I've Been Mugged

Development Starts On The Age Of Conversation: Third Edition Book

I am pleased to announce that work has started on the third edition of the Age Of Conversation book! You may remember that I authored a chapter in the second edition: The Age Of Conversation: Why Don't They Get It.

Well, the editors of the third edition are accepting new authors. Each author is responsible for writing a one page chapter up to 400 words. Chapters must be submitted during November 2009. Authors can select one of ten (10) themes to write about. The third edition will feature up to 300 authors. All proceeds from book sales will go to a charity to be selected by the authors.

If you are interested, I suggest that you read more at either of the editors' blogs: Drew McLellan or Gavin Heaton. Both blogs have a link so you can sign up and choose your theme.

Which theme did I pick? To find out, you'll have to read the third edition of the book when it is available in 2010.

Honoring 9-11 Victims And Our Military

To honor the 9-11 victims who died 8 years ago and our military men and women who have died or were injured since, below is the U.S. national Anthem straight. No pop stars, no vocal show-offs... just the anthem:

Health Care. What's The Story?

[Editor's Note: while I am away, today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. I've known Bill for decades, going back to our time working together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio during the 1980's. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations. Lately, Bill has had a lot of direct, personal experience with the health care industry.]

Part I – How To Think About It & The Economics and The Politics of It

By Bill Seebeck

My son Matt taught me a few things in an essay he wrote this week, when he asked the question, “Why do so many people know so very little about subjects that are so important to them?” Now he asked that question not about health care but about the defense of the nation.

In the essay, he said that in his quest to answer that question, he thought, “What kind of preconceived notions did people have and where did they come from? What is the reason for their knowing a half-truth or a true falsehood and was it a result of their education?”

“After long periods of study and introspection, I deduced that there are two types of knowledge people acquire often without acknowledging the disparity between the two. First, ‘perceived knowledge’ is a veritable brain dump, something learned or heard of, studied for a test but never examined or understood.”

“The second type, ‘actual learned knowledge’ is the opposite, instructed or read in a detailed manner and expressed in such a way that it is appreciated,” he opined. “The beauty of actual learned knowledge is that it incorporates a whole spectrum of topics. For example, history inherently requires economics, politics, and sociology to be more fully explained. It is a way to wisdom,” he wrote.

Thanks Matt for helping to focus on and shape how we think about the subjects that are so important to us. Thank you also for serving all of us this day in the uniform of our country.

So, as we think about health care, let us also think about the fact that we also need to consider economics, politics, history, sociology, medicine, science, technology and how we value life, our lives and others.

Health care is one of the most expensive items in our personal budgets, state budgets and in the budget of the United States. The cost to those budgets continues to rise. We (the citizens, our state governments and federal government) cannot afford the basic cost of health care, nor its continuing increases.

Therefore, we must change the system.

There are lots of politics wrapped up in health care. Why? In part because there is so much MONEY wrapped up in health care.

Corporations run health care. They make the drugs we take, operate the pharmacies that dispense the drugs, make the machines (CT-Scan, X-Rays, etc.) used for performing tests, blood testing services, they own the insurance companies and the hospitals that determine how much everything costs and who is going to pay for what.

Then we have the doctors, nurses, technicians, etc., and the colleges and universities that train them. It costs thousands and thousands of dollars to train these people who not only choose this profession but they are the people to whom we entrust our lives. They have a need to protect the quality of their educations, but they also need to pay off the cost of their educations while practicing medicine, paying the high cost of insurance required to practice medicine and living life with some quality.

The next group is ourselves. We always want something better. We also don’t want to pay a high cost for it.

We have our seniors, who since the 1960’s have had a medical system of their own that in tandem with Social Security provides at the very least a basic style of life that recognizes their dignity and life’s effort as working people, who because of age and the challenges of health that come with aging generally cannot afford a system without support.

Finally, we have our elected officials. They are after all politicians. They are influenced by each of the groups noted above and many more. The lobbyists that represent such groups contribute millions to politicians at election time. Such influence can cause an elected official to move from the right thing to do, to the thing to do in order to get elected the next time they run for public office.

A sub-group of the elected officials are governors, state governments and their legislative bodies. Most states require an annual BALANCED budget and the cost of health care to a state can be punishing, especially if the federal government doesn’t help fund what the state is required by law to provide its citizens. Then, if the state has to cut costs to balance their budget, then local governments (your town) will also have less money from the state and generally will have to make cuts as well.

It is the role of the President of course to lead the country as its chief executive officer. He or she must offer programs to Congress that balance the cost of health care in relation to other needs of the nation with in this case, the health care needs of its citizens.

The President knows that the health care system has to change because as we noted in the economic section, it costs too much for everyone. In the economic mess we are in, it absolutely must be addressed. Not later, but now because it represents such a large and growing percentage of the federal budget, state governments and our own budgets at home.

What we change to as the NEW HEALTH CARE SYSTEM is a battle between all of the groups noted above, the debate we are experiencing today, with all sorts of half-truths and falsehoods flying about, all because it is first ABOUT MONEY and only a distant second about our health.

As a result, at the end of the day, it does not mean that we will have a new system that will truly serve our health care needs in the future nor be as inexpensive as it could possibly be. What we will have will be what the lobbyists and elected officials bang together. Unfortunately, not a happy thought.

Meanwhile, let me know what you think.

Challenging Debates

Chicken Little Congress (Video & Somewhat Political)

[Editor's Note: Today's blog post below is a commentary by Montana Maven, who gave anyone permission to publish it. The commentary sums up pretty well how I feel about the health care discussion in a Congress that is quick to spend $2 billion more to subsidize auto purchases but timid when it comes to health care. Our current system is designed to maximize profits while minimizing the number of people covered, while a truly responsible health care system would maximize the number of persons covered and the number covered with adequate insurance. I am proud to live in a state, Massachusetts, that is trying to solve a difficult problem rather than run away from it. Too often, it seems that too often the attitude in Congress -- or frequently within the "Party of No" -- is to find ways not to do something, rather than find creative ways to solve a problem. When will people realize that a a country is only a strong as the health of its citizens? People are worth more than autos.]

