Success and GS

 So, I know it's been awhile, another bit of a hiatus, life happening while I was making other plans, that sort of thing, but I will try to get back on track, at least a bit. And let me start with a post about a podcast interview that took place back in August, and was published on September 12th, 2017. Here's a rather cool and groovy preview video for the podcast:







The interviewer was Jeff Bogaczyk, who was finishing up his PhD in communication at Duquesne University, and does a podcast series called Mind for Life. As he explains it:

Who Am I?

My name is Jeff Bogaczyk and I write about and produce a podcast on personal development. I am very interested in the intersection between our thoughts and actions and explore this in my writing and podcast. I hope you enjoy!

What is Mind For Life?

Mind for Life is a podcast/blog designed with your best life in mind based on the idea that how you think greatly affects the way you live. This seems obvious at first glance but a deeper probe into the question reveals how important this fact is, and also how often it is forgotten in our daily activity. The majority of our life experience is done on “autopilot.” What this means is that our actual lived experience is comprised of thousands of things each day that affect what we choose to do, how we respond to people, the choices we make, and the actions we take. There are so many factors involved that we cannot consciously be aware of all of them and so our brains “choose” for us based upon past experiences and decisions. Our brains act for us and make “autopilot” decisions beneath our conscious awareness.

Of course some of these decisions are minor and don’t have major affects on our lives–we are tired of sitting so we stand, we stretch our arms, we fidget in our chair because we are uncomfortable. Usually, we aren’t aware that we are doing these things because it happens subconsciously. However, there are other decisions our brains make for us that have greater consequences in our lives. How we respond in a conflict situation with someone we love, for example. See, our brains have been “programmed” to respond in these instances based upon the past experiences in our lives. In other words, our environment has taught us how to respond simply by experiencing things and events. To use the conflict example–we usually respond to conflict the way we have been “taught”–not intentionally, necessarily–but by the examples of the people that we have been around and grown up with. Our parents, our household environment, our friendships, and other relationships all influence how we learn about managing conflict. So, if we have grown up and lived in an environment that has been characterized by shouting, slamming doors, demeaning others, etc. in conflict situations, we learn that unconsciously and that becomes the “default” for how our brains operate in similar situations.

We Can Change

The good news is that we can change our default thinking patterns by establishing intentional, productive thinking processes in our life. Recent research into our cognitive development has shown that our brains have a quality called neuroplasticity. This basically means that our brains, our thinking patterns, our thought processes are still mold-able and can be adjusted and improved. This is good news because we all understand, if we are honest with ourselves, that we have areas in our lives where we can improve. Self-awareness is the ability to see those areas of weakness in our own lives. The challenge is finding ways to correct them. This is where communication can make a difference.

Mindful Communication

Really, if you think about it, thinking is simply a process of communicating with ourselves in a particular direction. When we think, we enter an internal dialogue with ourselves where we ask questions, provide answers, state premises’ and hopefully solve problems and come up with solutions and answers. This podcast/blog is basically about helping to turn our attention to this entire process as it is taking place in our lives and helping to establish proactive thinking patterns that will, in time, provide better outcomes and a better life. If our default thinking patterns in particular aspects of our life are dysfunctional due to bad experiences in our past, then the default thought process will result in a habitual action that results in a destructive outcome. Think of it like this. Though the “computer” model of brain function has many problems, in this area we might be able to say if the programming is bad, the output will be bad. Garbage in, garbage out as they say.

The solution? Though we can’t always fix what goes in, we can take steps to address these inputs in constructive and productive ways. Changing our thinking involves self-awareness–a realization in all facets of what has happened to us and where our areas of difficulty lie. Secondly it involves education–learning about what is really happening, how these processes are taking place and how we can respond positively and productively. This is what Mind For Life is all about. Join with us on the journey!

Jeff has been doing very impressive work, and we originally connected via his interest in media ecology and participation in communication conferences. Given the nature of his series, it was only natural that the discussion emphasized general semantics, and it seemed only fitting to get into Wendell Johnson's general semantics concept of the IFD disease. 

