January 2009 Archives
Rarely explored in social theory: the olfactory dynamics of human interaction.
LITTLE girls may be made of sugar and spice and all things nice, but their armpits smell of onions. And while free of slug or snail odours, men's armpits pack a powerful cheesy whiff.
That's the conclusion of research in Switzerland that involved taking armpit sweat samples from 24 men and 25 women after they had spent time in a sauna or ridden an exercise bike for 15 minutes.
The researchers found marked differences in the sweat from men and women. "Men smell of cheese, and women of grapefruit or onion," says Christian Starkenmann of Firmenich, a company in Geneva that researches flavours and perfumes for food and cosmetics companies.
The team found that the women's armpit sweat contained relatively high levels of an odourless sulphur-containing compound - 5 milligrams per millilitre of sweat versus 0.5 milligrams in men. When the researchers mixed this compound in the lab with bacteria commonly found in the armpit, the bugs turned it into a thiol - a previously discovered odour from armpits that is akin to onion. . . .
Next, the team hope to develop new ingredients for deodorants that fight the smells. "We could make inhibitors that neutralise the precursors, or block the bacterial enzymes that do the conversion," says Starkenmann.
Some researchers are sceptical that gender is the main deciding factor, arguing that the patterns found in Swiss volunteers might not apply to other populations with different diets and genetic backgrounds. "Other factors include what you eat, what you wash with, what you wear and what genes you inherit," says Tim Jacob of Cardiff University in the UK.
Even if the specific aromas are culturally dependent, the fact that differences emerge raises interesting questions about the relation of our olfactory sense to social connectivity, as does the fact that our first impulse today is to neutralize and replace natural smells.
A fantastic publicity photo for one of my childhood obsessions, Captain Scarlet. No question that Gerry Anderson shows helped shape my academic perspective; if that's not clear now, it should be by the end of this semester.
Jeremiah's Vanishing NY says what many folks here in the City are thinking about the possible long-term effect of the financial crisis.
Makes me wonder if we're not going to see a similar phenomenon in social enterprise as the unreflective mimicry of bubble culture recedes.
Cookie College at the University of San Diego teaches Girl Scouts entrepreneurial marketing techniques, such as the comeback--
'I just ordered some at work.' What would you say? How about, 'Oh great, which ones did you order? You forgot to order Thin Mints! Those are our most popular.' Or how about 'I can't afford them?' You might hear that one. It's good to say, 'Its for a really good cause,' but also 'You deserve these cookies.'
and gimmicks:
The girls were amazing! From hiring a singer and writing a custom song, to having a full costume giant cookie, to building a six-foot pyramid of cookie boxes, to maybe we can have thin mints on the pillows of hotel rooms instead of the normal mints.
But when these B-school-savvy techniques don't work, the girls know exactly what to do:
Reina: I do what she does too, but also when they say no, I make them kind of feel bad and stuff.
Reporter: How do you make them feel bad?
Reina: I just give them this look, like 'Oh, okay.' And then they'll go 'Oh wait. I want two boxes!'.
Well, not talking about my birthday, but taking on my day of birth about the integrative force of electronic circuitry.
A student in my venture initiation class clued me into this--a fun (with swears!) look at the origins of the subprime loan crisis.
Class prep & meetings this afternoon, but last night I was plugging away on a few posts re social enterprise for JustMeans. Check 'em out here: Davos, Sun, NatGeo music and new social enterprise textbooks.
The Girl Scout cookie program is a regular part of my nonprofit law & social enterprise teaching. Not surprising, really, because it raises a number of interesting legal and strategic issues.
One I haven't discussed: the ethics of bosses soliciting their employees. CNN has raised this question on its iReport section; a number of responses have already been posted.
It's the first full week of class, which is why things are slowing down on this site, but things will pick up again soon both here and elsewhere.
Today, though, it's time to prep for an evening session on social enterprise. Above: a chart on the topic by Flickr's Empathya.
The Social Business contemplates B-school blurbs after the crash:
"Leeds alumni were responsible for wiping £8.7 billion pounds off the value of their companies as a result of the outdated management models that ours, and similar MBA programmes, encourage. This ranks 63rd in the world and 4th in Britain."
