Toellner Tells it

News has a problem

News has a problem... and seems to be unaware of it.  Seems that with all of the outlets out there where you can actually get real information, people have become keenly aware that news outlets seem to be creating news instead of reporting...or coming up with good, juicy headlines and fitting 1/2 truths of information in the story to fit the headlines.

I talked about it in relation to how local media outlets handled a KCMO press conference on the Dangerous Dog ordinance last month.   http://btoellner.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/06/reporting_what_.html  The KC Star did a fabulous job of this during its coverage of the Stadium Tax issues back in April. 

It appears that the Star isn' the only one doing this. This week, Malcolm Gladwell talked about how the New York Times headline was misleading in that it only dealt with the increase in price of branded drugs -- when the cost of generics has actually declined:  http://gladwell.typepad.com/gladwellcom/

The collective media has also done a terrible job in the coverage of the war in the Middle East. I read an article recently that the news people have somehow managed to not talk about Weapons of Mass destruction that were actually found in Iraq.  We found something?  If we did, which it sounds like we might have, seems like that'd be a pretty big deal.  I've barely even heard about it.  Last July I spent 3 days in Toronto and got news in the Daily in Toronto that Canada sent about 300 of their elite ground troops to help in Iraq -- not one single media outlet that I could find in the US carried it.  That seemed like big news to me.  Also, we hear a lot about soldiers supposedly killing innocent people in Iraq, but hear nothing about them turning schools back into schools (and no longer military basis) and giving local communities in Iraq hope.  I guess even entertaining that the government is doing anything right would not be newsworthy.

Mark Cubin also talked about how reporters were blaming him for being the story of the NBA playoffs -- but correctly identified that he is only the story if reports CHOOSE him to be the story. http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000227073770/

Meanwhile, according to Edelman Research, people continue to distrust news on broadcast media, but are growing in trust in online media -- most of which is actually their peers through blogs and chat rooms.  People feel like they get the truth from their peers (even those they've never actually met) vs the media, corporations and advertisers who are setting the "news" to meet their agendas.

I think there is a wonderful opportunity out there for those who authentically want to deliver accurate, not-one-sided, information to people.  There is also a huge chance that by the time any media outlet figures out that there is a demand for fair news that shows all sides of the story it will be too late for them. 

There used to be a time when we had enough media competition that all sides of the story were shared one way or the other.  But now, with only one daily newspaper in a market, maybe one local talk radio station, and TV news stations that only care about fires and shootings, there is so little actual news content shared -- and almost never a decenting voice.  It's scary...and we should figure out a way to demand more.

Have it your way

This was one of the greatest fast-food tag lines ever.  Why shouldn't I get it my way?

I had dinner at the Capital Grill earlier this week.  Great food (per usual) and exceptional service.  One of the guys in our group, Joe, saw creamed spinach on the menu. As a health nut, he wanted the spinach, but not the creamed variety.  "We can steam some for you" said Mia our waitress.  Apparently Mia has served Joe before, and knows that Broccoli is Joe's favorite food.  She has been known to, when he makes his reservation enough in advance, to buy broccoli at the store for him on her way in just so he can have it (it's not a regular Capital Grill item because most people have enough sense to know that broccoli tastes like sour dirt).

Meanwhile, my client had vaguely remembered having a "Blue Cheese - stuffed Steak" on his last visit, but it wasn't on the menu.  "We have plenty of Blue Cheese and great steak, how would you like it prepared".  Easy.  Genious. It's why Joe is a regular, and why I'll go back.  Service is free -- ok, you have to pay good servers -- but once you have the good server, upgrading the service is free. 

Meanwhile, it took me three attempts to order an egg mcmuffin with layered egg instead of folded egg at a McDonalds in Council Bluffs Iowa.  I don't think most McDonalds employees have realized that Egg McMuffins have a weird, unnatural hockey puck egg, but all of the other sandwiches have a layered egg but are on much more fattening bread.  Took three attempts to explain that.