Senator Chuck Grassley pays $356.59 a month for health insurance with a $300 deductible. We pay for his cheap care with our taxes. When asked why we can’t have what he has with our tax money, he told the guy to “Get a job with the Feds”. Hey, Chuck, guess you forgot whom your boss is. It should be us. But like Max who received $3,902,785 from the health care industry over his career, Wellpoint and Blue Cross Blue Shield might have better seats at the Chuck’s table.

Americans are already paying more in taxes for health care than Canadians and are not as healthy. We have the fourth highest infant mortality rate of the 30 developed countries. We are 24th of the 30 countries in life expectancy. That’s because we have a for profit insurance based system. We have great health care providers, but we are often denied full access by some insurance bureaucrat.

Health insurance is not health care. Trying to figure out how to keep the profit in health care is a losing proposition. Other countries use insurance companies to manage bill paying but all of them are non profit.

And we have the money to pay for it. All our Chicken Little legislators do is squawk, “Cost, cost, cost!” like a bunch of hens. We have a $16 Trillion dollar economy. We just spent $160 billion bailing our insurance giant AIG. We spend over $1 Trillion a year on keeping 761 military bases in 150 countries. Come on, close a few of them. A measly $150 billion a year for health care is cheap and money much better spent because it is spent here in the good old U.S.A. on its hard working citizens. Support H.B. 676 Medicare for All. It’s a lot simpler than the Chicken Littles want you to believe.

---

How bad is the influence peddling and lack of accountability by Congressional representatives to their constituents? Watch this:

I love how Olbermann calls on the carpet both Democrats and Republicans, and especially the Blue Dog Democrats:

"You were not elected to create a Democratic majority. You were elected to restore this country. You were not elected to serve the corporations and the trusts who the government has enabled for these last eight years. You were elected to serve the people. And if you fail to pass or support this legislation, the full wrath of the progressive and the moderate movements in this country will come down on your heads. Explain yourselves not to me, but to them. They elected you. And in the blink of an eye, they will replace you."

Here's a link to the transcript, courtesy of JedL at the Daily Kos.

A Combustible Combination: Race, Class, Testosterone, And Differing Expectations

During the past week, I have thought long and hard about whether or not to write this blog post.I decided to write it partly because the Gates-Crowley event occurred close to home (I live in Boston about 4 miles from Cambridge where the event happened), and also because some citizens have been mistaken for criminals by police due to identity theft.

Yes, Professor Gates and I are both African-American men aged 50-plus. Yes, I used to work at Harvard during the 1990's. I do not know him or the officer. Regardless, this post is not about what you're probably guessing it's about.

The President, Sergeant Crowley and Professor Gates are arranging a meeting in Washington during the next few days, and many pundits and citizens advocates have debated whether or not the incident and arrest was racial profiling, Some people are quick to blame the professor. Others are quick to blame the officer. I see a far more complicated situation. It’s about how we communicate with each other.

A police stop can be a very tense and scary event for everyone; for both the officer and the citizen. I'm not talking about police stops for speeding or traffic violations while driving, but stops where a crime may be involved. A police stop is a highly charged event where everyone involved doesn't know what they will get from the other person. To me, the appropriate question to ask is: what is proper decorum during a police stop?

In her column, Maureen Dowd tackled part of the problem in a column titled "Bite Your Tongue:"

"Gates told me Crowley was so “gruff” and unsolicitous “the hair on my neck stood up.” Crowley says Gates acted “put off” and “agitated... A police officer who’s proud of his reputation for getting along with black officers, and for teaching cadets to avoid racial profiling, feels maligned to be cast as a racist white Boston cop. A famous professor who studies identity and summers in Martha’s Vineyard feels maligned to be cast as a black burglar with backpack and crowbar."

Could it be that Crowley and Gates are both right? I think so.

Part of the problem starts with the nature of a police stop. It's a tense situation for all involved. I know because I have been stopped by the police. I am not discussing police stops for speeding or violating a traffic law. I'm discussing police stops where the police are investigating a possible serious crime and the person stopped is considered a possible suspect.

You just don't know how tense and scary a police stop is until it happens to you. So, I am not quick to judge anybody involved in a police stop. In the heat of the moment, it's easy for anything said or any movement to be interpreted in a way different from the way intended.

In 1978, I was stopped by two plain-clothed detectives while I was walking down a Chicago street with my girlfriend's hairdryer -- one of those old, heavy bulky kind. (The photo on the right will give you an idea, but it was an older model before the hand-held hairdryers became popular.) We were both graduate students at the University of Chicago, and were house-sitting during a school break in Hyde park for a friend who was away on vacation.

My girlfriend left her hairdryer in her dorm room and asked me to retrieve it. While walking from the campus back to the apartment with the hairdryer, the two plain-clothed detectives stopped their car on the sidewalk in front of me, exited their car, drew their guns, and yelled at me to, "Freeze."

Thankfully, I had the presence of mind to stay calm with guns pointed at me. I froze and responded politely with, “Hello officers. How can I help?” This response helped diffused a tense situation and let them know I was cooperative. The officers asked me for identification, reviewed my school I.D., made a general statement about there being burglaries in the area, and then waved me on.

My point is this: even when you are innocent a police stop can be a harrowing event. Some of you might say that was 30 years ago, so get over it, George. Well maybe, but that was the only time in my life that I had guns pointed at me. I could have twitched with fear and easily been shot. Some memories fade more slowly than others.

Maybe that was how Chicago police officers felt that they had to respond to situations. I don't know. I've never been a police officer. Police officers work in a profession where their lives are at risk at times, so maybe this is how they feel they must act to stay safe. I didn't know if they were responding to a 9-1-1 call or not. Maybe I was wearing similar clothes as a thief they may have been pursuing. I don't know and they didn't say.

