I subscribe to the philosophy that advertising makes the world go round. Think about it: Where would most retailers, insurance companies, auto dealers, or any other business be without a good marketing program?
Advertisements are everywhere! Newspapers, magazines, radio, television, movie theatres, Internet, direct mail, special events, and billboards. The revenue from ads is astronomical and is a vital player in our national economy, as evidenced by the fact that ad sales exceeded $140 billion in 2013. And, having worked in sales and marketing myself, I can tell you there are many thousands of people out there who make a living selling these ads. In fact, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports 156,400 people were employed as an advertising sales agent in 2012, with a median annual salary of $46,290.
But who wants to be bombarded with advertising? Many people now record television programs and then skip through the ads. Or show up late to the movie theatre to avoid having to watch the same kind of ads that are on their television screen at home. And unless they’re purposely looking for something specific, who pays attention to ads in newspapers and magazines or the pop-ups online?
But there are also unavoidable ads, unless we turn off our car radio, close our eyes to highway billboards, or cover our ears when a segment of our favorite sports program is “sponsored by” a commercial product. In other words, we would have to become see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil monkeys. It seems we have little choice but to see, hear, and watch commercial material, as it is now embedded in every aspect of our lives.
The alternative, then, is to challenge advertisers to create more interesting content. Make their ads funny or smart or entertaining. Provide valuable information or discounts. Give us a reason to pay attention! Ultimately, advertisers must motivate their target market to see what benefit the product has for the customer, so he/she will make the purchase. If they don’t (or won’t) do that, then they’ve failed the fundamental “buyer perspective” test of advertising: What’s in it for me? And consumers will continue to be fed up with marketing campaigns.
Am I the only one who’s noticed the dominance of men holding the prestigious position of late-night host? With so many moves taking place in recent months, not one seat has been filled with a woman; they have been completely shut out of the glorious hosting spotlight.
And despite all the changes, this attitude isn’t new. It’s a pattern that’s repeated for hosts of the primary game shows, competition shows, and news programs.
The one woman who hosted late-night was Chelsey Handler, with the final episode of "Chelsea Lately" airing August 2014. Apparently, none of the major networks saw fit to move her into their open slots. Their loss.
Maybe they didn’t like Chelsey. But the format of opening with a topical monologue, performing comedic sketches, conducting guest interviews and introducing a concluding musical performance could be mastered by any of the popular ladies of daytime—Queen Latifah, Whoopi Goldberg, Ellen DeGeneres, Wendy Williams or Kelly Ripa. Were none of them qualified or trendy enough to make the transition to late-night? Or do television execs think these women aren’t capable of holding a nighttime audience? Maybe it’s more like believing that men are the key late-night demographic, and that women watch only daytime television, as in the fifties.
Frankly, I’d prefer to see any of the above-named women at night than the male hosts we’ve got now. Let’s run through some of the personalities and changes, and determine what we can learn from them.
David Letterman was given a morning show on NBC in 1980, which was award-winning but short-lived. "Late Night with David Letterman," premiered in 1982, with a time-slot following Johnny Carson’s "The Tonight Show." When Carson retired and named Jay Leno as his replacement in 1992, Letterman switched networks and created "The Late Show" on CBS in 1993. Following Letterman’s May 20, 2015 retirement, Stephen Colbert will take over in September.
What began as a character on "The Dana Carvey Show" in 1996, Stephen Colbert’s fictional newsman appeared in sketches on "The Daily Show" for several years. With Colbert playing the character as host, "The Colbert Report" became a spin-off of "The Daily Show" in October 2005.
LESSONS LEARNED: (1) A man can move from daytime to nighttime. (2) A man—two actually—can change networks as late-night hosts. (3) A man can go from being a contributor on other shows, and get not one, but two late-night shows of his own.
Jon Stewart took over "The Daily Show" in January 1999. His final broadcast is scheduled to air August 6, 2015. We don’t know what he’ll do next. Trevor Noah, a South African comedian who has been a contributor on the show since December of last year, will take over as host following the summer hiatus.