Will Business Schools radically alter their MBA programmes in recognition of the allegation/fact that the management styles that they tend to promote are largely responsible for the mess we're in? There's a very good piece by Simon Caulkin . . . in this month's Management Today magazine where he makes it very clear:
"The bomb that has blown up the heart of the world's financial system was not primarily financial. It's true that finance provided the high explosive in the shape of the structured vehicles, collateralised debt obligations (CDOs) and derivatives devised by the rocket scientists of Wall Street and the City. But it needed a detonator to set them off: the unfit-for-purpose management model that has governed the way our companies work for the last 40 years."
The piece is well worth a read. He, and the people he quotes, such as Gary Hamel, sense that there's a real opportunity to throw out the discredited Management 1.0 model and come up with something far more progressive.
From an upcoming on-air charity auction for Alaska Public Telecommunications.
As indicated yesterday, this site will probably go dark for a few hours tonight. Still, I had to note this charity event today: a charity auction of a napkin signed by Leonard Nimoy. And not just any napkin--the event is a follow-up to the following scene from The Big Bang Theory:
Via TrekToday
It's because I'm doing some maintenance on it this weekend. We'll be back. If RSS and such stops working afterwards, please let me know and I'll try to fix it!
It's the first day of this semester's venture initiation & entrepreneurship class, so I'm steeped in class prep. More about the class later, but what's striking me most now is how interesting it is to be teaching this class after a crash as opposed to before.
So many of the texts seem archaic, even those just a year or two old. New economy! Ample credit! Ample investment capital! Good thing I've always taken a critical historical approach to bubblenomics. In fact, this year should be a bit more smooth, since we won't be fighting ubiquitous memes of unending unbounded wealth.
Not much else to say right now, since I'm off to hit the keyboard for other things. In the meantime, for your entertainment & instruction here are some robots from the future:
Since folks are coming here from Amazon Daily's nifty Toy Whimsy blog looking for more about the Snoopy bento box, here it is, with along with the earlier post:
From the syndicate's Peanuts FAQ. Y'know, as in frequently asked questions:
Q. As a Peanuts fan, I often come across content on the internet that uses the Peanuts copyrights and trademarks in an unfavorable fashion, and I don't think it is authorized by United Media. What actions does United Media take to protect the work of Charles Schulz and the Peanuts property?
Might have been slightly more believable if they'd shown a picture of the question on a postcard in crayon from Heather, age 6.
Below: a Snoopy mock-sushi bento box
. . . prompting this pointed criticism of the OLPC project (the post includes a linked response).
Haven't used one of the computers myself, so I'm not going to chime in anything about design flaws, except to reiterate vis the ad above that the neo-colonialist equation of needy with black-and-African (and vice versa) really has to stop. Helping folks by selling things is cool and all, but it doesn't give us carte blanche to traffic in stereotypes.
Anyway, one line in the OLPC critique stands out for its application beyond the project in question:
As far as I can tell, the OLPC team so wanted to be revolutionaries that they insisted on reinventing everything at once, and as a result, failed everywhere.
Whatever the situation with OLPC, it's an important cautionary principle--innovation as an absolute can be as problematic as maintaining the status quo.
As noted before on this site, churches & religious organizations exhibit an unfortunate tendency to disregard intellectual property law. A Christian music company has provided a podcast interview with an attorney re churches, copyright and licensing.
Here's an organization mentioned in the podcast: Christian Copyright Licensing, Inc.
This podcast popped up in a blog post I accidentally clicked away; sometime I'll try to follow up to see how folks in other religious traditions are handling IP issues.
Chief Marie Smith Jones, the last native speaker of Eyak--RIP.
This is a must-see exhibit: Birth of the Cool, featuring the work of Barkley L. Hendricks. On its way here, the exhibit was listed by Vogue as one of the top cultural events of 2008. Above, the brilliant 1969 piece, Icon for My Man Superman (Superman never saved any black people—Bobby Seale).