My point is: until it happens, you don't know how scary and tense a police stop can be. And until it happens, you don't know how you'll respond. My impression is that most Americans have not been stopped besides a speeding or traffic violation. The police have definite expectations about how you should act: remain calm. That means speaking only when directed to, and moving only when directed to. It means that your questions probably won't be answered, too.

To remain calm, when you know you are innocent while others treat you like a criminal, can feel frustrating, humiliating and insulting. When you try to comply and don't get your questions answered, that can intensify those feelings. Some people might call being calm in such a situation being docile. Many people probably have the opinion that it should be easy to be calm if you are innocent, and obey the police no matter what. Yes, we all want the same thing... for the police to protect us. Having been stopped, I can tell you that it's a difficult situation -- a situation I think most Americans don't really know and don't pause to consider how tough it can be.

I learned about the expectations police have for police stops while growing up in Harlem. When I was a youth, there wasn't an Internet or Google to search and find out the proper decorum during a police stop. You learned it from whomever you trusted: your parents, a teacher or a relative. My dad told me.

While in college, in 1974 I had a summer job selling students dictionaries and home repair manuals door-to-door in Oklahoma City. The job was to show residents the books for students, collect deposits, and deliver the book orders at the end of the summer. This was long before Wal-Mart stores were everywhere, long before the Internet and online shopping, and before many supermarkets sold books. While selling books in Oklahoma City, Del City, and Midwest city, the police stopped me several times to check for a selling license, which I made sure to have.

During one stop, the police said that they had received complaints from some neighbors who thought that I was casing the homes to rob people. I was just going about my summer job door-to-door, trying to sell as many books as I could. Along the way, I asked questions about which homes had school-aged children so I could stop at the right homes.

In one incident, the police shuffled me into the backseat of their squad car while the neighbors screamed for the police to arrest me. I showed the police my selling license and explained how I was complying with their local laws. This time, the police drove me to the edge of town where I was released. Before I got out of the car, they tore up my selling license for that town -- a clear signal for me not to sell there anymore.

Based on my experiences, during a police stop it's easy for mistrust and poor communication to happen.

Was my experience in Oklahoma City in 1974 racial? Or was it because I was different: a sales person, from the North with a different accent, who happened to be Black? Hearing the “N” word was a clue. Having the police tear up a legal seller’s license was another clue. I tried to sell by their rules, and was still being treated harshly. Was it fair? No. I bit my lip, cried in the safety of a local gas station bathroom, and then moved on to sell in the next town.

Are things better today than they were in the 1970's? Of course things are better. That's not the point. My point: nobody likes having their credibility and integrity questioned. Nobody. The police don't like it and neither do citizens. We need to remember that about each other. The Gates-Crowley incident is a clear reminder.

Remaining calm, when you know you are innocent and while others treat you like you are a criminal, can feel frustrating, humiliating and insulting. You want to demand that they treat you with respect since you know you are innocent and are not a criminal, but at the same time they don't know who you are. It's a difficult situation filled with tension and uncertainty -- a situation I think most Americans don't really know or don't pause to consider how tough it can be.

So, what is proper decorum for citizens during a police stop?

This weekend, I did a few Google.com searches and was surprised at how many towns and cities don't publish local law enforcements' expectations of proper decorum for citizens during a police stop. Maybe the police feel like we citizens will learn what their expectations are through police shows on television and cable. To me, this is too important to leave to chance or to a fictional television show. Make it clear -- publish your expectations online with sufficient detail for the different types of police stops. And citizens share the responsibility -- attend local civic association meetings, where law enforcement representatives visit and share important information.

Some people can remain calm more easily than others during a tense situation like a police stop. Thankfully, I was able to do so in 1974 and 1978 and not get shot. But I do know this... when you are innocent and the police stop you as a possible suspect in a crime it is very tempting to ask, "What's going one? Why are you stopping me?"

My point: an innocent question like "Why are you stopping me?" can be easily be interpreted during a tense situation as "Why are you stopping me?" or "Why are you stopping me?" It's easy for an innocent question to be interpreted as a confrontation or challenge to authority. It's easy for words and actions to be interpreted in different ways. Everyone involved in a police stop have expectations about how they wish to be treated, and the answers they expect to have answered. A simple question like "Why are you stopping me?" can easily be heard as "How dare you stop me?"

The news reports have often provided some (but not all) facts about the Gates-Crowley incident. Facts continue to emerge. A wise person once told me that, "an expectation is a planned resentment."

It's easy for me to imagine a scenario where the officer asked professor Gates for identification and the professor would assume that his school I.D. was sufficient, while the officer's I.D. expectations included verification of his residential address. It's easy for me to imagine a scenario where the professor asked the officer for identification and the officer provided his name and precinct; something the officer felt was sufficient while the professor felt was insufficient. If either of these happened, it's easy to see how the situation escalated.

My point: none of us were in the Gates' home to see and hear exactly what was said. Words, tone, and inflection all matter. We only have both individuals' reports after the fact... a he-said versus he-said situation. So, it's difficult to know exactly what happened.

Based on everything I have read, my opinion is that both men probably over-reacted... but that's easy to do in a situation filled with tension, ambiguity, and uncertainty. Words and actions are interpreted, then egos get in the way. So, I'm willing to give both men some slack.

President Obama says he hopes that this can be a teachable moment. I agree. I hope that the teachable moment includes a discussion about law enforcements' expectations of citizen decorum during a police stop. In my opinion, this event is not about racial profiling, but about the decorum and expectations during a police stop.

Hopefully, local law enforcement across the country will make more efforts to make it clearer to citizens what their expectations are during a police stop. Baltimore County, Maryland has a pretty good Web page that clearly explains local law enforcements' expectations of citizens during the different types of police stops: in your car, on the street, and at your home. There are important details between each type of police stop. I wish that more cities and towns published clear statements online like this.

I'd like to see these online pages cover appropriate decorum during a police stop where a citizen is mistaken for a criminal due to identity theft. That's a situation that is ripe for conflict, since the police are pretty sure they know who the suspect is, while the victim is both certain they are innocent and unaware that their identity has been used by others during a crime.