Formerly a cast member of "Saturday Night Live," Jimmy Fallon got the job as host of "Late Night" in 2009. In February of 2014, he was promoted to host of "The Tonight Show."
Seth Myers, also a former "Saturday Night Live" alum, was given his own NBC show, "Late Night," in February 2014.
LESSONS LEARNED: (1) Despite the numerous talented female contributors on both "The Daily Show" and "Saturday Night Live," it’s always a man who is plucked for a place in the limelight. (2) Producers saw fit to go to another continent to fill "The Daily Show" position with a man, rather than a woman.
Following Letterman’s departure from "Late Night" in 1993, Conan O’Brien was chosen to fill the slot as host, with the name of the show becoming "Late Night with Conan O’Brien." In May 2010, O’Brien took over NBC’s "The Tonight Show" following Jay Leno’s departure. We all know how that turned out: Leno regretted his decision, and wanted the post back… which wasn’t the end for O’Brien, of course. He went on to debut his "Conan" show on TBS in November of the same year.
LESSONS LEARNED: (1) Even if a man gives up his hosting job, he can get it back. (2) If a man is publicly disgraced and ousted from his late-night hosting job, he can get another one.
Arsenio Hall’s late-night syndicated show premiered in 1989, and ran for five years. His second was shorter lived—only eight months, debuting in September 2013.
LESSON LEARNED: A man can always get a second bite at the apple.
Carson Daly debuted his very late-night show, "Last Call," on NBC in 2002. He’s a regular on The "Today Show" and hosts "The Voice."
LESSON LEARNED: A man can have it all!
I could go on and on, but the point should be clear: Late night is a man’s world! I’m not saying that women should boycott all these shows in order to send a message to the producers; but with the tables so unbalanced, isn’t it time for some changes in the other direction?
Late Night is No Place for Women
Posted May 20, 2015
Hurricane Harvey
Posted August 29, 2017
Is it really you?
Posted April 6, 2015
Having worked in the banking industry for nearly 25 years, I saw how lightly the general public took the matter of protecting their financial profile– leaving pay stubs on the check-writing counter in the bank, tossing credit card receipts in the trash, allowing their checkbook to get into the wrong hands, and sharing online banking passwords or ATM card PIN numbers with friends and relatives. As daunting as those errors are, it’s not always the individual’s fault when their personal information is jeopardized.
Social media and the Internet have made it possible to find out almost anything about anyone. Too much of our data is “out there.” But, if you’ve had to provide your Social Security Number on a questionnaire in your doctor’s office, or an online job application, or even when applying for car insurance, your personal data is subject to risk. In almost every instance, our Social Security Number is the universal number that’s used to positively identify us. In fact, it’s our Achilles’ heel, the vulnerable opening to financial and personal downfall. It only takes one curious or unscrupulous staff member to get their hands on your Social Security Number, and when added to your date of birth and address (which are also contained in related documents) put your stability at major risk.
Now add:
Our healthcare information being part of a national database, credit regulations allowing the confusing “opt out” of sharing personal identifiable confidential information, our social media being tied to our cell phone activity, GPS tracking data, online search history, and emails, endless data stored in “the Cloud.”
Someone next door or in a far-away country can sit at their computer and, with random input, seriously violate someone’s identity. All they have to do is pick a name. Go online. Match this to that. Voila! Imagine the damage that can be done before the victim is even aware anything’s wrong.
At some point in our working life, we were each assigned a unique nine-digit Social Security Number, which was to be used to track our work credits for the purpose of Social Security benefits. However, our Social Security Number has become our national identity number, used to verify insurance benefits, credit worthiness, and so much more.
What if, instead of using our Social Security Number for healthcare, banking, insurance, job applications, and anything else unrelated to our Social Security benefits, we could select our own password. And change it as often as we’d like? We are encouraged to change our passwords for everything else in order to keep identity thieves from breaking the code. Why, then, should we use one number… one very important number… for so many other important purposes, for the rest of our lives?