This is why I'm more likely to return to buy a $35 steak at Capital Grill than I am to return to McDonalds for a $3 breakfast.  I know what I want, and I want people to sell it to me.  If they don't, I'll go somewhere where they will.

Ignorance is bliss -- and scary

Ignorance can be bliss...but it's scary to me how many people decide to remain ignorant on topics.  For people who aren't up to speed, about a month ago, three dogs -- two of which happen to be Pit Bulls attacked three men -- one was injured pretty badly and still hospitalize.  It was a horrible incident.

Since then, nearly every city in the Kansas City Metro has brought up at least the discussion of some type of Pit Bull ban.  I won't get into the details of why this is a bad idea (I'll post that later this week), but what I do want to discuss is how ignorant people want to remain on the topic.

On Sunday, June 25, the Star released its official statement that it agreed with banning "Pit Bulls".  There were no real facts presented in their editorial -- but it is concerning because people can be easily swayed.  Meanwhile, my wife was talking with all of the organizations that matter (ASPCA, HSUS, Doris Day Foundation) to get official statements from them against Breed Specific Laws.

I've included one dialogue she had with a woman who works in the Star's editorial department (the same small group that spoke in favor of bans) because you have to see this to believe it.  She didn't understand how a breed ban meant dogs would be euthenized.  I'm not really sure what she thought would happen to the dogs when they were confiscated from people's homes -- prolonged doggie daycare, time in a pet resort, or what -- but it's very disturbing that someone could work in a group that took a political stance on a matter and not have thought through the next steps of what happens when you ban a breed of animals.  They die.  That's how it works.

It's very concerning how little research people do before forming opinions -- and FIRM opinions at that.  People at the Star, and in a lot of cases, city council people.  It's frightening.

If you have a passion -- fight for it.  I feel safe saying that you can't expect anyone to research this on their own. Do their work for them...otherwise, it's likely it won't get done.

Dear Letters,

I have asked Julia to send this statement directly to you.  In case she gets pulled away from her email...here is the Doris Day Foundation's official statement in regards to recent moves to pass BSL in this city.  You will obviously be able to call her to confirm authenticity.

*****************************************************************************************

DDAL feels strongly that breed specific bans are not a solution to the issue of aggressive animals.  Recent statistics show that the Pit Bull, a breed often targeted by these type of bans, scored better than the national average on the American Temperament Test, in which aggression is a key component.  Dogs displaying unprovoked aggression fail the test.   

In addition a breed specific ban that relies on visual identification ignores the underlying issue of problem behavior.  Moreover, dogs who resemble any "dangerous breed" may be unfairly targeted.  There is a risk of misdiagnosing a dog's breed, resulting in his death.  DDAL feels that if a state or municipality insists on legislation against certain animals, that a generic "dangerous dog" ordinance that prohibits certain aggressive behavior is preferable to a ban on specific breeds.

Sincerely,

Julia Janak

Director of Grassroots Advocacy and Outreach

Doris Day Animal League

***************************************************************************************

How would misdiagnosing a dog's breed end in the dog's death?

Lajean Keene

Letters Editor

Kansas City

Star

*******************************************************************************************************

If pit bulls are banned they are taken from the owners home and euthanized in most cases.  If a dog is labeled as a pit bull - whether it is or not, the same thing will happen.  There is NO scientific way to accurately determine a dogs breed.  It is all based on what some person *thinks*.  This is one reason that breed bans were found to be unconstitutional in a recent court ruling: Toledo V Tellings in

Ohio

.

Also, the term "pit bull" is actually a reference to a type of dog - not an actual breed.  Many mixed breeds and certain pure breed dogs resemble pit bull type dogs as well.  It is impossible, even with DNA testing, to prove a dog is or is NOT a pit bull type dog. 

Here are just a few occurrences of misidentification.

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/MistakenIdentity/WrongId.htm

See if you can find the pit bull (note:  find an American Pit Bull Terrier)

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Please note that the above is my statement.  If you need an official statement to clarify the Doris Day Foundations official stance on breed specific legislation please contact Julia.  However, I am very confident this is what is being referred to with that statement.

