Q's Version of Reality (aka "Q's Views")

Q's News

noreply@blogger.com (Mark A. McHugh) — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 04:35:00 +0000

Howdy All Ya'll!

Now that I can count myself among the Ashford Alumni, life seems to move at an almost surreal, agonizingly slow tempo: no deadlines to meet, no assignments to ponder, no homework getting the final few touch-ups at 11:55 at night (five hours before I must be up for work).
It is a little like my past experiences in the Navy, coming back from a deployment only to find that life does not necessarily just pick up where it left off. Certainly, I have been here (in body anyway) throughout my virtual attendance at Ashford, but it does seem as though I have been "off at school" in more than just thought. Day-to-day life, as I knew it before, seems to have lost a little luster, suffering against the comparison to a consistent stream of intellectual challenge and collegiate interplay.

It seems almost fitting that my body should feel the need to scream out for attention, only now, after supporting the last few desperate steps of my mental marathon. I offer this up as explanation for my blogospheric absence, and apologize if (for some unfathomable reason) I was missed. This grand machine I walk around in - in some respects grander than in its younger days - has presented a new hiccup to the daily routine, a new twist just to make things interesting: Parkinsonism. For those unfamiliar, Parkinson's (proper) is a thoroughly difficult condition to diagnose, sometimes taking years to nail down and only then by a contracted process of causal elimination. This has given rise to the term "Parkinsonism" to describe a grouping of symptoms which are common to those with actual Parkinson's Disease, and those who have not been formally diagnosed, but also perhaps to some who have other, wholly unrelated causes altogether.

This is where I find myself; by no means feeling the need for anyone's pity or sympathies as it is but a minor inconvenience, especially when compared to the maladies with which some must contend. All it represents for me is a minor realignment of lifestyle, a re-prioritization of sorts, nothing more. It is not a threat to my life, at least not yet, and may in fact extend it as I have accepted the fact that my motorcycling days are behind me - the most obvious indicator of my condition (whatever it is) is my right hand, which any scooter-rider will tell you, is kind of important. You can drive a car without the use of a right hand, but any disconnect or miscommunication with that same hand at a crucial moment on a motorbike can be catastrophic.

So my mode of transport around Southern California will change, but fortunately, I am not defined by "my ride." My future as a concert pianist looks pretty dim, but I never had the personal discipline to focus my efforts on a musical instrument long enough to develop any appreciable talent anyway. There are probably enough people in the world's inventory already who can write tourists' names on a grain of rice - I don't need to be added to their number. And though not a fan as yet, if I do develop a taste for them someday, my martinis will always be shaken, not stirred. My typing, while still above par (I flatter myself) is a little slower with more corrections needed, but I have never been easy enough to look at, or had the legs to be an executive secretary. Life could certainly be a whole lot worse.

That is what's new in the World of Q, which I mention only because there are those who have asked why "I fell off the face of the Earth." I tried to make it more upbeat, but my pragmatism threw the challenge flag and vetoed that idea. Still, not bad news within The Grander Scheme, and still reason to count the blessings I enjoy with you all.

Godspeed, Q

To Blog or Not To Blog: That is the Question!

noreply@blogger.com (Mark A. McHugh) — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 05:48:00 +0000

Why create a Blog? There are a staggering number of Web logs out there in cyberspace – more than 150 million according to the Nielsen Company
(http://blogpulse.com/) – so there would seem to be a significant impetus to create them, but what is it exactly? The most obvious answer is that Blogs, as a means of self-expression, have as many reasons for their existence as they have variations; the same question could be asked regarding any means of artistic expression: Why write? Why sing? Why dance? Why create? It is questions such as these that help define the dividing line between Science and Art. Regarding the former, there is always an answer to why someone endeavors within its disciplines; and although the specific and correct answer might not yet be known, the broadest all-purpose answer always applies, “To arrive at the truth.” Regarding the latter, there is an equally universal answer that crosses all artistic boundaries: “Because I felt like it.” While the Communications Studies degree requirements provided more tangible motivations that will be addressed herein – sort of – the universal answer for the Arts should and still applies.

