A couple of interesting articles in todays papers.
One offers the recommendation that the State of the Union address should be eliminated, or scaled back to be simply a written review rather than the media event that it's become since the Clinton years. Apparently (I didn't know this) the requirement is that the president deliver such thoughts as he finds relevant over to the Congress; the method, and even the timing, is not set. (For all their foresight, apparently the forefathers never considered prime time.) The article is lengthy, but what it comes down to is this: the presentation is mostly hoopla and little substance. I have to agree. It's been years since I watched one. The shaking of hands on the way in, the camera shots of reactions, the applause points -- I'd rather a written summary. But I have to admit that it should be tightly written, elegantly phrased, and focused. In other words, Aaron Sorkin should be hired to write it. Wag the Bush, as it were.
Another, a review of a book titled Th!nk, makes the point that instantaneous decisions cannot be effective unless they are based on study, research, and experience. Again, that makes sense. The book that it seems to counteract, Blink, came across with that message, and I wondered how anyone could seriously suggest that snap decisions were more effective than any other. Turns out thats not what they were saying, exactly, but as that is a sexier concept, thats what got promoted. If I have the chance to read Th!ink, I will -- also Linked, a book that I saw recommended on the Geeky Mom blog (she's an excellent writer, incidentally; well worth a visit -- kind of like me, only smarter, more focused, and more literate); the book speaks about social networking, sort of a six degrees of separation concept, or something that James Burke might have written.
But right now I think I'll take a nap.
No comments:
Post a Comment