One other way breed bans lead to the increased deaths of ALL breeds of dogs is this:  a breed ban leads to more dogs of that breed in a shelter.  Shelters run on a first in, first OUT system for the most part.  When the shelter runs out of room, whatever dog/cat is next in line is killed - whether it is a lab, poodle or pit bull type dog.

Of course, I will be more than happy to answer any other questions myself as well. 

Thank you for your time and consideration

Michelle

***************************************************************************************************

No ban being discussed in our metro area includes removal and/or euthanization

LaJean

If you can learn this from termites...

Great story on Joyce Wycoff's blog today on an innovative way an engineer designed a self heating and cooling building by learning from termites that lived in the area and how they naturally cooled their nests.

http://thinksmart.typepad.com/headsup_on_organizational/

If you are familiar with Joyce, I suggest you make yourself that way.  Her insights are incredible into ways organizations can structure themselves to find innovative solutions to consumer's problems.

Let's face it, if you can save a company $3.5 million a year in energy costs in one year based on learnings from termites, think about what other insights we may be overlooking every day.

New Ideas

There are a lot of great things that I like about my company, but two things really stick out as differentiators among other places I've been around:

1) We believe that good ideas can come from anywhere in the company -- accounting, IT, media, creative, PR, Sponsorships -- if there is a good idea, or process, we embrace it.  Regardless of where the idea came from.  Even if making the change will be hard.  If it's good, we act on it.  That's pretty cool. 

2) We hire great people from different backgrounds from other great agencies around the country.  They really feed into what makes #1 click.  No one here has ever been told, "that's not the way we do things".

The reality is that there are really only a few different types of marketing problems. Sure, the environment changes, the target audience changes, the budget changes, etc, but the overarching problems remain more or less the same.  And if you do this business long enough, it's pretty easy to attack the same problems in exactly the same way over and over again. Granted, if it's successful, great.  But as I noted before, things change. 

A new way of thinking, or a fresh way of looking at the same problems can open up opportunities you never would have imagined possible before.  And it's pretty exciting. And it's pretty fun.  People who have fun work harder than people who feel like they're attacking the same problems every day.  Hard work (along with great thinking) brings great results.

We're embarking on such a change in thinking. We're not done yet, the process is being tweaked.  But I see the light at the end of the tunnel, and the light is in some color of crazy 60's tie-die.  It's colorful.  It's a funky.  It's fun.  And it's opening doors that weren't even visible before.  And every person here can't wait to see what it's like on the other side.  Once we get there, you'll hear all about it.  But just know, the road getting there has been fun, and worth the good change.

Odd man out

I went out to a volleyball beach club last night and watched recreational/competitive volleyball.  This isn't abnormal for me, I've played in leagues off and on for years.  But I sat and watched.  It was interesting. One team I watched had three good players on it, two average players, and one player who just didn't quite get the pass/set/spike process of volleyball.  What was amazing is that that one player disrupted the entire flow of the team's play...and everyone on the team played down to that level.  The team would have been greatly improved by even putting in an average performer in place of the weak link.

I figure work is like that a lot.  Having a weak link in the work force can be devastating to getting work done, getting work done fast, and getting work done well. We can tend to perform down to the lowest denominator. 

If you have a weak player on your team you have two options -- bring them up, or let them go.  Do either option swiftly, or they'll bring down the playing field for everyone.

References Available

I'm in the process of applying for a mentorship program for inner-city kids, and one of the questions on my application is that I need to have four references.  I'm a big fan of the thinking that if you network correctly, your next job will just come to you -- usually without the need of resumes or references.  However, in order to do that, you need references/contacts within the company you intend to work for next.  Suffice it to say, I think references are crucial to job success -- and can make or break you when it comes to getting a job (or whatever you're applying for). So while I'm compiling my list of references, I thought I'd pass on my tips for choosing good references:

1) Big name people are impressive.  Titles like "President" and "CEO" certainly don't hurt.  If big-time successful people will put their stamp of approval on you, you're probably doing ok.