Looking at the specific elements contributing to and included in my own Blog (http://qsversionofreality.blogspot.com), there are four key areas that should be addressed and evaluated in an effort to gauge its potential effectiveness: purpose, design, content, and audience. This efficacy remains “potential” in nature until a Blog’s ultimate goal can be quantified, and that goal is to be sought (and found) by Web patrons, repeatedly and often. Until such a regular audience can be established, however, the only meaningful way to self-critique a Blog is through the four attributes mentioned above. After a consistent following is in place providing statistically significant feedback, subtle alterations can then be made to fine-tune the Blog’s design and content in response, the feedback loop being closed by monitoring how those changes affect patronage (“hits”) and subsequent feedback.

When starting a Blog however, that feedback source is typically not available unless you happen to have a professor on short-lived retainer (which is apparently much cheaper than a lawyer!), so the “attribute mix” must be perpetually manipulated until readership starts to appear. Taking those four attributes – Purpose, Design, Content, and Audience – and putting them into an equation that should define success for a Blog, it could be said that:

All this equation really means is that where the Blog’s Purpose and intended Audience intersect (which is equivalent to and creates I or Interest), this Interest must be great enough to cause the Web surfer to visit the Blog. As with most equations, T equals Time, specifically the time since the last Content or Design change; the longer they remain static, the less Interest they are likely to garner.

The Blog itself is comprised of Content and Design, two values which are interrelated. Content alone cannot exist without some degree of Design, as even a page full of text with nothing most anyone would call “design” is, after all, a design (albeit spartan). The equation above assumes that a functional, user-friendly, and aesthetically pleasing Design is equal to a value greater than one, and that the opposite is some value less than one. Using this equation then, it can be seen that content can either benefit from a good design, or suffer from a poor one which detracts from the content’s value with equal proportionality. The absolute-value brackets around Content and Design are there in recognition that Blogs can achieve Interest because they are intentionally bad, ostensibly with “anti-socialites.” Whether good or bad however, Design cannot stand on its own, as even the best Design with zero Content equals nothing.

While this equation, admittedly pulled from nowhere other than my twisted little mind, does serve to approximate how the differing elements of a Blog relate to each other, it is by no means equally applicable across all of the stages of a Blog’s development. At some point, the operator in the middle of the equation would change from ≥ to ↔, indicating that a linked interrelationship had been established: the feedback loop mentioned earlier. Additionally, at some point in a Blog’s popularity, anecdotally, another symbol fits somewhere within the equation: $. Just how that symbol relates remains an undiscovered mystery, at least to me.

The context of this course directs that my Blog make my achieved proficiencies and communications skills apparent; the success with which it achieves this remains the subject of debate, hopefully inspiring enough controversy to drive millions to speak out in revolt, support, or something in between. What this course has highlighted, if nothing else, is that content is not enough where communication via the Internet is concerned. History has shown that writing of significant quality and intrigue, assuming it survives intact, will eventually find an audience of commensurate size (hence the tribute to “BillBard1564” in the title). Within the Information Age, however, survivability can easily be limited to the length of time it takes to click a mouse and refresh the screen, therefore a constant consideration for all four elements – Purpose, Design, Content, and Audience – must work in balance and harmony for a Blog to survive; or more to the point, for anyone to notice its survival.

Correcting an Egregious Oversight

noreply@blogger.com (Mark A. McHugh) — Wed, 10 Nov 2010 04:33:00 +0000

Offering no excuse for my instruction-reading incompetence, I utterly failed to publish a required posting on imparting bad news effectively.