Jeff incorporates the connection in his blog post related to the podcast: 3 Powerful Leadership Lessons From General Semantics And Media Ecology. You can read what he wrote over on his blog, I'll just note here that the three lessons he mentions are: 1. Develop operational definitions; 2. Watch out for idealization; and 3. Avoid abstract jargon and leadership clichés. His explanation of these three ideas and the overall discussion leading up to it are worth reading, so I recommend checking it out.

As for the podcast itself, can listen to it via this link: MFL 22–Dr. Lance Strate: Success and IFD Disease. I do think it turned out rather well, don't you agree? And here's the custom pic he included:

You can download the podcast via that link, and there's a bio and list of my books on the same page, and some links, which I don't need to include here. But I think the following items Jeff also includes are worth a little cut and paste. The first is a list of Podcast Time Stamps:

Podcast Time Stamps

[5:51] – Dr. Strate tells what Media Ecology is all about and explains General Semantics.

[7:48] – Lance describes how General Semantics can help us in thinking about words and how we use them in our lives.

[10:03] – Dr. Strate describes how General Sematics can help us when thinking about success.

[11:00] – Lance talks about IFD disease: Idealization, frustration and demoralization. A process that occurs when we use our words as high level abstractions instead of more specifically.

[17:13] – How operational definitions can help to prevent IDF disease. Operational definitions prevent us from idealizing any given term or goal in our lives.

[18:42] – How General Semantics is an attempt to take scientific method and generalize it to human relations.

[21:26] – Lance talks about his own personal “operational definition” of success. Specifically about looking at accomplishments and completing tasks as realistic expectations instead of idealized abstractions.

[24:00] – How pride and status are related to success and accomplishment. For Lance, it’s more about “going with the flow” and following the path that rose up before him.

[25:30] – There is also a component about being realistic about what you are able to achieve.

[26:22] – How Lance finds the motivation to write as extensively as he does – it’s about committing to things and leveraging his sense of obligation to deliver on what he promises someone.

And the second is Jeff's list of Top Learning Moments:

Top learning moments

Much of success is related to your definition of success. From a General Semantics perspective this has to do with creating an “operational definition” that allows you to pursue something that isn’t a generalization or abstraction.

IFD disease – the idea of having “idealistic” expectations that will never come to pass turns into frustration and demoralization. If you find yourself frustrated or demoralized, ask yourself if you aren’t pursuing some idealistic end and then think about how you can make that more realistic and practical.

Committing to doing something leverages the psychological power of obligation. When we commit to something, we have a stronger tendency to accomplish it because other people expect it of us. So, to accomplish more, it may be helpful to say “yes” rather than “no” when someone asks us to do something outside of our comfort zone.

 

All in all, I'd say the outcome of this interview interaction was, indeed, a success!

Radio Days

Over on the Media Ecology Association listserv, Donna Halper wondered why there hasn't been all that much discussion of radio by media ecology scholars, and especially by Neil Postman.  After various folks chimed in on the subject, which included some misrepresentation, in my opinion, of Postman's views, I offered my own remarks, which I thought I'd share with you here (with some minor editing).

It is understandable how a reading of Amusing Ourselves to Death, where Postman draws a sharp contrast between typographic America and contemporary electronic culture, might lead one to conclude that he was solely an advocate of books.  But if you examine a bit more of his rather impressive body of work, including some 25 or so books, what you find is that he was also very much as advocate of the spoken word (and those of us that had the pleasure of knowing him knew him to be an outstanding public speaker, conversationalist, and discussion leader in the classroom).

He was a champion of rational discourse, as the highest form of discourse, involving discussions based on reading, and rooted in schooling where the curriculum was based on literacy and books (in Germany, he was at one point compared to Habermas, and indeed Postman's ideal of schooling very much parallels the Habermasian public sphere).  It's the balance between orality and literacy that was achieved during the typographic era that he favored, and its loss that he lamented.  That's why I've previously characterized Neil as a "defender of the word"( both written and oral), that is, defender against the rise of image culture in the 20th century, and against the supremacy of quantification that goes along with technopoly.