The Next Big Thing
Posted March 21, 2015
For the past few weeks, I’ve been involved in a different kind of writing. Straying momentarily from creating characters and the stories in which they live, I have been working on an idea that’s been in my head for more than five years. Finally, the time has come to turn it into an invention– putting it in writing by virtue of what is called a “Provisional” patent. Unlike writing a novel, the language submitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office is rather repetitive, and consists of sentences that would make anyone trained in grammar cringe. But still, composing the necessary text to describe a patent-worthy idea takes as much, or more, intensity and dedication than fiction writing. And it includes drawings!
What is my invention, you ask? Well, until the groundwork is complete, I’d rather not say. Or shouldn’t say. And that’s because the world of Intellectual Property (IP) is all hush-hush until the protections are in place. First comes the “Provisional” patent, which is like taking a number at the deli. It enables my idea to be first in line, marking its originality by the date of filing. It also starts the clock, meaning that I have one year to file my “Non-Provisional” patent, which is the process by which my idea is scrutinized by a patent examiner for every conceivable glitch in terms of whether my invention is truly new, unique and non-obvious. That can take from 2-6 years, I’ve learned. Meanwhile, I’ve submitted my idea to a think tank of sorts, a company that evaluates inventions for feasibility, sustainability, and marketability. I’ll also need to submit professional pen-and-ink drawings (think Leonardo daVinci) and have a prototype (sample) made. Then comes the real work: marketing my invention to prospective licensees. By then, if I’ve done everything right, things should fall into place.
No, I didn’t reinvent the wheel or create a better mousetrap, but my invention is rather clever, if I say so myself. And when you see whatever it is in the real world some day (hopefully), you’ll wonder why no one came up with the idea before I did.
UPDATE: After more than six months of research, which resulted in no similar concept to my invention, I proceeded with officially applying for my patent. After more than two years, I was informed by the patent office that, indeed, someone in Europe had conceived a vaguely similar device a few months before my filing. Geesh! If only I had submitted my application when the idea first came to me!
Rather than leave you in the dark, I'm now sharing with you what I invented. It was called a "Beverage Container Wireless Microphone." The simple explanation is that a small microphone is hidden inside a branded container that looks like a beverage can or bottle or cup. Used as a marketing device, a performer or announcer would be promoting the beverage product when using the device.
The idea came to me in about 2008, when I was watching "American Idol," which was heavily sponsored at the time, by Coca-Cola. The performer often held the microphone as shown in Fig. 11. I thought, "What if... that microphone were a bottle of Coke?" That translated to the idea of an announcer holding a can of Coke, using it as a microphone. The number of uses and the types of adaptations were considerable. As I say, I only wish I'd submitted my patent application earlier.
Good morning! Good morning! Good morning!
Posted February 16, 2015
Such is the constant refrain from seven to nine a.m., Monday thru Friday. And for some stations, on Saturday. Filled with beautiful personalities, the morning shows are our wake-up call, part of our daily routine, the filler as we begin our day. You know who they are… CBS This Morning, the Today Show, and Good Morning, America.
The casual style of this programming is different from evening news shows … and not always for the better. While meant to contain news and information, I would argue that for the most part, these morning shows are mostly a laugh fest with everyone talking at once—a virtual party for the participants, whose main purpose seems to be splicing a few interesting segments between multiple commercials. Run a clock sometime, and see for yourself how much time is dedicated to news, and how much is commercial filler. An alternative: DVR the program(s) of your choice, and skip the commercials when you watch the playback.
Shameless self-promotion is the hosts’ worst offense. When they show clips of themselves holding their new baby, participating in a fashion show, getting an award, doing something silly, or sitting courtside, they’re using their platform in the wrong way. Note to hosts: If it’s not covered by any other network, it’s not “news.”
Do we need so many banners plastered across the screen? As many as nine messages run at once, taking up about one-fourth of the total image. Often, we’re unable to see what is the focus of the story, because a banner is in the way. If these “headlines” are necessary, why not put them at the top of the screen, and smaller, so we can see the main picture?
Those are my highest-ranking pet peeves. Here are some others:
Talking too fast, and at the same time, so we can’t understand what they’re saying.
Too many programs being dubbed “Special Edition.”
Naming the disaster and giving it its own dramatic theme music.