Depicting Hendricks in dark sunglasses and a tight Superman T-shirt against a bright blue sky, the 1969 portrait is called "Icon for My Man Superman (Superman never saved any black people—Bobby Seale)", suggesting the intriguing ways in which popular culture can be reclaimed and repurposed toward political and creative self-expression, even in a time of racism and division. It's a stunning, evocative work, and I must have looked at it for more than five minutes before I finally glanced down and realized that in the painting, Hendricks isn't wearing any pants.
Recent news articles about Obama's post-ideological pragmatism got me thinking back to the turn of the 19th/20th centuries, when pragmatic philosophy rose as an alternative to philosophical idealism. John Dewey is probably the most familiar pragmatic thought leader in the public realm, but he was far from alone. You can see the semantic traces of this movement throughout political and philanthropic writing from that era.
For example, check out this 1915 book on civic ritual by poet, playwright and social theorist Percy MacKaye. It may seem quaint now, but back in the day it was quite radical, both theoretically and in practice. A number of its core themes--inclusive equality, social design, a shift from consumption to participation, --are values now seen as cutting-edge. MacKaye's argument, down to his explanation of the role of "symbolic dance," reflects his pragmatic perspective. It's especially evident in passages such as this--note the references to crafts, form and plasticity:
In New York City at 8 a.m., New Yorkers will be gathering at Bryant Park to send good vibes to Obama through yoga. The event is called Ombama, and yes, it's in New York, not California:
On Tuesday, January 20th, the day of the Presidential Inauguration, lululemon athletica invites all New Yorkers to The Pond @ Bryant Park at 8am to send a wave of good karma and positive vibrations to our President Elect in Washington.
The plan is to “ommmm†as strongly and as unified as possible so that the sound vibration can be heard all the way down in DC!
Meeting at the ice skating rink The Pond @ Bryant Park, participants will be asked to open the day with an Om, complete yogic sun salutations followed by a closing Om. Mats will be provided and placed directly on the ice rink.
The event will take place rain, snow or shine and all levels of experience with yoga are welcome. The complete ceremony will take no longer than 30 minutes.
For more information, visit our event page on Facebook: www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=45647458671
All in all, a rather clever and engaging way to promote not just a spiritual community, but a yoga apparel shop!
I'm Learning to Share offers a revealing look at Archie Comics as an archive of technological change. Below: a page featuring a Scopitone, an old, once cutting-edge, visual jukebox:
A design blog that illustrates, among other things, the physical space that helped give rise to modern (and postmodern) critiques of corporate identity.
This Bad Astronomy post praises Alison Singer for resigning from her post as VP of Autism Speaks. The reason for her resignation: the charity's persistence in investigating the link between vaccines and autism, despite scientific research indicating no substantial connection:
In general, I disagree with a policy that says, “Despite what this study shows, more studies should be done.†At some point, you have to say, “This question has been asked and answered and it’s time to move on.†We need to be able to say, “Yes, we are now satisfied that the earth is round.â€
Whatever one's position in the autism debate, the issue of personal responsibility to resign when disagreeing with an organization's actions warrants further examination. The heated comments thread in the BA post--109 comments & rising--points to the difficult situation faced by leaders of an organization such as Autism Speaks. If they reach a conclusion similar to that of Alison, cutting off support for a project that otherwise has a sizable constituency could have substantial consequences for projects the leaders deem to be more valuable. Moreover, the more leaders who resign out of the conviction that support for the project is wrong, the greater the likelihood that their positions will be filled with supporters of that very project.
It's a scenario that leads to an all too common situation we do not discuss enough--nonprofit leaders who channel funds to projects that they personally don't think are effective in resolving the targeted problem, but are nonetheless necessary due to the group's internal politics.
A 1911 graphic from the Industrial Worker. The revival of such imagery is as much a challenge to social enterprise now as it was to "scientific" models of philanthropy and social reform in the early 20th century.
This 1916 ad presents the Maytag Multi-Motor Washer as the missing link between household drudgery and women's self-realization as a person who rises above routinized tasks. "Your husband uses a machine to do a machine's work. Put a MAYTAG in your home to do the same for you."
Easy to laugh at now, but images such as this shaped evolving norms of gender equality more than we tend to recognize.