Hopefully this will make everything right with the world once again:

Handling the Taste of Bad Apples

In handling any issue that impacts the pay, benefits, or employment of an individual, one of the steps made necessary by today’s litigation climate is to ensure that due diligence has been performed and documented. That is to say that if an employee is being counseled for undesirable behavior, and there is any possibility of punitive action such as unpaid leave or dismissal, there better be a paper trail documenting that this person has been repeatedly counseled about their undesirable behavior and the potential ramifications if not corrected. Doing anything less opens up any company, especially one that has salaried employees with benefits packages – or worse, one that has to deal with a labor union – to legal action for wrongful dismissal; even if the case is eventually decided against the complainant, the company still has to expend legal time and effort (read: money) to go through the mandated process, and likely with paid counsel in tow.

Psychologically too, there is a definite benefit to having someone see their bad behavior spelled out in black-and-white, ideally facilitating further reflection on the issue outside the workplace environment. Aside from allowing the employee an opportunity to see the supervisor’s comments wholly outside any contextual background, it also enables the employee to personally (or aided by professional therapeutic or career counseling) map a course from where they are to where they need to be (Marshall, 2001).

All this said, the actual technique to be used in addressing this issue must be chosen carefully, in that part of the undesirable behavior has manifested as confrontational in nature. It is important to realize the reason why someone is confrontational: Did their developmental environment simply wire them that way? (This is more common relationally to densely urban and/or financially oppressed backgrounds.) Do they feel intimidated, professionally, personally, or otherwise? (Is the “fight or flight” response at work here?) Are they compensating for some perceived injustice or inequality, based upon some personal (or personality) factor?

Certainly, the fact that this “problem behavior” is localized to one person would bias the decision process to think that this one person is the problem, but that is not always the case. With that realization as backdrop, counseling can be entered into without leading with a focus on the bad behavior; begin by an exploration of the “why” instead. This has a much greater chance of being perceived as a compassionate attempt to understand the individual, vice simply accusing him/her of wrongdoing and delivering an ultimatum. If this approach is met with resistance or a blatant deflection of blame, it may ultimately become ineffectual, but the attempt should probably start there if this employee is deemed worthy of salvation. Should the employee show any willingness to accept responsibility for their own behavior, then there is ground to be built upon. However, if “It's not me, it's all their fault!” seems to be the theme of their discourse, there is a good chance that this employee is not worth salvaging anyway. . . . If an apple is spoiled at the core, it is not even good enough for making apple sauce, but it can still be squished, just to make sure.

Reference

Marshall, A. (2001). Career counseling: A narrative approach [review of the book of the same title]. Canadian Psychology, 42(2), 145-147. Retrieved November 2, 2010, from ProQuest Psychology Journals. (Document ID: 98565134).

Q's View on Social Networking Websites

noreply@blogger.com (Mark A. McHugh) — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 06:38:00 +0000

I am inclined to side with Betty White when she said
on Saturday Night Live last May that she thought Facebook™ “sounds like a huge waste of time!” While I have an account of my own, started only to keep up with the group I went to England with during my junior year, the Website itself does not play well with the government security software I am obliged to put on my home computer; we wouldn’t want me to infect an important government computer system because of something I brought in from home, now would we? Because of this user-hostility, I rarely use Facebook, and have never had a MySpace™, instant messaging, or other social networking account. I am virtually socially retarded, so to speak.
As is often the case, however, my Better Half, the person who makes me complete, the Doctor Jekyll to my Mister Hyde, does not share my opinion of Facebook and the many offspring sites that have come from its virtual loins. Left to her own devices, and free from work or any favors I might ask of her, she is just as likely to park herself in front of her computer and cyber-chat with her pals on Facebook, as she is to watch any of the number of television shows she follows. She also watches Survivor, The Amazing Race, Desperate Housewives, Ellen, and several other shows so that I won’t have to; her willingness to sacrifice herself for me is just one of the many reasons I love her.