An inability to say the word “billion” without adding, That’s BILLION, with a “B”, as if we’re stupid and don’t know the difference.
Overuse of the word “exclusive.” So what if they’re the only broadcaster to have that footage, that interview? Are we supposed to be impressed, so we’ll know to turn to them next time? Because THEY have the exclusives? The only ones who care about that is THEM.
Reporters interviewing each other, setting themselves up as the experts.
Reporters on location nodding until the studio reporter finishes asking a question—a relatively new technique, used to replace the field reporter’s blank stare during the feed lapse.
News teasers. In the time it takes to entice us about what’s coming up after the commercial, they could’ve given us the full report. Why can’t they just tell us?
Text not being displayed on the screen long enough. If it’s worth putting on the screen in the first place, they should leave it there long enough for us to read it. And display it in a size we can read without having to crawl close to the screen with a magnifying glass.
Firing words at the screen, machine gun fashion, while we’re listening to the audio. It’s an assault to the senses. Rather than trying to be clever, they should just paste the words on the screen. If we can’t hear the audio, then we can read the words. At our own pace.
The best of the top three?
CBS This Morning. The hosts—Charlie Rose, Gayle King, and Norah O’Donnell—are a pleasant ensemble of intelligent, genial folk who know how to present material without making themselves the center of attention. But, somehow they do. Because of their integrity. If Charlie Rose says it, I believe it. When Gayle King asks a question, it’s based on spadework she’s done as a true investigative journalist. And as a young working mother, Norah O’Donnell adds the unique perspectives of idealism, caution and awareness. The trio seldom leave their seats, and are only seen outside the studio when they’re conducting an interview somewhere else in the world. There are no elaborate stage set-ups on the sidewalk. There’s no camera following them around, hustling to the next segment. Nor are there screaming crowds outside the studio, waving to friends and family at home and making goofy faces and gestures. CBS This Morning is just a show about the news. And that’s fine with me.
“Eye Opener” (Your World in 90 Seconds) on CBS This Morning, is presented at the top of the hour, to get us up to speed in no time flat. It’s a visual index of topical political, financial, entertainment, weather, and sports highlights without much detail. If we watched nothing else all morning, we’d have a good sense of what took place overnight, and what might happen throughout the day.
And 90 seconds might be just about all the news I can take in the morning anyway.
Close to Home
Posted February 1, 2015
One of my childhood homes, the setting for my novel Good Girl.
After considerable thought about what the subject matter of my first blog should be, it seems wise to begin with something close to home.
People often marvel at the fact that I’m able to string together enough words to create whole novels—conjure up characters with unique traits, conceive interesting situations, and fabricate storylines that bring readers along on a worthwhile journey.
"Where do you start?" they ask.
The basic art of storytelling boils down to creating a structure of some variety, using four familiar building blocks. First comes an idea of what the story will be about. That "thing" our teachers called theme. In short, what message will the story convey? Second, every story needs a setting—be it outdoors, inside a mall, entirely in one room, on a boat. Wherever. Third, characters. They can be people we relate to, those whom we despise, strangers, relatives, or even animals. There are no limits. And finally, time period. Will the story be historical, contemporary, or take place in the future?
While those are the basics, writing is more than that. It’s about getting inside the head of the protagonist, giving him dreams, challenges, and people to interact with. It’s about making the reader care about him, believe in him, hurt when he hurts, and follow him anywhere. It’s about making the reader feel that she’s been there, seen that, knew that! In short, it’s about making it real.
But how?
Actually, I seldom stray too far from home. The writer in me is a composite of everyone I’ve ever met, everywhere I’ve ever been, the places I’ve seen, the things I’ve experienced. However trivial, much of my past comes into my stories in one way or another. In writing, though, the trick is to blend. A friend from high school becomes an uncle or a favorite teacher, an obnoxious woman in the grocery store shows up in one of my novels as an unpleasant coworker, and a conversation with my mother is reinvented as sage advice between friends having dinner at an elegant restaurant. The key to working my own experiences into my writing is having a good memory—being able to remember all those gems from the past, and having the ability to work them in at the right time.