Also, I think that citizens' expectations of local law enforcement are changing. This experience will illustrate what I mean.

After a drive-by shooting on my street, my neighbors and I formed a neighborhood watch group with the assistance of the Boston Police Department. The BPD came to meetings in our homes and taught us how to form a successful neighborhood watch, what is suspicious behavior, and when to call 9-1-1. And, there is a big difference between "suspicious people" and "suspicious behavior."

That was an enlightening process, since like most people I thought that I knew when to call 9-1-1. We learned to call 9-1-1 when we see suspicious behavior that we want investigated. All of this is training that I believe more citizens should get. My point is this: during the training, the local police representatives shared their names and office e-mail addresses, so we could contact them for a variety of follow-up reasons.

I can tell you this: if I invite a police representative into my home, I will expect to know their full name and contact information (not necessarily a badge number). It doesn’t mean there is a problem. It does not mean I question the officer’s authority or integrity. It simply means that I want to know exactly who I am doing business with, in case I need to contact them again for some reason requiring follow-up.

I hope that this incident becomes a teachable moment that includes a discussion about law enforcements' expectations of citizen decorum during a police stop. And since data breaches soared by 47% in 2008, it'd be great if this teachable moment covered the decorum for mistaken identity police stops due to identity theft.

Too Big To Fail

This blog has covered the abuses by banks of consumers. Banks and companies that are too big to fail are simply too big. Enjoy the music video below from the Austin (Texas) Lounge Lizards:

Michael Jackson: A Life of Great Creativity & Very Human Challenges

[Editor's Note: today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. During the 1980's, Bill and I worked together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations. Bill also blogs at Seebeck's View.]

By Bill Seebeck

I can still remember watching 40 years ago as Michael Jackson and his brothers went on the stage of the Ed Sullivan show, with Diana Ross, who discovered them, sitting in the audience.

What startled me that night was how Michael took the microphone, as if he had been doing it for a thousand years and with a voice that from the moment you heard it, knew it was special, began singing and dancing about the stage. He stopped you. You had to watch. You instantly fell in love with him and for quite some time afterward, he became known as "Little Michael Jackson".

Well, Michael Jackson and his brothers became famous overnight and they never looked back, everything was before them and we, the audiences throughout the world, were the beneficiaries of his amazing creativity.

I was in college when Michael first hit the scene and only saw him once in person, it was during the 1993 Super Bowl in Pasadena, California where he was the half-time show. Watching the video again today of that performance reminded me of his extraordinary gifts as one of the most exciting entertainers of all time.

We will always listen to Michael's music. We will also remember the songs he wrote for the world, including Black or White, Heal the World and We Are The World, the last, a song written for African relief and performed as a group by just about every major talent in the music business at the time.

Unless you have traveled the world, it is hard to appreciate the enormous impact American music has had on so many cultures. I remember sitting in a Fuddrucker's restaurant in Jeddah Saudi Arabia 10 years ago and watched as a group of Saudi high school boys entered the restaurant dressed not in their traditional garb but in cargo pants, Abercrombie & Fitch t-shirts, LA Laker hats worn backward and listening to the most popular radio station in the Kingdom back then -- U.S. Armed Forces radio. What were they listening to? Yes, American music and they all knew Michael Jackson.

However, the type of overnight success that fell upon Michael was both a great joy and a great burden. In our times, when you gain "your 15 minutes in the sun" as Andy Warhol used to say, your life is taken from you by the public. You're watched and followed twenty-four hours a day and someone always wants something from you for themselves. Now sometimes what they want is legitimate, yet more times than not, it is not. It feels at times that they are sucking the very marrow out of you and one of the things that you lose is the ability to trust others. It is a difficult life. You try very hard to create a life that you can trust, withdrawing into a type of cocoon. That space becomes your safety zone, the place you can always run to and survive the latest hurt or betrayal. That space became where Michael, despite all of his world fame, lived. It is no surprise then that this is where he was tempted by his demons, the same ones that tempt each of us in our lives of non-perfection.

So today, I remember Michael Jackson, the boy I first saw and heard, the man we all came to experience, the incredible entertainer that graced our lives and with whom he shared his truly extraordinary God given gifts. We are forever grateful.

May God's peace be upon you Michael.

Copyright 2009 WBSeebeck. Reprinted with permission.

Former Employee Identified as Alledged Hacker of Power Company

I have often written about data breaches where the sensitive personal data of customers, employees, or subcontractors has been lost of stolen. This breach event is important because it highlights the criminal aspect of a data breach, when a different type of damage was done.

Last week, the Threat Level blog reported that the FBI is investigating a computer breach at:

"... a large Texas power company that crippled the firm’s energy forecast system for a day in March, costing it over $26,000... FBI agents raided the home of a former employee of Dallas-based Energy Future Holdings... The ex-employee, Dong Chul Shin, was fired from the company March 3 for performance reasons, and escorted off the premises, according to court records. But the company failed to immediately shut off his VPN access. That afternoon, someone using Shin’s account began logging onto the corporate network, e-mailing out proprietary data to a personal Yahoo account linked to Shin, and modifying and deleting files..."

It appeared that the hack was intended to cause financial damage to the power company and not cause a power outage or threaten plant safety:

"One of the files that was tampered with, “Hourly Capacity Supplied — 2009 upload.xls... resulting in EFH being unable to accurately forecast the parameters necessary to operate the business... That kind of sabotage would harm the company’s efforts to sell its electricity in the Texas power market..."

This breach also highlights several implications. First, threats come from within an organization, and not just from outside.

Second, Shin's VPN access should have been deactivated when he was fired. This suggests that either the power company's data security policy was insufficient, or the data policy was sufficient and an employee didn't do their job. Either way, the power company needs to do more about data security. Either update its policies, train employees, or both.

Third, events like this indicate to consumers that companies don't take data security as seriously as they should.

