The more a source uses persuasion to convince, the less science the source possesses.  Science is trump, the reality you can relabel but cannot resist.  Science is Truth and Truth don’t need no stinkin’ persuasion.  Gravity don’t need no persuasion.  E = mc² don’t need no persuasion.  Global Warming don’t need no . . .

And now we learn how climate science might be better understood as climate persuasion.  An unknown cybercriminal hacked into the computer of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, England.  This Unit is a major source for . . . I wanted to write, “science,” but that appears to be inaccurate . . . for communication about climate change with the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.  The hacker got into the email system with the Unit going back to 1996.  And the contents of those emails demonstrate a considerable consideration for persuasion about climate change, not for science about climate change.

I encourage you to do your own search, read the contents of these emails for yourself, and then make your own determination.  I raise no argument about the science of climate change, but only point to the obvious, consistent, and deliberate application of persuasion as a major component in the communication of this group.  I do not dispute anyone’s use of persuasion and do not find this Unit’s behavior to be illegal, unethical, or bad.  They have a position and they want to move others toward that position.  Go for it.

Just don’t call it “science.”  That, it is not.

It is persuasion, baby, and now you see the Rule:

You can be Famous or Effective, but Not Both.

The researchers at East Anglia used to be Effective at persuasion, but now they are Famous, if not InFamous.

Many people who use persuasion with their success come to believe they are skilled at it when they are not.  When you are successful you tend not to scrutinize the sources of your success; you simply enjoy it.  It is only when your success turns towards bankruptcy – first gradually, then suddenly, to quote Hemingway from “The Sun Also Rises” – that you begin to see the illusion.  Your success succeeded on your power, not your persuasion and now that your power is broken, receded, or lost, you see the distinction.

Today we see the Rule in the continuing decline of the power of Elite Media.  Through most of my life, Elite Media (the original broadcast networks, a handful of daily newspapers, and another handful of weekly magazines) owned the reputation as Persuasion Masters of the Universe who could use words to change the world.  Back in the day, They were It and They knew it, or at least believed it because they saw evidence of their persuasive skill everyday.

Until they lost their monopoly on distribution or in Standard Model terms, exposure and reception.  Consider the changes with that lost monopoly as the Elite Media move gradually and now suddenly into persuasion bankruptcy.

But ratings are going down. In the 1952-53 television season, more than 30 percent of American households that owned televisions tuned in to NBC during prime time, according to Nielsen. In the 2007-8 season, that figure was just 5.2 percent.

Most analysts and many executives agree that the economic model of broadcast television — which relies much more heavily on advertising than cable — is severely fractured. What they are wondering now is if it is irreparably broken.

“It’s in a period of huge transformation,” said Horace Newcomb, a professor of telecommunications at the University of Georgia and the director of the Peabody Awards, which are awarded annually for excellence in radio and television broadcasting. “It’s in a state of confusion.”

And again, what I quote here regarding the broadcast Elites can also be said of the print Elites of persuasion.  Similar declines show with other Players from Elite Media.  Circulation rates for them all have declined in similar proportions.  They all face a new future that does not include them as Elite.

Cable, satellite, and Internet have destroyed the “means of production” for the Elite Media.  And with that, they have also destroyed the power that made Elite Media famous, but not as skilled, as They thought.  Their success, it turns out, depended not on Their skill with persuasion, a strong Argument well expressed, but rather with power, a monopoly on the means of distribution.  And now that They are losing their monopoly we see Their persuasion skill for what it is, shallow, strident, self-focused; all the hallmarks of my Rule:  All Bad Persuasion Is Sincere.

As I think on this, it occurs to me that persuasion thrives with competition while power does not.  Power is the essential tool of the dictator whether in politics, media, art, business, education, any area of human activity.  Saddam Hussein is a compelling historical figure when he’s the only guy in the room with a gun and so is the New York Times when it is the (almost) only guy in the room with a printing press.  They thrive when They do not compete on an equal playing field with equal challengers.  Put the Elites on democratic turf and They are not nearly as smart, wise, or, most importantly, persuasive as They were when They owned the stadium, made the rules, and sold the tickets.