Quite often when I’m sitting at my computer, struggling for words, the past comes to me from deep in my subconscious. It’s as if I go back in time and pull situations, conversations, and experiences from another context, and reconfigure them to fit the circumstances I’m writing about. I’ve also been inspired by a photo in a magazine or a premise in a television documentary, recycling those snippets into an experience for one of my characters, taking the idea to whatever extreme seems suitable for the story. I strive for reality. Believability. This can be misleading, as readers often wonder: Did that really happen? Not always; but yes, many of the troubling social issues I write about are based on things that I know firsthand.
But only the people closest to me know what is real … and what is not.
Hollywood may be waking up to a trend underscored by a line in the film, The Intern: Gray is the new green. The last two films I’ve seen depicted lifestyles of active senior citizens; and the theatre seats were filled almost to capacity with mostly gray-haired patrons. With the baby boomers coming of age—the NEW age—a lot of industries should pay attention to who’s buying tickets... and also clothes, foods, home goods, and services.
There was a time when the eighteen to twenty-five-year-olds ruled retail: fast cars, flashy fashions, and fried fast foods. But, slow down. Way down. The older crowd is moving in, now making up the largest percentage of the U.S. population. Already, hefty retirement and Social Security incomes are available to a larger segment of the population, inflating the buying power of those over 62. Following the economic crash, many of those eligible for retirement put their plans on hold; but people born between 1946 and 1964 are now making up for lost time, crashing through the retirement gates at lightning speed. Those who lived a healthier lifestyle than their ancestors are more likely to live longer; but generally speaking, this is the generation that lives for today, and so they’re more likely to spend money on goods and services they enjoy.
Pay attention, my friends, to how the shift in population changes the American economy. The sectors most likely to benefit will be healthcare, travel, and --sadly-- end-of-life businesses like assisted living facilities, nursing homes, and funeral services. But before they go, my money is betting on the baby boomers to live large and spend freely every step of the way. And I’ll be right there with them!
It’s time someone cleared up the misunderstandings about Health Savings Accounts. I’ve had one for eight years, and can tell you this: It’s primarily a piggybank that allows you to switch YOUR OWN MONEY from one of your pockets, to one of your other pockets. It’s not a government subsidy. HSA deposits are funds on which you haven’t yet paid taxes—meaning that, if you have money deducted from your paycheck and directly transferred into your HSA, it’s considered “pre-tax” dollars. If you deposit (or, as they say, “contribute”) money into your HSA on which you’ve already paid taxes, that same amount can be deducted from your income on your tax return.
You can only open an HSA if you have high-deductible healthcare coverage. Once funds are deposited into your HSA, that money can ONLY be used to pay qualified healthcare expenses. Not healthcare premiums. Many people use their HSA funds to pay the deductibles required by their health plan.
The federal government limits the amount you can contribute to your HSA annually. For tax-year 2016, the annual HSA contribution limit for individuals with self-only high-deductible healthcare coverage is $3,350 (unchanged from 2015), and the limit for individuals with family HDHP coverage is $6,750 (a $100 increase from 2015). Individuals over age 55 can contribute an additional $1,000 annually. In lieu of making your own contributions, your employer can contribute to YOUR HSA (utilizing the same annual limits); but your employer will get the tax credit on those contributions, not you.
Once you begin Medicare, you can no longer make contributions to your HSA, but you can still use the funds you’ve already contributed to your HSA for any qualified medical expenses that arise after you’ve begun Medicare.
If you use HSA money for non-healthcare purchases, you will be required to pay the tax (and often a penalty) on that amount, but you’ll also risk losing the benefit of having an HSA. Any funds remaining in your HSA at the end of any year can be used in subsequent years.
Where can you obtain an HSA? Many banks offer Health Savings Accounts, and will serve as the custodian of your account. HSA’s are also available through some insurance companies, and online. Look for one that offers a debit card (to make paying easier at doctors’ offices), has no minimum balance requirement, or fees.
HSA’s are not a pot of gold or an endless supply of cash. They’re simply a place in which to put money that you can use for QUALIFIED MEDICAL EXPENSES (not cosmetic surgery!) without having to pay tax on that money.
