Showing posts with label Misleading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Misleading. Show all posts

April 25, 2017

Check The Clock

So it should be so easy...

We manage time by the hours and minutes--and moments of life. 

This sign was hilarious though:
Breakfast 6 am - 10 am
Lunch 11 am - 2 pm
Dinner 4 pm - 7 pm
We are here to serve you any time.
Really, if you're here to serve us any time, then isn't that mean around the clock--24/7--and not just the total 10 hours listed?

What a ridiculous contradiction!

It reminded me of another crazy story of the person who when you ask what time it is, they tell you how to make the watch.

Yes, the point has definitely been missed by the other person.

Their explanation may be very detailed and even accurate on how to make a watch, but frankly they missed the point altogether, which was simply what time is it!

We need to pay attention to our communications and be honest and actually say what it is, and not beat around the 24-hour bush. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)
Share/Save/Bookmark

May 9, 2016

Fooling The Media And The American People

So finally the truth got spilled about the true rationale for the Iran deal that lifted critical nuke weapon sanctions on the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and human rights abuses.  


The narrative of a Nuke deal with a "moderate" Iranian President Rouhani at the expense of hardliners was "deliberately misleading."


So what was once touted as a "good day" for America is now quite malevolent and disheartening, indeed. 

Moreover, rather than a "new political reality" with Iran, we have ongoing and increasingly hostile Iranian actions against the U.S., leading to the House Intelligence Committee opening an investigation into how Congress and the American public were misled by the administration on Iran. 

What happened to the promised transparency and truth espoused for the American people? What of Abraham Lincoln's sacred and compelling vision of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people."

Now instead of earnest dialogue, we get a blowharded "retail[ing]" of a predefined manipulated narrative--a "far-reaching spin campaign"--for the simple media "echo chamber" and hungry public consumption.

Iran has won a big round at the expense of Democracy and as we now know our National Security. 

Maybe the worst part is that no one even seems to care, because we're now in a new election cycle for the next President (and possibly chief manipulator). ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Share/Save/Bookmark

July 7, 2013

Got References?

If you've ever done any hiring, you'll know that the reference checking can be the wildest part of the process. 

Some people have a lot of trouble coming up with good references or perhaps any references. 

In one case (actually more than one), calling the number provided for the candidate's supervisor went to the voicemail for the candidate him/herself--ah, clearly that doesn't help.

However, often candidates don't want their references checked until they have a clear intent of offer, which is sort of understandable--they don't want their references bothered unnecessarily and don't want to jeopardize their current position--but also a little bit of a chicken and egg approach, since you can't provide a real offer without checking references first. 

Then, there is a whole different category, where references are just bogus. In fact, according to Bloomberg BusinessWeek (14 January 2013), in an article called "Imaginary Friends as Job References," a CareerBuilder survey of 2,500 hiring managers found that "30% regularly find false or misleading references on applicants CVs."

Maybe candidates think that throwing around big names on their resume will just land them the job or at least get them a foot in the door--not fully realizing that the references will actually get called. 

One of the funniest anecdotes in the article was that of a hiring manager who actually found himself listed as a candidate's reference---I can hear the candidate fessing up now, "Oh, did I do that?"

Anyway, it's probably not a good idea to list people that don't know you, don't like you, or are not professional references like your mom, your boy/girlfriend, or your 5th grade teacher--then again, maybe that last one is okay if you're Doggie Howser, M.D. ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Tulane Publications)
Share/Save/Bookmark

January 18, 2009

Information: Knowledge or B.S.?

With modern technology and the Internet, there is more information out there than ever before in human history. Some argue there is too much information or that it is too disorganized and hence we have “information overload.”

The fact that information itself has become a problem is validated by the fact that Google is world’s #1 brand with a market capitalization of almost $100 billion. As we know the mission statement of Google is to “to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.”

The key to making information useful is not just organizing it and making it accessible, but also to make sure that it is based on good data—and not the proverbial, “garbage in, garbage out” (GIGO).

There are two types of garbage information:

  1. Incorrect, incomplete, or dated
  2. Misleading /propagandistic or an outright lie

When information is not reliable, it causes confusion, rather than bringing clarity. And then, the information can actually result in worse decision making, then if you didn’t have it in the first place. This is an enterprise architecture that is not only worthless, but is harmful or poison to the enterprise.

Generally, in enterprise architecture, we are optimistic about human nature and focus on #1, i.e., we assume that people mean to provide objective and complete data and try to ensure that they can do that. But unfortunately there is a darker side to human nature that we must grapple with, and that is #2.

Misinformation by accident or by intent is used in organizations all the time to make poor investment decisions. Just think how many non-standardized, non-interoperable, costly tools your organization has bought because someone provided “information” or developed a business case, which “clearly demonstrated” that is was a great investment with a high ROI. Everyone wants their toys!

Wired Magazine, February 2009, talks about disinformation in the information age in “Manufacturing Confusion: How more information leads to less knowledge” (Clive Thompson).

Thompson writes about Robert Proctor, a historian of science from Stanford, who coined the word “Agnotology,” or “the study of culturally constructed ignorance.” Proctor theorizes that “people always assume that if someone doesn’t know something, it’s because they haven’t paid attention or haven’t yet figured it out. But ignorance also comes from people literally suppressing truth—or drowning it out—or trying to make it so confusing that people stop hearing about what’s true and what’s not.” Thompson offers as examples:

  1. “Bogus studies by cigarette companies trying to link lung cancer to baldness, viruses—anything but their product.”
  2. Financial firms creating fancy-dancy financial instruments like “credit-default swaps [which] were designed not merely to dilute risk but to dilute knowledge; after they changed hands and been serially securitized, no one knew what they were worth.”

We have all heard the saying that “numbers are fungible” and we are also all cautious about “spin doctors” who appear in the media telling their side of the story rather than the truth.

So it seems that despite the advances wrought by the information revolution, we have some new challenges on our hands: not just incorrect information but people who literally seek to promote its opposite.

So we need to get the facts straight. And that means not only capturing valuable information, but also eliminating bias so that we are not making investment decisions on the basis of B.S.


Share/Save/Bookmark