A dream offers a revealing perspective on charity and gender dynamics. "Slow Wave is a collective dream diary authored by different people from around the world, and drawn as a comic strip by Jesse Reklaw."
Really. It may seem funny, but it's a ruling that, if emulated elsewhere, could be no laughing matter for churches & nonprofits with charismatic leaders.
The authors of Philanthrocapitalism are airbrushing their book as energetically as Stalin airbrushed photos. There are ways for social enterprise to emerge stronger from the present financial crisis, but claiming that its message was always to emulate the way business leverages government support--no, that's not going to work.
Via Philantopic
When I was in Moscow, I lived across from the Kremlin in the complex known as "The House on the Embankment." The building used to be the home of prominent leaders of the Communist Party, many of whom died in the Stalinist purges. The House on the Embankment is also the subject of Yurii Trifonov's landmark eponymous novella, which begins thus:
None of these kids exist now, none at all, anywhere. Some were killed in battle, some died from illness, others passed unnoticed. And some, though they are indeed alive, have turned into different people.
An interesting observation from the New York Times' review of the new Biggie Smalls bio-pic, Notorious:
“We can’t change the world unless we change ourselves.†That line occurs twice in “Notorious,†and it’s not entirely clear what is meant, other than that the characters aspire to be better as well as richer and more famous. At times the movie seems to lump all those things together, to imply that celebrity, money, clothes and boundless sexual opportunity are not just the rewards reaped by talent but also visible signs of righteousness.
Speaking of which, this charity auction of Hip Hop's Crown Jewels sounds like it had an amazing catalog.
My post on the settlement announcement is up at Blog@Newsarama; more on Superman, CSR and charity to follow.
And yes, the above photo is of a tattoo.
Vladimir Putin painting a scene from a Gogol story in which the devil steals the moon--sometimes the world is its own poetry. Proceeds from the sale go to benefit a local hospital and church.
The official announcement casts it as a modernizing shift toward community-based care. Nikke Finke highlights the underlying financial problems.
Obama has become a profitable marketing phenomenon. Because he's a government official, merchants don't have to worry about his publicity rights or paying him royalties. In keeping with the public nature of his image, some comic shops have decided to donate proceeds from this week's Obama/Spider-Man tie-in to charity.
Prickly Situation at the Bronx Zoo from Gothamist on Vimeo.
A clever PSA in response to New York State budget cuts. More at WCS.org, via Gothamist.
A multilayered scratch-off lottery candid from down the Street. Via Gothamist.
Three ventures that have been integral to maintaining a sense of community, all gone or about to leave. This post on Jeremiah's Vanishing NY is a poignant illustration of how the City is changing.
As I mentioned in my last post, IDW's Ted Adams was on our Association of American Law Schools panel on comics & the law. The location of this particular academic conference: appropriately enough, San Diego.
It wouldn't be a comics-related con in San Diego without a promotional giveaway, of course--and after his chat Ted offered the audience copies of IDW's hit comic biographies of Obama and McCain, which were a big hit. It's not every year--for that matter, any year--that we go to a law conference and get free comics.
Gave my presentation today on Superman and CSR--basically a narrative of the case for folks who might not be familiar with it, with broad-brush thoughts that, if you know what's in my head, illustrate my larger theoretical points. More to come on that--much more--soon enough.
The news that the Watchmen settlement talks have heated up is interesting, though not wholly surprising. Nikke Finke notes inside talk that Warner Bros. finally takes the legal threat seriously enough to negotiate--as I was explaining to a law prof today, before hearing about this latest development, the judge's summary judgment order is likely not the only thing on WB lawyers' minds. The permanent injunction in the Bratz case is a powerful reminder that a judge can view (alleged) infringement of IP rights as harm substantive enough to warrant shutting down distribution.
It's a question every litigant has to consider: how much risk are you willing to bear. Even if lawyers were convinced they can prevail--and here, the WB's definition of prevail was basically lose-millions-of-dollars-to-the-point-the-movie-is-unprofitable, at some point they were going to have to say to company executives that yes, the possibly exists that the movie could be entirely shut down. Fox had nothing to lose going forward; WB could lose everything. You don't have to be a game theorist to see where the incentives lie.
