Thinking out loud

The international development secretary is describing the response to Pakistan’s floods as “woefully inadequate”. He doesn’t blame Pakistan’s international reputation - madness!

So let me cite a recent example, when Cameron recently commented about the Pakistan government:

But all we cannot tolerate in any sense the idea this country is allowed to look both ways and is able, in any way, to promote the export of terror whether to India, whether to Afghanistan or to anywhere else in the world … Pakistan needs to do more to shut terror groups down.

He may well be right and negative images like that are not in short supply.

Social media is disruptive for sure but the impact of mass media is also very much alive. Let us remember when the BBC refused to broadcast a DEC charity appeal for Gaza, in the name of “impartiality”. Who was looking both ways then? Clearly there are times when the mass media plays a role in challenging and influencing our beliefs.

In war, divide and conquer doesn’t just keep your enemies at bay, it can also act as a good distraction. And in modern times this tactic is very much alive. Take, for example, the debate about the Islamic burqa; an outer garment worn by some women which covers most of the body. Is the burqa a security threat and a shackle to womens freedom? - or a challenge to liberty and tolerance?

Should people also refrain from wearing hats, scarves and sunglasses? Is wearing a motorcycle helmet any more suspicious than a car with dark windows? Is a frail person with a walking stick, or a mother with a pushchair, anymore visible than a terrorist deploying sarin gas? It should be clear, terrorists don’t need to cover their faces, they walk among us.

Post 9/11, not forgetting imminent danger from Weapons of Mass Destruction, what we have is governments instilling fear and dividing opinion amongst it’s own. Apparently, it’s good for our democratic freedom to debate the repression of women because, after all, these women don’t have real voices, they are being suppressed by their husbands, right? So what happens when one day the government denies YOUR voice because, apparently, YOUR voice is being suppressed and it’s only right they liberate you?

Seems to me, the political machine has turned the burqa into a uniform and a symbol of “the enemy”. That society is silently blind to the uniform of a nun which is somehow more acceptable than the burqa. We live in a society that struggles with the dual role of masks and body paint; great at carnivals but a nuisance and security issue at democratic protests.

If it’s not already clear, I think we need to ignore the political rhetoric and learn to live more at peace with our neighbours; integrate, tolerate and respect. What really counts is good intention.

The world is crazy… no wait, I’m really stupid.

On and off over the years I tried to take some time to get my head around facebook. It’s constantly used in mainstream media, apparently the whole world loves it. With all the hysteria, year to year, strength to strength, it must be something special. And friends will tell you about that wonderful game FarmVille… sounds exciting, not… like I’ve been yanked 20 years into the past.

So why is it I NEVER get it? Every few months I come back to it, desperately trying to get with it, only to come back to isolation, the only person on the planet that just simply can’t figure it out. It’s utterly complicated, confusing and mis-guided.

Again I give up, No need for replies, I know I’m stupid.

Whether we’re selling a product or an idea, positive and negative feedback will impact our mindset and decision making process, it can work for us or against us. Imagine for a moment, you go to a friend with an idea. Here are some possible outcomes:

• Your friend tells you all the reasons why it will not work.

  The continuous voice of negativity can destroy self-esteem. For many people, finding possible flaws is a habit and easier than seeking or accepting solutions.

• Your friend simply doesn’t get it.

  Early adopters and visionaries may get it but many of your friends may not understand your ideas and foresight.

• Your friend says you’re very smart.

  A potentially disastrous position, being lead into a false sense of confidence, that your ideas are great and worth pursuing. An initial boost of encouragement sometimes sets people off in the wrong direction.

Of course, your friend could also be right, so a balance needs to be made, where we carry enough conviction to pursue our dreams yet equally keep both feet firmly placed on terra firma. We need to learn when to listen and when to ignore.

To better explore your ideas, you may need to downsize them and let them evolve. You may also need to test your ideas with more like minded people.

With each milestone we need to re-examine our journey as it is very easy to believe an outcome was based on sound judgment or execution when, in reality, luck played a greater part.

It may also help to keep a sense of perspective, feedback is relative to failure and success. When you get it right you’ll be cheered on, get it wrong and…

Here are some thoughts on how to respond to feedback:

• Recognise the benefits you are bringing to others.

• The world is in constant change, try to be more adaptable.

• Accept your failures and learn when to cut your losses. Don’t let your losses run.

• Remember people love to see actions, meaning and results.

A few years ago I tried facebook in an attempt to understand the hype. I gave it a shot but still I didn’t get it. Millions of people use fb every day yet I found it confusing and I always found myself asking “why, why??” A week or so went by, then word got out that Microsoft was pouring money into it… it was time to get out. Seems I’m forever running from those guys at Redmond; hotmail, facebook, yahoo - you name it and Microsoft trashed it. A lot of hoops had to be jumped to close that fb account, which says a lot about such organisations unwilling to accept rejection.

The media loves to talk about personal data and privacy. The world, apparently, is full of scammers, losers, weirdos and pedophiles. SIX BILLION PEOPLE on this planet and the chances are it’s all about YOU. How to list the unfamous?

I can deal with the minority of crackheads in our society by applying some common sense and perspective. I’m more concerned about vulnerable groups of people and data hungry organisations. Which leads me to ask, whoever said the Internet is a child’s product? We don’t sell alcohol to children so why are Internet providers allowing unfiltered services to children? For children, we don’t just need filters on the PC or phone, the only true solution is to do it at the service level; filter in, not filter out.