2) Choose people who see you every day -- or as often as possible. The better the person knows you, the better qualified they are to be a reference for you and speak to you being a solid individual every day of the week.

3) Choose people who are passionate.  If them being a reference for you is sort of a waste of their time, chances are, that will come across when they speak to the person calling them.  However, if the person who is your reference is passionate about giving you a stellar referral, that passion will come across and help sell you in.

4) If you can, find a referral that is someone that the person calling about you respects.  If you have a mutual aquaintance, or business partner, use them.  If they know and trust the person giving the referral, then you're that much closer to being "in".

5) Build as many positive reference sources as possible.  Being able to pick and choose the right mix of the top four criteria to impress the specific situation you desire can make or break your chances.

6) Above all else, be someone worth referring.  Work hard.  Be smart.  Make good decisions.  Be kind.  Every day.  If you don't have that going for you, the rest of it doesn't matter.

Heady Idea

The people at Proshade are geniuses.   About a week ago, they offered the US Parks Services $4 million to put their Proshade visors on the Presidents on Mount Rushmore. 

My initial thought on this was: "have they now shame?"  I mean, when will advertisers stop?  It's no wonder that Americans are lashing out against advertising.

But here's the thing, they don't need to even do the project.  By merely THINKING of the idea has gotten them press in the Miami Herald, Kansas City Star and the Pittsburgh Post Gazette.  In fact, I'd venture to say this idea has already generated more impressions than had they quietly actually DONE the project.  Smart thinking, especially since it never happened.

Reporting what they want

On the note of news stations not providing news people want, it is becoming more and more evident to me that many news stations are reporting what they WANT the news to be.

Last night I attended a public hearing in Kansas City regarding "Aggressive Dogs" following the news of a Pit Bull attack in Independence last month.  The animal control officer for Kansas City is kicking around the idea of "being proactive" and doing a policy for mandatory Spay/Neuter of all Pit Bulls.

During a two hour session, where speakers were given 3 minutes to talk, not one speaker spoke out in favor of a Pit Bull ban, nor did anyone speak out in favor of mandatory spay/neuter of all Pit Bulls.  Many talked about animal overpopulation and the need to spay/neuter all breeds, the need for owner education, the need for Animal Control to be granted the funding to allow them to enforce the current laws that are in place, and extend the hours (past 8 pm and on weekends) to help with public safety. 

KCTV5 in Kansas City ran one news clip of one guy telling a story about how two pit bulls killed his dog and how he shot both dogs and how even after firing a warning shot, one of the dogs kept coming after him.  That was it.  The story was told to emphasize that uncontrolled animals, on weekends, are problems because there is no animal control on weekends.  The gentleman even said that ANY dog can be a problem, but these just happened to be Pit Bulls.  But the "news" station took it out of context to highlight the only comments all night about "vicious Pit Bulls". 

Seems like making the news what you want it to be is more important than providing an accurate portrayal of the actual meeting. 

Media Missed Opportunity

I've been thinking a lot about Mark Cubin's blog from last week on why Journalism matters.

http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000993073720/

Seems that most news outlets are operating under the assumptions that either a) young adults don't care about the news or b) what they care about is the flamboyant and overly dramatic stories about fires and shootings.  I doubt either is the case. 

First off, young adults (Gen Y, Millenials, whatever) are shaping up to be one of the most proactive political generations in several years (and no, I'm not in this generation -- so I don't fall into the prototype that assumes that my generation is better than all others).  But the point is, they do care (as do other generations) -- but it's gotten to the point that the news doesn't carry anything relevant to them (I DO agree with them here).

Meanwhile, what it seems that most news organizations have missed is that it's not longer about content.  Content is merely a comodity in a world full of information.  What matters now is opinion, perspective and dialogue.

Some other thoughts on the matter appear by Jeff Jarvis at:

http://buzzmachine.com/