Another interesting thing that jumped out at me when reading a letter by one of the film's producers--the description of the movie as a charitable social venture. Really:
Writers gave us free screenplay drafts; conceptual art was supplied by illustrators, tests were performed gratis by highly respected actors and helped along and put together by editors, designers, prop makers and vfx artists; we were the recipients of donated studio and work space, lighting and camera equipment. Another irony, given the commercial stakes implied by the pitched legal dispute between Fox and Warners, is that for years Watchmen has been a project that has survived on the fumes of whatever could be begged, borrowed and stolen - A charity case for all intents and purposes. None of that effort, none of that passion and emotional involvement, is considered in the framework of this legal dispute.
It's easy to be cynical about this sort of thing, but this account really does touch upon an important feature of comics and comics-related enterprises. In my talk today I spoke of the connection between comic art and charity, and IDW CEO Ted Adams--a fellow panelist--described how for most comics creators the work truly is a personal passion as much as, if not more than just, a job. This personal dimension is as essential to corporate production as the business elements, and we lose a lot when we ignore it.
That said, I bet Warner Bros.' lawyers are not exactly thrilled with the producer saying the project survived through "whatever could be begged, borrowed and stolen." Stuff like that is why lawyers tell clients not to say anything their case in public!
I'm off to chat about Superman, ethics and charity at a legal scholarship conference.
Via See3's Michael Hoffman, it's more-or-less official: Wallstrip is dead.
Wallstrip, for those of you who never watched it, was a fun and informative video site dedicated to explaining the world of Wall Street. Good production values, sharp writing, engaging wit--Wallstrip was often a model of how educational video could work.
Making money, though, was not its strong suit.
And that's the thing. I've had social enterprise folks approach me about doing online video, but the pitch is typically accompanied by starry-eyed visions of making millions of dollars from productions that didn't have one-tenth of Wallstrip's infrastructure support. Funding operations through online educational media is a lot more difficult than a lot of folks think--and if the Wallstrip example isn't enough, just take a look at how many educational & charitable podcast series die after a few episodes.
Adam Ostrow's conclusion is spot-on:
The problem here is a simple economic one: though relatively inexpensive to produce and distribute (compared to network or cable TV), the costs of professionally produced online video are exceeding the revenue being generated by ads. And that’s a problem that’s not likely to be solved soon between the economic slowdown and the fact that the revenue that’s out there is flowing towards big media content being re-purposed for the Web. In fact, despite being 20x smaller in terms of video views, some estimates have Hulu catching up to YouTube in revenue this year.
Will we still see individuals making a living from compelling online video that spreads virally? Absolutely. But the economics of trying to re-create the network television experience on the Web are quickly falling apart, and unless either the audience suddenly surges or the ad market quickly pulls a 180, WallStrip’s demise could just be a sign of what’s to come.
Below: a couple of classic Wallstrip episodes:
Marrying for health care
Glengarry Glen Salesforce
Allan Benamer, one of NYC's coolest & tech savviest do-gooders, has posted a copy of his Obama inaugural invite on his blog. Check it out here.
Just a quick note for those of you who read this site for social enterprise, and occasionally comics. In addition to what's on here, I also post a number of interesting (well, to me, anyway) news stories on my Twitter stream, so feel free to check it out if you're looking for another way to avoid work.
Got some more interesting stuff percolating, but more about that eventually. Until then, keep watching the skies, or something like that.
Above: the original July 2000 concept sketch for what would eventually become Twitter--six years later!
From the original photographer:
On Aug.9, 1945, an atomic bomb exploded above the city of Nagasaki to kill over 70,000 people. The Uragami Catholic Church was then collapsed to decay. After the war, they dug out the head of Virgin Maria, which used to be at the front gate of the church. On the day I visited her, I saw a bird flying up into the blue sky, twittering 'peace'.
Back in 1980, the future senator parodies charitable fundraising. The mournful background music is spot on.
\
A couple years ago at the Book Expo I chatted with the folks at the booth for Plenty. I wasn't too happy with their cover slogan--"It's Easy Being Green"--which I thought glossed over the difficulties faced by real-world green entrepreneurs.