Jesse Ventura, Dick Cheney, and Torture

This post deviates from our standard identity-theft because this is important. You rarely hear this amount of honesty and straight talk from a politician, who has military experience:

Also, the Mclatchey newspapers did some excellent fact-checking on Cheney's recent speeches, which are filled with falsehoods. For me, our foreign policy should never be the equivalent of, "the ends justify the means."

The Crisis Of Credit Visualized

Good video at explaining a complex subject in easily-understandable terms and images:

The Crisis of Credit Visualized from Jonathan Jarvis on Vimeo.

White House Correspondents Association Dinner

This includes some really funny jokes by Wanda Sykes. Part One:

In part two, I really enjoyed the jokes about Limbaugh and Cheney:

Google: The Monolith

[Editor's Note: today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. During the 1980's, Bill and I worked together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations. Bill also blogs at Seebeck's View.]

By Bill Seebeck

Google, a household name. I use it everyday. I google this and google that and get a nice result. Google is my friend. I trust Google. Until...

Earlier this week, I needed to speak with someone at Google. You know like customer service. I wanted to ask them about some confusion I had about one of their online products that I use called AdSense. I had received some e-mail requesting very, very personal information for my AdSense account that those of us that are concerned about online privacy teach others never to respond to when they receive them. So, I was very confused when Google asked me for such data by e-mail. I needed to verify first that it was indeed Google that was making such inquiries -- and then why?

So, I went to the Google website and searched all over the place for information related to what I wanted and was unsuccessful. Then I looked for a telephone number so I could call and ask my questions. No phone number. You could send an e-mail, but since I wouldn't give anyone the information they were requesting, I wanted to hear a human voice tell me what this was all about. All of a sudden, I realized that the Google website was designed to keep me and others away from the company.

Then, I checked my BusinessWeek online, looked up Google, it is after all a public company, got the local phone number, checked the list of key employees, found the person in charge of products and services and gave them a call.

The call went something like this:

Google: Hello, this is Google, how can I help you?

Me: May I have Mr. X please?

Google: What is your business with Mr. X?

Me: I need to ask Mr. X about one of Google's products.

Google: If you have questions about Google products, you need to go to the website and use the e-mail.

Me: I don't want to use the e-mail, I need to speak with a person please.

Google: I'm sorry we don't do that.

Me: Well, let me speak with someone then in corporate communications.

Google: We don't have a corporate communications.

Me: Public relations then.

Google: Do you have a specific name in public relations?

Me: No.

Google: Well then I can't help you.

Me: Then, can you connect me to investor relations.

Google: Do you have a specific name in investor relations?

Me: No.

Google: Well then, I can't help you.

Me: Listen, this is crazy, are you saying that there is no one to talk to at Google?

Google: I have a very short list of people that people can speak with but, if you don't know their specific names and can't tell me what specific business you are doing with them, then I'm sorry I can't connect you.

End of conversation.

The Oxford American Dictionary defines a monolith as, "a large and impersonal political, corporate or social structure regarded as intractably indivisible and uniform."

So, when you call Google, the monolith, it responds, "Welcome to Google. Go away."

Now I've been in the online business for 27 years and I have never experienced such behavior.

My next step took me to their most recent earnings press release and yes, I found a name of a person in corporate communications. I called but got their voice mail. I left a message and said I had two questions. First, was why was Google making itself so unavailable to the public, and second, I needed to ask some serious questions about their product AdSense. Well, I have yet to hear from them.

I have to admit that Google is not alone in its Internet strategy. They and others use their websites to inform but also use it to block the public and as a way to control access.

Now, I am sure that Google or others that have such a strategy will say that thousands of people will call if they give out a phone number. Maybe that is true, and maybe that's good. How do you know what your marketplace is up to? What are people feeling? Are you satisfied that e-mails provide you with the true trends with which to gauge your business in the future?

Thirty years ago, my boss at the time, J. Peter Grace, CEO of W.R. Grace & Company, put out a memo to all employees (numbered in the thousands) and told us to answer our own phones. None of us, he said were too big to do that and in our humility, we might learn something about our business. He also said that some of the calls might not be pleasing, but then that was the way we took responsibility for our actions in the course of doing our work.

Now, I realize that many things have happened since those days, but what hasn't changed is that when you sell to the public, you are responsible to the public. When you think that you are better than the public you serve, then someday it comes back on you.

Take a look around Google, you can see the carnage of many companies that didn't think they needed to be responsible to the public.

What do the readers think about this? Let us know below.

Copyright 2009 WBSeebeck. Reprinted with permission.

Bernanke Says Recession Over End of Year! NOT!

[Editor's Note: today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. During the 1980's, Bill and I worked together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations.]

By Bill Seebeck

It was reported Tuesday that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke believes that housing is bottoming out, that the recession should come to an end by the end of 2009 and while unemployment will be slow to rebound that, things will move over to the positive side, unless of course there is a further problem with the financial system.

Well, that's a stinging endorsement of Happy Days to come if I've ever heard it.

Little or No Credit Available

Perhaps the Fed Chairman hasn't noticed that in the last 90 days the banks have seriously contracted personal and small business credit by slashing credit lines, even to the most worthy. Net, net, sir, every day that goes by, there is less and less credit in the hands of the people.

Housing on a Rebound

Perhaps, sir, you have not noticed that while banks are playing at handling the foreclosure crisis, they are just that playing, creating an illusion. In fact, they are handling lots of requests from people in need, but they are holding up finalizing new mortgages and promote only the fact that they are processing so very many. Processing but not completing. Foreclosures continue.

Banks Rebuffing Congressional Staffs

Perhaps Mr. Chairman, you should make inquiries of Congressional staffs and find out just how successful they have been in helping their constituents with mortgage problems. You will find that the banks have not been responsive to the staffs of our elected officials, the very people who have oversight of the banks and of you, sir.

Squeezing the People

Mr. Chairman, the people are being squeezed from every corner. Our cities and states all have budget deficits and are making serious cuts in services and trying to raise funds in every possible way, mainly on the backs of the people. People are losing their jobs each day. Self-employed folks are out of work also and the Fed doesn't count those people who never did qualify for unemployment insurance. The prices of food and services have not retreated, nor very little else, except the income of the people.