We live in a society that sings the wonders of freedom yet simultaneously tells us why we should be fearful. Isn’t it time that large Internet providers and mobile operators be required to offer child-safe services?

Today, the BBC was “educating” me about OFCOM’s decision to fix wholesale prices for BSkyB. Bloody rich that they should describe prices as an “unlevel playing field” when it is the criminal law of this country to say, I can have any channel I want so long as I pay the BBC first.

In the real world, people talk and transact face-to-face. Compliments and complaints are both dealt with face-to-face. There’s no fast or reliable disconnect, our actions and inactions are held to account.

But then get online or on the end of a phone and suddenly we feel empowered. People we can filter and run from because there’s always another agent to deal with that nuisance we call a “customer”. Yes, if only business could eliminate the last mile in a money machine, humans. We’ll automate the phones and demand websites and emails. And finally, we’ll curse those pesky emails and let them disappear into the proverbial black hole. Ah yes, where’s the easy life with babes and beaches?

Do we carry those same values to our social life? Does the ability to search and filter new friends and partners lead us to elitist thinking? Does the who-you-know become more important than why-you-know?

In a world more connected than ever, I can’t help thinking we are simultaneously letting slip the value of listening and responding to people for whom we may or may not normally choose.

“I belong here, choice and independence is my right. I choose you, or not, for this is my function of modern living” or so it seems.

We’ve all heard of stories, seemingly beyond rhyme or reason, where someone is going about their day-to-day business when they unexpectedly find a big stash of cash. People love those stories because it always begs the same question, what would you do? Well, you may not approve but here’s my honest answer.

There are places such as airports where police create sting operations; intentionally leaving a bag of money, waiting to be found. The money is subsequently followed to an exit point which is when the police pounce and arrest. At first glance this may seem reasonable; either the money was legitimately forgotten or it is dirty money; drugs etc. In the absence of facts, is that a reasonable assertion?

I’m thinking at this point I’ve probably split my readers. Some of you will argue that dirty money is untouchable and that forgetful people are innocent. The rest of you are probably saying “finders keepers”, “God works in mysterious ways” and “run like hell”!

If I found money in a busy public place such as an airport, I would hand it in and ask for a receipt. Other situations would also lead me to report the incident, for example, if I found it as part of my work for an employer. In all these situations I am making a risk assessment of getting caught in a sting.

But if I am being perfectly honest, there might exist a certain set of circumstances in which I might keep the money. For example, if there was a complete lack of identification and if it was out of work hours and the location was reasonably isolated, then I might make a decision based on specific circumstances:

• does the money genuinely look and feel real?

• are the notes of different denominations or are they all the same value?

• how large is the amount of money? - hundreds? - tens of thousands?

• are there significant batches of notes with sequential serial numbers?

If I keep the money in certain circumstances, does that make me a thief? I say absolutely not. I despise thieves and would be happy to see their fingers removed. When it comes to money, I consider myself a very honest person. If I’m given money to hold, regardless of size, I can return it without temptation. And if I knew you made a legitimate mistake, again I would return the money. I have my own money, I don’t need to beg or steal.

But being honest doesn’t guarantee brownie points. Once, me and some friends found a wallet with credit cards. I located the owner by calling one of the banks. The owner collected their wallet but later called and said there had been cash in the wallet. His implication was that maybe we took the money and returned the rest. Yeah, thanks mate. Would I do the same again? - yes, if the owner was traceable.

But part of my reasoning for keeping money would be whether I played an active role (eg. robbery) or passive circumstance. I simply don’t do robbery but in a passive situation, the “finders keepers” rule might apply for a few reasons:

• First, the person that disposed of the money is missing from the equation, potentially making a legal case very difficult… unless of course you were setup.

• Secondly, the absence of explanation does not make the origin of the money illegal or immoral… at that point, the life cycle of the money is simply unknown. On the other hand, sequential serial numbers, for example, would lead me to reasonably conclude that the money is dirty, thus it would be correct to hand it to the police.

Every situation is different and who’s to say what will happen to the money further up the chain? We may also consider that facts can very often defy reason. For example, sometimes people die and leave their money to charity instead of “reasonably” leaving it to their spouse. Who’s to say how or why the money was there?

A while ago I had an idea, it lead me to call a local organisation and leave the seed of that idea with them. I was going to chase it up later. A week passes and my dad suggested I get more involved with that idea, more “hands on”. However, for this particular idea, I did not have the confidence and necessary experience to execute it all by myself. My response was tepid and his expectations of me were seemingly high. We argued back and forth, his response was, “it can’t be very important to you” and “you want the glory without the work”. He was provoking me; I disliked the implication that I did not care for the idea or that I was lazy. Unfortunately, that battle caused us both to make mistakes for which I regret.

For my side of things, I raised my voice and failed to respond in a better way. Alone in my room I cried; for not showing enough respect, for not keeping my cool, for not having a better response and maybe for not compromising enough.

For my dad’s side, he failed to accept my rationale and reluctance. Only now do I understand him more. A part of my dad is proud of my achievements; that I got the education he did not, that I travelled where he did not and that I simply became a responsible adult. Equally, when you are proud of others, you will wish for them to have a full life and excel in the areas for which you only dream.

The lessons are simple. Sometimes we must remind ourselves of what others have achieved and that our aspirations can be too high and distract us. Instead of motivating others we sometimes push too hard. And it is also true to say, being correct does not give us the right to fight.

The structures, the science, the locations are different. The gods and the daemons are different. But empathy, fear and pleasure remain. And so the cycle of life and death.