Happily the magazine dropped the glib slogan, but, sad to say, it also learned the bigger lesson. Gawker reports that the magazine--though not the website--will be shuttered. Employees were reportedly laid off today after the latest bid for funding fell through.
Jack Siegel & Gene Takagi take a look at a controversial recent private letter ruling in which the IRS revoked a charity's tax exempt status. Note that PLRs, while instructive, are not binding precedent:
The IRS determined that the organization failed on all three parts. The IRS concluded that the grants did not qualify as being in furtherance of one or more exempt activities because the distributions were given to “other unrelated organizations to use in conducting their own program of exempt activities.†[This conclusion makes little sense to me. Grantmaking does not qualify as being in furtherance of an exempt purpose? - Ed.] Administrative costs played a large factor in the second and third parts of the test because the grantmaking activities only attributed for 13% of total expenditures over a four-year look-back period while salaries counted for 37% and general overhead at 50%.
Branded wine at an open bar for the Full Circle Fund, a venture philanthropy fund in San Francisco:
Members conduct their work through Circles, focusing their hands-on grantmaking on four key issue areas . . .
Each Circle develops a Theory of Change, a specific, strategic approach for how the Circle plans to engage their issue. To construct this Theory, the Circle thoroughly analyzes their issue and chooses the most effective approach that draws upon members’ skills and interests. This Theory then guides the Circle’s grantmaking decisions.
Interesting--and potentially troubling--tax law news from India:
To curb the misuse of tax exemption given to charitable organisations, the government will now closely scrutinise accounts of large entities, which include NGOs and trade bodies, after it was found that some of them were allegedly indulging in commercial activities.
The basis for this action is a recent amendment to India's tax legislation, explained in a December 19th tax circular that I've uploaded here. This amendment refines the legal definition of "charitable purpose" to exclude "any activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business" or "any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business" provided for a fee or other consideration, if that activity is associated with "the advancement of any other object of public utility" besides education, medical relief or relief of the poor.
The exceptions are crucial: charities dedicated to one of these three purposes can still use business to advance their cause without losing their tax exemption. Relatedness is key--as the circular explains, permitted charitable business must be handled in separate books of account and "be incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the entity."
Other organizations are arguably at risk. One direct target of the amendment: trade associations that are using the broad standard of public utility to gain recognition as charities, which had enabled them to market goods and services to non-members without paying tax on the profits. However, trade groups are not the only organization affected by this refinement of the law--any charity that does not fall within the ambit of the three excepted purposes listed above needs to pay attention to this change.
Pictured above: Reality Tours, a Mumbai social enterprise that promotes relief of the poor by conducting slum tours and donating 80% of the profits to local charities dedicated to the relief of the poor.
Earlier today, I received a helpful note from Jimmy Wales confirming that his term on the board of the Wikimedia Foundation did not lapse. Contrary to the Valleywag post, the Wikimedia Foundation had not only re-appointed him to the board before December 31st but had reported his re-appointment to members of the Foundation's email list.
As I tried to indicate in my post yesterday, my aim was not to take sides in the controversy but to highlight the rhetoric associating nonprofits with incompetence, backbiting and arcane bureaucracy. The popular perception that nonprofits grow less responsive to their mission as they scale up is an environmental factor that can harm even the most efficient organization--for example, it's one reason why legislators & AGs time and again seek to improve their electability by calling for charity "reform."
With regard to the Wikimedia Foundation more specifically, it is dealing with dilemmas faced by any number of nonprofit organizations. Relying on donations is for many people an essential quality of 501(c)(3) status, yet asking for donations is nonetheless often criticized as an unseemly preoccupation with money and marketing. Nonetheless, when a nonprofit tries to reduce fundraising requests through corporate sponsorships and ads, the criticism can actually grow more intense as some purists accuse the organization of selling out. For more on these tensions and ways to resolve them, check out my article on law and nonprofit design.
The Wikimedia Foundation also highlights other important issues faced by nonprofits. One obvious issue is that of executive pay. Contrary to the critics I don't find the salaries of the Foundation's top staff to be excessive--there are any number of nonprofit (and for-profit) executives who get paid more for doing less in organizations of similar size & scope, and under current law comparability is a key metric. That said, as any number of nonprofits have experienced, the use of donations to pay substantial salaries can, however counter-productively, provoke a backlash.