In America, radio before television was very much a medium for language, for discourse, for speech that was still shaped and influenced by typography. In this sense, I believe that Neil viewed radio in positive terms until television became dominant, and radio shifted in formats and styles (which he does make clear in Amusing Ourselves to Death).   I also believe that much of the interest relating to radio before television's ascendancy was an interest in the nature and use of language, and this was part of a more general interest in the use of language and symbols in mass communication and mass persuasion, in newspapers, magazines, and other print media, and also in motion pictures.  That's why much of the research and scholarship following the First World War and into the 60s centered on propaganda analysis (the specialty of George Gordon, who taught at NYU when Neil arrived, was a mentor to Neil's media ecology colleague and collaborator, Terry Moran, as well as my colleague when I arrived at Fordham), general semantics, rhetoric (e.g., Kenneth Burke's dramatism), and other approaches to the study of persuasion.

Radio never was a dominant medium in the way that television has been, and the internet has become.  The "radio days" were part of an uneasy balance of mass media that included movies, newspapers, magazines, paperback books and, to a limited extent, record albums and live events amplified by public address systems.  Much of the discussion of radio as a medium was subsumed under discussions of mass media and mass culture, and "mass man."  And as noted, analysis of radio otherwise centered on the uses, misuses, and abuses of language.

Others taking part in the listserv discussion did mention McLuhan's chapter on radio in Understanding Media, and Paul Levinson's radio chapter in The Soft Edge.  Also, while it's dated and out-of-print, I would also include Radio in the Television Age, co-authored by the great FM dj and host, Pete Fornatale (who now does a show for Fordham University's WFUV, and Josh Mills.  Also worth mentioning is Paul Levinson's chapter on Podcasting in his recent book, New New Media, as podcasting is otherwise known as internet radio, and this constitutes a very significant development, in my view.

And that's that, thank you, ladies and gentlemen and all the ships at sea, for tuning in!

Making Healthy Media Choices

So, I was interviewed by Mary Rothschild of Healthy Media Choices for the program she airs on WVEW, Brattleboro Community Radio in Vermont.  The interview was taped at Fordham University, in the studios of our own station, WFUV (thank you very much), and was broadcast on June 8th.  I was very happy with the way that it turned out, especially since I wasn't at my best, health-wise, and was in a little bit of pain in fact, when we were taping (see my previous posts, A Minor Medical Mystery and Causation or Coincidence?).

So, anyway, the interview has been archived as a podcast by Mary Rothschild on two different sites, Healthy Media Choices which is devoted to media literacy and education and helping parents to cope with the overwhelming media environment that they and their children are immersed in, and Witness for Childhood, which a faith-based website that offers Progressive Perspectives on Media, Technology, and the Development of Young Children.  So go ahead, click on either of the links above, or both, and give us a listen, if you haven't already.

The interview is pretty wide-ranging, but centers on media literacy, with significant discussion about general semantics throughout.  And towards the end, the conversation turns to a discussion of religion and spirituality, based in part on my role as a Trustee of Congregation Adas Emuno, with emphasis on a progressive approach to those topics.

I really do think that the interview turned out well, and worthwhile--it was certainly a healthy choice to do it, even if my health wasn't 100%.  So, I hope you enjoy this bit of media, if you choose to check it out.

Volumizing Ear Relevance

In a previous post, Now Oddcasting, I told you all about my new podcast show, Lance Strate's Ear Relevance, which so far consists of only one episode.  And while I have yet to create a new episode, I was troubled by the fact that the episode I did upload came out at a low volume, even when turned up all the way.  So I used a program called Sound Studio to amplify the recording, albeit at the cost of some distortion.  And I uploaded the new version as episode 1b; episode 1 was uploaded as an MP4a file, and episode 1a in the more widely used, lower quality but smaller in size MP3 format).

And thanks to the embed codes supplied by the good people at Mevio.com, here it is:

Volumizing, I guess I should call that Hair Relevance?