People who make their living in sales know and use basic selling techniques instinctively. They have to. Their livelihood depends on it.
Here we are on the eve of the presidential election caucuses in Iowa, and it’s apparent that every one of the candidates—with or without realizing it—has taken a page out of the playbook of the best sales associates, and subscribed to the five fundamentals of selling. They’ve had to. Their political life depends on it.
One candidate, though, has taken these techniques further than any other: Donald Trump.
1. Repetition
Repeating the message again and again reinforces the objectives and ensures they’ll be remembered.
“Ted Cruz has a problem. He’s a Canadian citizen. I don’t think he can even run. He has a problem. A very serious problem.”
2. Claims
Speaking truth or hype is irrelevant. Anyone can say anything. And they do.
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. … They’re sending people that have lots of problems… They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists…”
3. Association/Endorsements
An emotional response often results when someone or something familiar is referenced. Endorsements by celebrities work well for many products; when tied to a presidential candidate, the values of the celebrity are meant to connect with voters.
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin; Jerry Lamon Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University and son of the late televangelist; self-proclaimed “toughest sheriff in America,” Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Arizona; Aissa Wayne, daughter of movie icon John Wayne; political pundit Ann Coulter; and former WWE pro wrestler Hulk Hogan are among those who have endorsed Donald Trump.
4. Bandwagon
If everyone else is doing something, wouldn’t you want to do it, too? That’s the principle behind the bandwagon technique. And so, when a candidate claims everyone loves him, then he expects you to also love him.
“We’re winning with the Evangelicals, the Libertarians, the Tea Party…”
5. Promotions
Everyone loves getting something free, or walking away with a souvenir of their experience. It’s one more technique that builds loyalty.
As of this writing, Donald Trump has spent $678,000 on hats and t-shirts that his aids throw out to his supporters at rallies. While the recipients enjoy "winning" these prizes, these gifts turn into free advertising for Donald Trump, with the person wearing the hats or t-shirts becoming unpaid endorsers, helping promote the "brand."
You may want to pay attention to these sales techniques as the election process moves forward, while remembering another important element of the selling process: Buyer beware.
Commercial Success
Posted August 14, 2015
Selling Politics
Posted January 31, 2016
Understanding HSAs (Health Savings Accounts)
Posted March 13, 2017
As the author of a hurricane guide, I’ve watched with intense interest and profound sadness the devastation from Hurricane Harvey on the people of the Texas Gulf Coast. It’s heartwarming to see volunteers from near and far rescue flood victims, using boats, kayaks, and floatation devices. Having worked as a Red Cross volunteer in a hurricane shelter, I know firsthand the trauma these folks will face once they reach the facility where hundreds, if not thousands, of strangers must commune.
The numerous hurricanes I’ve experienced offer insight into the day-to-day trauma of surviving not only the storm, but its aftermath. The stress and fatigue are overwhelming, as you think first of the financial impact—realizing the out-of-pocket expense to be faced before insurance deductibles are met. And on the sentimental side, the loss of photographs and treasures that also is painful. I’m fortunate to have never known the personal loss of a loved one from a storm.
For those who can remain in their homes, each day following a natural disaster of this magnitude becomes a struggle... the night being a welcome relief from the depression that comes from overwhelming loss. Each new day brings different challenges, but also relief at being able to conceive solutions. Usually without water and electricity—luxuries taken for granted in normal circumstances—the aftermath of a storm creates a situation of “relativity.” People are relieved to be alive, but know that their homes may be forever damaged. Losses like these are difficult to swallow.
Viewers around the country are watching coverage of Hurricane Harvey on TV, wanting to help. But how can they? Other than donating funds, which will help in the long run, there MUST be a better approach, as these flood victims are in need of so much more.
I came up with an idea of what could be done—if not for this disaster, then the next:
The post office should set up a "special zip code” for natural disaster relief. Using only that zip code as an address, people wanting to help could bring donations of non-perishable food, diapers, pillows and blankets, clothes, etc. to their local post office, where these much-needed supplies could go-- postage free-- directly to the community that needs them. Giving money is welcome, but the people in shelters can't get to a store; and the stores, which may also be impacted by the storm, usually aren't open. Now, to flesh this out, the "special zip code” would need to be unique to a given community... not be just ONE special zip code... as donations might go to the Houston area now, but to communities in Louisiana next week.