As a medium wholly shaped by the very users who participate in it, Facebook is likely one of the best environments for someone pursuing the foundations for a psychology research paper, or some other aspect of human-interaction study. Other than the potential intrigue that such academic review might hold for someone, however, I simply find it boring as Hell. Maybe it is a guy thing, but having access to a blow-by-blow account of other people’s lives kind of keeps me from living my own, you know? Not that I have much of a life mind you, but what I do have would certainly be less productive if I wasted innumerable hours chatting about minutiae that I would likely find meaningless even if I was seeing it in person! I would rather go visit with people, sans computer screen.

Every Internet pundit I have researched on this topic – all three of them – is of the opinion that Facebook and its competing social outlets are here to stay. I have to wonder if the good people at Pixar were inspired by such sites in their conceptualization of the space cruise-liner’s daily routine in WALL-E. When I saw all those fat people floating in their hover-chairs eagerly consuming everything that flashed on the screen in front of them, I simply had to wonder if this was a commentary on our society and the directions we might be heading as well. . . .(Is there indeed a darker side to Disney?)

Q's View on Television

noreply@blogger.com (Mark A. McHugh) — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 06:34:00 +0000

Within the last decade of technological surges
on all existing (and many newly created) fronts, the common denominator, that has brought television back onto a level playing field with the various media competing for viewership, was the transition from analog to digital broadcasts. Now, without the needed converter to decipher the digital over-the-air broadcasts, a television that may have been top of the line in 1990 is little more than a large paperweight that can be plugged in.
For those in the audience who did not question the “Why” behind TV’s digital transition, or who simply went along with it because it gave them a new excuse to go buy a bigger and better television – it would have been much simpler just to say, “the men” – in simple terms, the old analog stations were major bandwidth hogs. In the same chunk of radio frequency spectrum formerly taken up by one analog television channel, the new digital broadcasts can include two fully high-definition channels, five standard-definition channels, enhanced audio like DTS™ and Surround Sound™, and information and interface signals (allowing you access to on-screen show details, and feedback from your set to the station for things such as on-demand viewing).

There old analog channels needed a much wider separation between them, so as not to interfere with each other, as compared to the lower-powered digital signals. All of this combined allows for much more bandwidth available for entertainment content, and unless the physical laws of electromagnetics can be changed by man (get in line behind this “global warming” thing) there is only so much usable radio frequency spectrum to go around. Besides making room for even more mind-numbing channels of useless fodder coming into your living room, this digital transition resulted in quite a nice chunk of space for new first responder and emergency communications frequencies. (More in-depth information is available at http://www.dtv.gov/consumercorner.html.)

During the section of his speech focused on the challenges of finding an audience, Rupert Murdoch spoke to the need to diversify television broadcasts across both geographies and platforms, enabling networks access to the widest range of viewing audience possible. While television was a strictly synchronous media a generation ago, now it can be recorded and viewed later, downloaded onto a wide variety of portable or home entertainment platforms, or viewed via video streaming on-demand. In short, by going digital, television has remained a relevant source of video content; a source that would likely have been overcome by something more Internet-based had it not kept pace with the Digital Age.

Murdoch, R. (2008, April 2). Creative Destruction: News for the 21st century. Speech delivered to Georgetown University, archived at http://fora.tv/2008/04/02/Rupert_Murdoch_News_for_the_21st_Century

Explorations in Communications

noreply@blogger.com (Mark A. McHugh) — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 06:31:00 +0000

For those who did not know, I are learning to talks and writes.
To this end, my major at Ashford is in Communications Studies. Of the possible media available for us to communicate with each other, an assignment this week has us exploring a few of those media, and commenting on them in light of the changes to our communication environment over the last few years, and for the foreseeable future.

Therefore, my next few posts will do just that: explore and summarize my perceptions of television, product placement in video games, social networking Websites, and electronic readers for e-books.

Please: If you have any comments on whether I am right, wrong, or obviously from another planet, feel free to add your thoughts so we might share some thinking together.

Enjoy, Q