Now Oddcasting

So, I've been meaning to tell you about this, and I've already added the links to my list of links over on the side of the blog page, but I put off posting on the subject until now.  So, here goes:  I've started a podcast.  Well, I've done a podcast.  One podcast, just one, so far.

My friend and colleague, Paul Levinson, had suggested that I get into podcasting a while ago, just as he suggested I start a blog (and here we are), set up a profile on MySpace, and stuff like that there.  So I finally got around to it, and on his suggestion, set up a profile on one of the free podcasting sites out there, Mevio.com.  So, you can find my profile at http://lancestrate.mevio.com, which is separate from my podcast page, it just seems like every site nowadays has to have a profile page, it's become a Web 2.o cliché!

So, then I had to think up a name for my podcast, which the good folks at Mevio call a show, a term I find amusing, that is, amusing as in amusing ourselves to death, public discourse in the age of show business, which is an excellent title for a book!  So, I concentrated on the fact that a podcast is entirely an acoustic form, like radio and sound recording, the term podcasting combining pod as in iPod, which was the main way that folks at first listened to these things (now there are a number of ways to do so, including on your computer, cell phone, and even via cable television services), and casting, from broadcasting, a form of distribution that began with radio and later expanded to television.  So, keeping in mind that I'm dealing with a sonic medium, I thought about it and came up with a name for the show:  Ear Relevance.

Maybe it's a bad pun, but the pun itself is a play on the spoken word.  So, I also decided to keep the title consistent with the name of my two blogs, and call it Lance Strate's Ear Relevance.  So that was that.  And it was hard to say what kind of "show" it was going to be before I actually got started on it, but I figured it would be a loose and open-ended educational program, a kind of class without curriculum, covering topics in communication theory, media ecology, general semantics, also including some poetry, and overall maybe a bit more coherent than the way this blog jumps from topic to topic whenever I post a new entry.  Anyway, that's how I tried to describe it.

So, in setting up the show, they asked for a picture to represent the show, and rather than use another picture of me (one, which was already there from my profile page, is more than enough), I asked an outstanding artist I know from MySpace, David Arshawsky, if he would do something up for me, and gave him an idea of what I was looking for, and he came through in spades.  Here's what he came up with:

Pretty cool, huh?  So with that image, all I needed was the actual podcast itself, which took a lot more time than I thought it would, but I finally got my first episode completed and uploaded.  I recorded and edited it on my Macintosh laptop, using the GarageBand program, and I had two options, so I first uploaded the episode in the better quality MP4a format.  But I learned that older devices can't play it, and when accessed online it plays more slowly than the more universal, lower bandwidth MP3 format, so I uploaded a second version in MP3, and I'll stick to that format from now on.


So, here is the URL for my podcast page:  http://earrelevance.mevio.com.  If you go there, you can "become a fan" and get email updates from Mevio whenever there's a new episode, and there are also links so you can subscribe via RSS feed, Zune, or iTunes--the URL for the iTunes subscription is http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/lance-strates-ear-relevance/id355714984, which I include here for your convenience, and because I think that's pretty darn cool!


So, you can head on over to any of these places to listen to and/or download the episode, but Mevio also gives embed codes, much like you can get for YouTube videos.  The embed option wasn't working for me for a while, which was one of the reasons I didn't post about the podcast earlier. I'm able to get the embed code now, although I'm getting some kind of error message from blogger, so maybe this won't work.  Well, I'll give it a shot anyway, and if it doesn't work, try the Mevio page or iTunes or whatever.


Before you listen, let me acknowledge that it's amateurish, my recording expertise is limited and my equipment far from professional (for example, you may need to push the volume all the way up, depending on the system...  oh, and let me warn you that the episode is about forty minutes long).  But for good or ill, here it is:









I'm pretty sure I'll do some more episodes, but I don't have any specific podcasting schedule, it'll just be whenever I can get them done, and whenever I want to get them done.  If you subscribe, you'll get them automatically, if not, well, I'll keep you posted and post them here for your amusement.