Another issue faced by the Foundation: whether the millions potentially raised by online advertising are worth the risk of adverse action by the IRS. It's something the Mozilla Foundation is dealing with now, although for somewhat different reasons. For the Wikimedia Foundation, placing ads on Wikipedia pages could arguably give rise to a substantial amount of unrelated business income, which in turn could jeopardize its tax exemption. There are subtleties and strategies in this regard that I'll discuss here soon enough--for now, suffice it to say that the Foundation's current practice of relying on donations could be the wiser course of action for reasons that go beyond maintaining a noncommercial culture.
If Marx had written about the withering away of the bookstore, he might still be regarded as a sage.
Cody's is dead. The Harvard used book scene is a pale shadow of its former self. And now Hollywood's Book Soup is up for sale.
Book Soup, for those who have never been, is a gem--a truly essential shop for anyone with a serious interest in the dramatic arts & design, not a mention a hub for local arts scene. It was a steady haunt when I lived out there and remains a mandatory drop-by whenever I'm back in the area.
Which got me thinking. Book Soup still makes a profit, and it's an integral part of both the artistic community and the region's various arts-related industries. Perhaps one way to maintain its integrity is for a charity to buy it, such as the California Community Foundation or even the Academy Foundation.
NOTE: Update here.
Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales' term as a director on The Wikimedia Foundation has expired, prompting Valleywag to launch this salvo:
How did Wales come to this embarrassing pass? The former porn merchant and options trader, who has traded sex and money for his help in getting Wikipedia entries edited, has met his Machiavellian match, in the form of Sue Gardner, a Gothy, spider-tattooed Canadian pop-culture expert who now runs the site he helped start as Wikimedia's executive director
Incompetence and infighting are endemic to nonprofits, of course. But Wikipedia's bureaucracy is distinctly, fearsomely awful. The site, which dictates the online reputation of countless living people and companies, itself operates by rules that are completely incomprehensible, determined by a self-appointed group of volunteer editors who can seldom stop arguing over obscurities to explain their ways to outsiders.
No one should be surprised, then, that Wikipedia's overseers are so hobbled that they can't even fill vacancies on the board — a situation Gardner has exploited expertly.
Whatever the particulars of the Wales' situation, the perception of nonprofit governance evident above is well worth noting.
That's the cover story of this week's Christianity Today. The article itself is a trenchant counterblast to the marketing of faith--and an instructive example of the culture clash that can result from remaking a social mission as a product to be sold.
Marketing has problems if it makes the consumer pant for the dead opposite of what you are trying to sell. . . .
The difficulty with the pro-marketing arguments, however, is the failure to recognize that marketing is not a values-neutral language. Marketing unavoidably changes the message--as all media do. Why? Because marketing is the particular vernacular of a consumerist society in which everything has a price tag. To market something is therefore to effectively make it into a branded product to be consumed.
Still using the break to gain some perspective. In the meantime, here are a few news items that stick out:
- This article has been making the rounds in design circles, and it really is a must-read for do-gooders of all stripes. I've been writing about the link between design and social benefit for a while, and it's a theme whose importance will only grow.
- Bruce Nussbaum on the shift from innovation to transformation. I have much more to say on that--in fact, I've already said a fair bit about it, if you read my articles carefully. What social enterprise folks should note: it's not just the talk about earned income & learning from hedge funds that face obsolescence.
- FilmLA has been in the news due to the decline of filming in Los Angeles. What I hadn't known: that a nonprofit coordinates movie, tv & ad shoots in the area.
- When can museums sell their works?
- Shaolin monks inspire controversy with their temple management franchise initiative.
- BBC announces the next Doctor today!
"Sadly, all the Marxists are in academia rather than broadcast sports. That's the problem with Marxists. They're everywhere you don't want them to be and nowhere you really need them."
--Jonathan Chait on interviews with corporate sponsors during the broadcast of college football bowl games
Above: Stained glass Lenin at the Humboldt University library in Berlin