Where is all the money going to come from Mr. Bernanke to improve our economy?

Unemployment Still Rising

Unemployment is rising at a lower level but still rising at more than 600,000 per month and the government expects the national unemployment rate to hit 10% before the end of the year. I'd like to know where the new jobs are going to come from to create the income to fuel the economy and create growth because they are not being created right now.

So, Mr. Bernanke what's the story? What's the truth Mr. Bernanke?

I read the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times every day and the whole world is in deep recession. How can this turn around Mr. Chairman in a little more than six months?

Please tell us sir, because we, the people, don't see it.

What do my fellow citizens think? Tell us below.

Copyright 2009 WBSeebeck. Reprinted with permission.

The Stress of It All is Becoming Dangerous

[Editor's Note: today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. I've known Bill for decades, going back to our time working together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio during the 1980's. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations.]

By Bill Seebeck

It seems that not a day goes by during these most difficult financial times when we don't hear a story about people "losing it". Just this week, a young man apparently took his life. He was the acting chief financial officer of Freddie Mac whose stated mission is to help stabilize residential mortgage markets in the United States. The Treasury Department took over the company last September. He was only 41.

That story was followed up by another in which it was reported that a lawyer mother ordered her two daughters out of the car because they were yelling too much and wouldn't quiet down. I checked up on the mother and found that she is a skilled senior attorney whose specialty is law that governs banking and other lending institutions with particular emphasis on the very issues being faced by, we the people, and our Treasury Department.

No matter what else was going on in the lives of these two individuals, I recognized in them, one of the real threats to the health and welfare of the American people.

STRESS.

Every day, in addition to whatever we've had to previously bear, we are now faced with losing our jobs, keeping our homes, feeding ourselves and our children not to mention the loss of dreams of retirement, college education and just a plain better life.  This folks results in stress and it has a profound impact on us.

According to a 1996 article in Psychology Today, "When stresses become routine, the constant biochemical pounding takes its toll on the body; the system starts to wear out at an accelerated rate. By responding to the stress of everyday life with the same surge of biochemicals released during major threats, the body is slowly killing itself. The biochemical onslaught chips away at the immune system, opening the way to cancer, infection, and disease. Hormones unleashed by stress eat at the digestive tract and lungs, promoting ulcers and asthma. Or they may weaken the heart, leading to strokes and heart disease."

"Chronic stress is like slow poison," [Jean] King [Ph.D. of the University of Massachusetts Medical School] observes. "It is a fact of modern life that even people who are not sensitized to stress are adversely affected by everything that can go wrong in the day."

This is another reason why I have been so worried about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am not concerned about the professionalism of our armed forces but I am concerned about the constant stress that four or five years of combat, four, five, six 12 and 15 month deployments have had on our service people and their families. And don't think that bravado will overcome it. It will not. Examine the increasing suicide rate among the military and you will find that we have a problem that can't be swept under a rug.

Watch the way people drive these days, listen to the concerns we share with one another. We as a nation are worried and stressed. Our institutions have failed us and our social contract has been broken. Now we can fix it, but there must be more relief given directly to the people in order that the stress of it all doesn't endanger us in ways we have never yet experienced as a society.

What do you think?

Copyright 2009 WBSeebeck

Roller Derby

Today's post is a playful diversion from the usual identity theft and data breach fare.

Yesterday evening, I attended a roller derby bout between the Wicked Pissahs and the Nutcrackers at Shriner's Auditorium in Wilmington, Massachusetts. One of my coworkers skates on the Wicked Pissahs team:

Roller Derby - April 2009 from George Jenkins on Vimeo.To learn more about upcoming events, visit BostonDerbyDames.com .

Sesame Street Explains The Bernie Madoff Scandal

This is very funny. I hope that you enjoy it as much as I did:

Seems to me that Ernie definitely felt like he had been mugged. Thanks to the folks at the Jimmy Kimmel Live show and at Sesame Street for the humor.

Banks And Credit Card Issuers Increase Interest Rates On Consumer Credit Cards

It took a while to calm down so I could write this blog post. About the 13th of February I received a notice from my credit card issuer, Capital One, informing me that the interest rate and other terms for my credit card were all going up:

"At Capital One, we are committed to providing valuable customers like you with honest and open communications. Today, we're notifying you that terms of your Capital One account are changing... Due to extraordinary changes in the economic environment, we're reviewing our existing credit card accounts. Having considered these economic conditions, your account's current Purchase rate, and the length of time you've had this rate and account, we will be increasing your Purchase rate. We're also raising your Cash Advance and Default rates."

This copy seemed so dishonest. If the bank is having difficulty and is losing money with decisions its executives made about asset-backed securities, then say so. This copy makes it sound like the bank is an innocent bystander or victim in this financial and economic mess. The last time I checked, Capital One received about $3.5 billion in bailout money from taxpayers to facilitate credit and lending. The notice didn't mention that fact, or thank us taxpayers for the huge loan. Based on the text in this notice, Capital One is doing the opposite: restricting credit and lending.

More from Capital One's notice:

"The following changes will be effective for all billing periods that begin after April 17, 2009:
Purchase and Balance Transfer Annual Percentage rate (APR): A variable rate equal to 17.9% as of 1/28/2009. Your purchase and balance transfer APR may vary monthly. The rate will be determined by adding 14.65% to the Prime rate."

So, my credit card interest rate is going up from 10% to 17.9%, or more since the rate will be variable. That's a huge increase. I definitely have feeling that I've been mugged.

And why the two conflicting dates? Which date is the correct date: April 17 or January 28? The notice should have been worded more clearly. Consumers shouldn't need a PhD in finance to read a notice from their credit card issuer. More from Capital One's notice:

"Cash Advance Annual Percentage Rate (APR): A variable rate equal to 24.9% as of 1/28/2009. Your cash APR may vary monthly. The rate will be determined by adding 21.65% to the Prime rate."