Update: I presented this idea to Postmaster General Megan J. Brennan in a letter dated 3/12/18, but never got a response.
We go along, most of us… day by day, not noticing small changes around us. This, too, has been the case with the products I buy. But today, my husband asked if I’d noticed how much smaller the new bar of soap was than the last. I hadn’t. Sure enough, what was once sold as a four-ounce bar is now coming into our house as only 3.17 ounces. That tied into something I realized last week: After preparing bacon and eggs for breakfast, I wondered why the bacon was all gone in a matter of minutes. And then I looked at the package. What used to be sold as a pound of bacon is now a mere twelve ounces.
Discovering these crimes of short-changing the consumer, I was compelled to take a look at some of the other groceries I routinely purchase. Cereal? Although the boxes are larger, there’s less content. Same with potato chips. Apparently, I’ve been buying a lot of air. My favorite brand of ice cream? Not sold by the half-gallon anymore. It now comes in a one-and-a-half quart container. A pound of coffee? Sadly, now just twelve ounces. Is nothing sacred?
And those are only the products we are accustomed to buying according to a known size. About a year ago, I purchased a case of Coca-Cola. What? A case used to contain twenty-four cans, not twenty. What happened to those extra four cans? Fortunately, the company recently reversed their decision, and cases of Coca-Cola once again consist of twenty-four cans. Yeah!
It seems corporate giants are making our lives smaller and smaller in order to collect larger profits. Sure, it might seem like no big deal, but it is. Twenty to twenty-five percent of the products we purchased last week or last month… or even last year, are now a fraction of the size, with the price remaining the same. Or higher.
But, what are we to do? Stop buying products we need? Make them ourselves?
Maybe it’s time to start saving hotel soaps.
Gray is the New Green
Posted September 25, 2015
Some people think that the sexual assault charges claimed by more than fifty women against Bill Cosby are a fabricated ploy, and that these women have something to gain. Why then, are such accusations not being made against any other celebrity? Why this one man? Why so many women? And why always the allegation that they were drugged?
I’ve heard their accounts and the circumstances, and I believe them.
Why? Because I’ve had more than my fair share of experiences with sexual abuse. From a school classmate, a relative, two bosses, and a city official. Like the Cosby women, I had to ask myself the obvious question: Why me? My physical appearance shouldn’t have been of any consequence--I was tall and lanky, and weighed less than a hundred pounds. Some would say I was pretty; some would say I wasn’t. But, I wasn’t coy or flirtatious, or in any way sexually overt. In my view, I was the epitome of a straight-laced girl, but also inhibited and insecure.
In every instance, the men who took sexual liberties with me were initially friendly. Not in a bad way. In a normal way, where, over time, we talked about routine matters, laughed about something amusing, and went our separate ways or continued our working relationship. And then, just like Cosby, when each one felt the time was right, he made his move.
Each situation was unique, and so it was a surprise each time when a man that I trusted kissed me, touched me inappropriately, or attempted to rape me. Every one of these men had a certain level of power, had more stature than I had. And so it also was a matter of whether I would be believed. Or be seen as having invited the attack.
I believe these predators preyed on my friendliness, knowing I wouldn’t say anything… at the time, or afterward. And I didn’t. Like the Cosby women, for thirty years I never told my parents, my sisters, my friends, or anyone else. Those who have never been violated may have difficulty understanding that. But the shock of having this happen--and happen more than once--is so personally demoralizing, crushing, and humiliating, that I, like other victims, couldn’t say anything. These men’s actions drained the life out of me, making me feel like nothing. However, each time something happened, reflection and introspection became second nature. Each assault begged an answer to two important questions: Had I invited the attack? Could I have prevented it?
Every woman deals with the circumstances in her own way.
