is "Don't Be Evil".
Update: Evidently Microsoft is considering throwing their hat into the social media ring as well, with socl.com. They mistakenly went live with the URL today. Maybe they'll see this blog post and think twice.
Why I’m Sold on Gold
The price of gold has reached record highs over the past few weeks and this steady climb has left many potential investors wondering if this rise is just another economic bubble or if now is a good time to jump on the gold train. While
we have seen many investment bubbles float upward and burst in the past, the reasons behind the meteoric rise of gold reveal that it has much more room to climb before the price begins to fall. The price will steady eventually, but those days are still far off leaving time for many more investors to join this modern day gold rush.
While most economic bubbles are formed by investors looking to make a quick capital gain, the rise in the price of gold has been driven mainly by people seeking to guard their wealth against inflation. These investors are utilizing gold as a hedge against inflation as the precious metal has a way of retaining its value despite fluctuations in markets and commerce. This prudent move is being taken by citizens of the world and not simply western nations as in the past. The booming populations of India and China have begun using the time tested value of gold to protect themselves against the possibility of drastically devalued currencies. In fact, the Chinese government has recently begun directing citizens to invest in precious metals, bringing widespread demand to what was once a fairly small market.
As more and more people awaken to the falling value of the dollar, they too will be turning to gold to protect themselves and their savings against the ravages of inflation. Currently, only a small part of the populace has begun to do this but this portion will increase as the average person begins to feel the impact of rising food and fuel costs. As more paper money is printed to plug the holes of economic crisis, the chances of inflation begin to increase, making the move to gold even wiser. Gold will likely continue to break records in a cycle that has repeated itself throughout history, when governments fail to protect their citizens from the devaluation of fiat currency.
The Higher Education Bubble and its Ramifications
Higher education may be a valuable investment, but it is hardly a priceless one. On the contrary, millions of Americans are finding out every day that the price of getting an education at a four year college or university is getting higher and higher. What once was a merely an expensive cost for students and their parents has now become an insurmountable
barrier to higher education that many students struggle to overcome. As a result, even if they are able to obtain an education from their four year education, many of America's college students will never see the return on their investment that justifies the amount of money they spent on that education.
In colleges and universities today, private college tuition can easily cost students more than $40,000 per year. And the tuition is only the beginning of the costs associated with attending college. Adding living expenses like room and board and fees, books and other costs, and annual tuition can exceed more than $50,000 per year. Although many colleges offer their students financial aid in the form of grants, most students are only able to afford their undergraduate education because they have signed promissory notes for enormous student loans.
These student loans, regardless of whether they are held through a federal lender like Sallie Mae or a private lender, like a bank or another creditor, are the financial equivalent of owning a mortgage. This is a fair comparison, because for many students, they will have to choose between having a college education or owning a house. They won't be able to afford both. Clearly, for many, combining these huge debts with students' lack of financial experience is a recipe for financial disaster.
The financial ramifications are realized when these debt-ridden students graduate from college and enter the workforce. Though they are now equipped with college degrees, they are so weighed down with debt that, after they make their monthly payments, they are unable to save any money to eventually put toward a down payment on their first homes. This leaves the housing market stagnant and unmoving, at a time when it needs the stimulus from new first-time home buyers the most.
As a result, not only do young adults fail to realize the return on their investment in higher education, but the ripple effect stymies the rest of the economy. It's not difficult to foresee that college students in the future will have to rethink whether the cost of attending a a four-year university worth it. And with the rise of the online schools with the ability to communicate the exact same information that a traditional school would offer, and with opportunities for student gatherings organized on sites such as Meetup.com, it's clear that the college education landscape in ten years will be significantly different than what we see today. Our young minds are our country's greatest asset, and to saddle them with a huge debt load does them a disservice that hinders the economic recovery. The future of our nation rests on the ability of our youth to succeed. And they can't succeed if they are expected to support a bloated educational system that hurts their chances more than it helps.