I'm one of the lucky consumers who is able to pay off my credit card balance every month in full and on time. So, I haven't incurred interest charges on my Capital One credit card since 2004, when I paid off all of my credit cards. With a credit score north of 790 (which is higher than 98% of Americans), my credit is good. I don't do balance transfers and cash purchases with my credit cards. So, while I'm unaffected by the interest rate hikes, it's the principle of the matter that irks me. And other consumers have complained recently about Capital One's rate increase notices.

But not everyone is so fortunate. These huge interest rate increases will hurt a lot of consumers, and make it far more difficult for good customers to continue paying. More from Capital One's notice:

"Default Annual Percentage Rate (APR): A variable rate equal to 29.4% as of 1/28/209. Your default APR may vary monthly. the rate will b determined by adding 26.15% to the Prime rate. If we receive your payment three or more days after your payment due date twice within any 12 billing periods, we may increase your APRs immediately to the above Default APR."

Wow! The bank wants to charge late payers almost 30% interest. How can a consumer ever get ahead with a high interest rate like that. That's robbery. Consider this craziness: in Hong Kong Citibank agreed to limit credit card interest rates to 45%. Can you believe that? 45 freakin' percent! How nice of Citibank! How customer friendly of the bank!

Around the 17th of February, I received a similar notice from Discover Bank. The interest rate and terms for my Discover credit card are going up, too:

"We are changing the Discover Cardmember Agreement. these changes apply to your Account effective for billing periods that end after May 1, 2009... We are modifying the "Default Rates" section to provide that the Default Rate is a variable rate... Each time you do not make a required payment on time (a Default rate Event), we may increase the standard Annual percentage Rate for purchases, balance transfers and cash advances to a variable rate equal to the Prime Rate + up to 27.99%, but such rate will never exceed 29.99% (the "Default rate). At the same time, any special rates on purchases, balance transfers or cash advances will end, and the Default Rate may apply. As of November 28, 2008, the maximum Default Rate would be an Annual Percentage Rate of 29.99%..."

An interest rate near 30%! Can you believe that? Again, I'm one of the lucky consumers who is able to pay off my credit card balance every month in full and on time. So, I haven't incurred interest charges on my Discover credit card since 2004, when I paid off all of my credit cards. But not everyone is so fortunate. These huge interest rate increases will hurt a lot of consumers.

I called my grown son (age 23) to warn him to watch his credit card statements for interest rate increases. I also advised him to pay off his credit card balances as soon as possible, so he doesn't get stuck in a bad situation where his credit card balances rise so fast that he can't pay his debts.

So, what's up with the banks and credit card issuers? Why these notices with huge interest rate increases?

Many consumers would say the banks are doing it because they can.Yesterday's blog post by guest-author Bill Seebeck provided a more detailed explanation. The banks lost money in the asset-backed securities marketplace and are using any means necessary to increase revenues to avoid more financial losses. If that means screwing consumers, so be it.

My list of reasons why banks are raising interest rates so high:

• Because they can
• To increase revenues from bad investments and poor decisions by their executives
• Expecting consumers with credit card balances are unable to pay off those balances before the higher interest rates start
• Betting that more consumers will be laid off from work during 2009, and those people will run up large credit card balances
• Greed
• Comfortable that a compliant Congress won't do anything about it

If there's any good news, neither credit card issuer lowered the limits on my credit cards. That has happened to many consumers already. Will I shop around to switch to credit cards with better terms? You bet.

If you are furious (and I hope that you are) about these huge interest rate increases, I encourage you to contact your elected representatives in Congress and demand strong oversight of the TARP money received by Capital One and other banks. You might also send a letter to Richard D. Fairbank, Chairman and CEO of Capital One Financial Corporation (1680 Capital One Drive, McLean, VA 22102), and politely express your opinion regarding this decision to alienate their strongest customer base. You can also write to David W. Nelms, CEO, Discover Financial Services (2500 Lake Cook Road,
Riverwoods, IL 60015).

If you have received a rate increase notice from your credit card issuer, please share your story below.

If You have a Credit Card: Beware the Ides of March!

[Editor's Note: Today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. I've known Bill for decades, going back to our time working together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio during the 1980's. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations.]

While the government and the Congress have been propping up the banks with billions of dollars, the banks have not been spending all their time figuring out how to begin lending again, they have been using the money to contract rather than expand with drastic impact to consumers and the economy.

The banks have assigned just enough staff to create the illusion that they are lending, but in fact they have been hiring hundreds of collection agents, reducing lines of credit, increasing rates for bank charges and in the credit card realm, dumping accounts that always pay on time in favor of accounts that they can push over the edge with more fees and increased debt in an effort to gain more income.

It is fast becoming known in the credit card world that in March the banks will increase rates on millions of customers. The annual percent rates (APR) will change and the consumer once again will take it on the chin big time.

These predatory actions are helping to make it very clear that there is another shoe yet to drop in the banking industry and that is the credit card business.

With the collapse of the asset-backed securities (ABS) marketplace, the banks took a big hit. First, it was with mortgages and now it will be with credit cards. Yes, just like with mortgages, since 1987, banks have been packaging credit card debt and receivables into what is called credit card asset-backed securities.

How does it work?

Over the past 12 months, we have come to know about how mortgages were turned into securities (mortgaged backed securities). The same can pretty much be said for turning credit card debt and receivables into a security (credit card backed securities).

In the credit card model, the bank that issues the credit card bunches up groups of accounts or receivables usually into the form of a bond "backed" by these accounts or receivables and sells them to a trust. In turn, the trust issues securities backed by those receivables.

Now, here is where I believe the process becomes risky.  The bank that issued the card and "sold" the account or receivables still services the account BUT, the assets that were "sold" have been removed from the bank's balance sheet.

Why is that important?

It's important because since the assets are no longer on the bank's balance sheet, the bank can reduce its capital requirements and seek new accounts to make for the ones "removed" from the balance sheet. Capital requirements are the reserves that banks must put aside by law to essentially protect the bank's business. These funds can't be tampered with and must remain on deposit, just in case.