So, what did I do? I withdrew in shame, as if the assault was somehow my fault. However, being the “nice” person that I was then, I didn’t get angry and I didn’t confront my attacker. In fact, I maintained a relationship with each one—albeit a more formal, guarded relationship, believing they would never violate me again. For one of them, that proved to be the wrong tactic, because when I let trust overpower my judgement, he found the ultimate way to strip my soul.
The other way I’ve dealt with the torment I held in for so long was to write about it. I’ve exposed the despicable men who breached the conventional expectations of friendship (or employment) in my novels—not by their real name, but by their actions. And even though novels are, of course, fiction, that part of my stories is true. Believe me.
Trust
Posted January 11, 2016
Every Sunday night for the past eight years, I’ve tuned in to watch the set-in-the-sixties television show, Mad Men. Well, that can’t be true, can it, when only a limited number of episodes aired in the spring of each of the show’s eight-year run. But you get my point: I’ve been addicted to Mad Men!
Superlatives for the show are never-ending. And no wonder. Every aspect of the program is spot-on. Magazines sitting on coffee tables are of the same dates portrayed in each episode. Habits of the office workers are true to real-life. Vehicles are period-specific. In fact, it seems as if the fashions, the furniture, the advertising slogans, and products have been lifted directly from the homes and offices each of us actually had back then. Sally Draper, who was born the year after me, actually wears the same dresses, jewelry, and hair accessories that I wore at that age!
Although the show is produced in exquisite detail and is wrapped in a glamorous time period, the characters of Mad Men are what make the series stand out. Don Draper, Peggy Olson, Pete Campbell, and Joan Harris are immersed in a competitive work environment and are living dangerously. They are multi-dimensional, complex, and beautiful!
More than anything, it's the interaction of the characters that creates the drama, and makes them seem real. And so, with such a long-running series, it’s fun to take a closer look, and make judgments about which other character has most affected them.
Don Draper – Peggy Olson
Connected from the first episode as the boss and his secretary, their lives pull in opposite directions, yet remain tied together. Throughout the series, Don takes an interest in Peggy, much as he would a daughter. Or a wife. He is cautious about extending his affection, and quick to reprimand. But when Peggy finally leaves his agency, the pain on Don’s face is evident. He keeps in touch with her thereafter, and rallies in her successes, but he remains guarded.
Pete Campbell – Peggy Olson
While Pete often sees Peggy as his competition, he also sees her as a potential love interest. She catches his interest from the moment she arrives at Sterling/Cooper (and makes love to her soon after), but is jealous of her every success… whether related to the job or her personal life.
Peggy Olson – Joan Harris
The relationship of these two women makes them fun to watch. Initially, Peggy fears Joan’s authority, then seems to pity the provocative co-worker, but ultimately comes to see her as an equal—a woman struggling with her own identity, just as Peggy is. Deep down, though, they regard each other with respect.
Betty Draper – Glen Bishop
The son of her divorced neighbor, young Glen holds a certain fascination for Betty. After reprimanding him for walking in on her in the bathroom, she then gives him a lock of her hair, which cements their somewhat improper relationship. She enjoys toying with his affections, but when Glen’s interests fall to her daughter, Sally, Betty turns hostile toward him, even though her interest in him never wanes.
Joan Harris – Roger Sterling
Joan’s secret office lover becomes the father of her son, and her long-term friend. If anyone respects Joan for who she is, it’s Roger. He is her champion.
Sally Draper – her mother, Betty Draper
As difficult as it may be, young Sally struggles to appease her mean-spirited mom by making cocktails, nurturing her when she’s ill, and making herself invisible when trouble presents itself. Often caught-up in adult situations, Sally begins to emulate her mother’s mean behavior, which leads to acting up at school. Eventually though, Sally learns from her turbulent relationship with Betty, and takes a different course. Perhaps to reward her maturity, Betty relies on Sally to carry out her final wishes, following her cancer diagnosis.
It’s doubtful there will ever be another series like Mad Men. We’ve watched the characters’ day-to-day lives with interest and vigor; but after the final episode, we’ll miss them in the same way we would miss close friends and family, should they also fall into the twilight.
Author & Screenwriter
Sandra Fontana
Mad About Mad Men
Posted May 16, 2015
Size Matters
Posted November 17, 2015