What happens next?

When you, as a credit cardholder pay your bill each month, that money goes into the trust. Those funds are used to pay those that have bought the Credit Card backed securities.

So what happens, if there is a slowdown in people paying on their balances?

Well, as you can imagine, the bank's are in trouble, not only because you owe them money on the balance they have lent you via the card, but also because they have already sold your debt/receivables and there is less money in the trust to pay the investors. Also, when your balances increase, it means that the banks can't add as many new accounts and must maintain larger capital reserves. Not good for them or you.

The Banks and Your Card

Banks want you to use your credit card because it creates more debt/receivables for the bank to use as noted above. The banks do not like cardholders that pay their balances off in full each month because then the bank doesn't get to assess finance charges or to have reason to raise their APR rates.

When the growth of the banks portfolios of card users slows down, the bank looks for other ways to still get what it needs from the card accounts that remain in its portfolio.

One of the ways of doing that is by raising the basic Annual Percentage Rate they are charging on all accounts and then increase all kinds of fees across the board. That is what I believe they will do in March. Further, I believe that the banks will also seek to close accounts that are not producing an ever-increasing amount of fees. It will tell the customer that their basic rate is being raised and give them an opportunity to close their accounts and move elsewhere.

Not a pretty picture folks, but neither was it on March 15, 44 BC, when Julius Caesar went to the Senate.

© 2009 WBSeebeck

[Correction: This blog post was updated March 2, 2009. The prior entry on February 23, 2009 incorrectly included a draft instead of the final version. My sincere apologies to Bill and to I've Been Mugged readers.]

Reengineering U.S. Government, Lou Gerstner, and John Madden

[Editor's Note: Today's blog post is by guest author William Seebeck. I've known Bill for decades, going back to our time working together at Lexis-Nexis in Dayton, Ohio during the 1980's. Bill has a wealth of experience in online systems, banking, publishing, and public relations.]

Shortly after the Super Bowl, I was speaking with a life-long friend, Mike Siani, NFL scout, coach and former Oakland Raiders wide receiver. I said, “You know Mike, I always loved when John Madden was your coach and on first downs he would use three wide receivers (Fred Biletnikoff, Siani, and Cliff Branch) and send you all down field for a big gain pass play from QB Ken Stabler.“ (In Mike’s 9-year playing career alone, he averaged some 17 yards after each catch). “Today, most teams are so predictable. They run on the first two downs and then they try the pass on the third down.”

I can still hear it in Madden’s voice today when he says, I’d pass on first down, you’ve got be more aggressive right out of the box. Go for it!

Another person who liked “going for it” in business was Lou Gerstner, the former CEO of IBM. There are at least two things Lou is known for. The first is being bold and the second being successful.

If you are holding an American Express card, chances are it’s because of the way Lou Gerstner changed their card business between 1978 and 1989. If you enjoyed a Nabisco cracker during the Super Bowl, chances are you can thank Lou Gerstner and the fact the IBM is still one of the most successful American companies is definitely because of Mr. G.

His efforts at IBM are well known to me, in part because my business partner, Hunter Grant and I were hired as an outside consultant to review and second-guess their Internet strategy in the mid-1990’s. During that time, we looked at quite a number of projects and found them wanting, not because they didn’t have great people, but because they weren’t current with the rapid changes occurring in the information technology marketplace at the time. In addition, the organization had become so large, that it was getting in its own way in creating new products. Gerstner changed that, but only after instilling in the company a belief that change and a willingness to accept ongoing examination and criticism were good things that could help drive new growth.

It was no surprise to me then when I received my September 18, 2008 edition of BusinessWeek and found that Lou Gerstner had written a great column entitled. “It’s Time To Reengineer U.S. Government”. In this now five-month old article, Gerstner said:

Amid the ongoing turmoil, it seems obvious we must reinvent our government and create an efficient system that can anticipate and avoid major crises. Despite many opportunities, however, this is not a lesson we have taken to heart. Whether the task is fixing health care, upgrading K-12 education, bolstering national security, or a host of other missions, the U.S. is better at patching problems than fixing them. Part of the reason is that we have two parties lacking comity and a sense of shared national responsibility. But beyond the partisan divide, I would argue that the processes of government are broken, preventing us from taking responsible actions.”

In the article, he invited readers to visit USA.gov and there he said:

“You'll find thousands of directorates, agencies, boards, offices, and services replete with overlapping responsibilities, ancient priorities, and divided accountability.”

He continued:

“We do not need Departments of Commerce, Labor, and Education; we need a single Department of Skills that will promote an integrated approach to global competitiveness. Our military should be trained and structured around missions, not the elements of air, water, and land. That requires fundamental change, but instead, the Defense Dept. has established an overlay of "commands" to compensate for organizational deficiencies. Does it make sense, in 2008, even to have a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives? If so, why is it part of the Treasury Dept.?”

when it gets to the financial sector, Mr. Gerstner stated:

“... the regulatory processes in place are ad hoc and depend on leaders undertaking risky initiatives. Now more than ever, we need a single federal organization to oversee all of our financial institutions.”

In addition to calling for bipartisan action and business cooperation, he suggests the creation of a commission similar to the one established by President Reagan in 1982 that became known as the Grace Commission (named after its chairman and my former boss, the late J. Peter Grace, Jr.) It was this commission that uncovered great government waste. In its final report, the Commission concluded that nearly one-third of all taxes collected by the federal government were squandered through inefficiency. Although, as Mr. Gerstner stated in his article, 2,478 recommendations were made, few were ever tried.

I agree with Lou Gerstner. A government reengineering team should be created, reporting directly to the President. It should be vigorous in its effort to create change not for change sake but because we know that government no longer works. It is a broken system. We are much better off defining new requirements and creating a new government structure, that we can migrate to, one that is lean, flexible and powerful enough to efficiently meet the needs of tomorrow’s citizens.

Come on, don’t be afraid, you’ve got to be more aggressive out of the box. Go for it!

© 2009 WBSeebeck