Power beguiles and turns us away from the most obvious admonition:  Know thyself.  And if you disdain the Delphi Oracle, then take Dirty Harry’s advice:  “A man’s got to know his limitations.”

Lord have mercy upon my weak soul, but I did not find interesting persuasion news at the annual conference of the National Communication Association.  I spoke with several smart folks and they, too, had nothing new to offer.

So, let’s hit the street!

Melanie starts us with a shot over the Chicago River at night on the North Michigan bridge.  She’s got a bag which means we’ve been shopping.

If we’re shopping, we’re eating, so let’s get to the point.

If Chicago caught fire again, I’d save Al’s Beefs at Ontario and Wells, just a few blocks west of North Michigan.  You know there has to be more to life than evolution with food like this.

Okay, so pounds of beef soaked in gravy is not your cup of tea.  How about Rosebud’s on Rush, Yoshi’s, or North Pond?

First, it is Rosebud on Rush and not Rosebud Trattoria on Dearborn.  I enjoyed an embarassing moment sitting in the Ann Taylor store on North Michigan (no, I was not trying on the new winter styles; yes, I was the mule for Melanie) failing to distinguish between these two restaurants that are just a few blocks away from each other.  I used her iPhone Google Map function to find “Rosebud” while I waited.  Listen up:  the app gives you the closest hit and it turns out that Rosebud Trattoria is closer to Ann Taylor’s than Rosebud on Rush.  When Melanie told me she was ready to eat, I told her we’re heading for Dearborn street and she stopped me saying, “It’s Rosebud on Rush, hon-ey.”

If you’re in a long term relationship, you know what happened next and if you’re not, I won’t tell you so you can experience moments like these without bias from me.  Let’s just say we had a discussion and I looked like a stupid mule.  Onto Rush Street.

Rosebud on Rush is just a couple of quiet blocks off the mayhem of North Michigan.  It turns into a neighborhood with lots of brownstones, kids, and little shops.  Rosebud feels like a special neighborhood place, not a joint, but not overly formal and fancy.  Great service that starts at the door, takes you to a quiet table, delivers a great meal, then takes you out the door, happy and satisfied.  Man, did we eat good and a lot.  I had a huge antipasto, the Misto, with a diverse array of cured meats, cheese, greens, and sauces.  It was built for two, but mules work up an appetite.  Our fabulous server cast a nervous eye upon me, warning to save room for my entrée, a double cut veal chop.  I’ve learned to trust good servers, so I backed off just a bit.  Thus, I finished one of the best veal chops I’ve ever had.  Hubba-hubba.  Then coffee and desert.

And this.  The obligatory Martini shot.

We ate at Yoshi’s before taking in the Blue Man Group up in the Lincoln Park area of Chicago.  We had a nice 6pm taxi ride up Lake Shore Drive with a fabulous view of the lake and the city brightly lit up against the evening.  Then YuppieVille on the Northside and Yoshi’s.  Yoshi’s is a fusion of Asian and European influences.  The room is pretty, open, and functional; the service is experienced, expert, and professional; the food is fabulous.  I had a sea bass Bento box entrée that was some of the best tastes I’ve experienced.  Yoshi and his wife toured the room with professional greetings for newcomers and longer conversations with neighborhood regulars.  This is one great place.

And the room.  Yoshi has his back to us just left of center as he talks with a regular.

The Blue Man Group was a surprising disappointment.  It is extremely kid-friendly which means the content is pretty simple.  I didn’t expect Vegas showgirls and boys, but this was closer to SpongeBobSquarePants than What Happens In Vegas Stays In Vegas.  The performers were skilled and talented, but the show material was just weak, like SNL after midnight.  The audience, filled with quite a few children on a Thursday night, enjoyed the show greatly.  It’s just pretty simple.  Here Melanie puts on her poncho in anticipation of the flying debris from BMG.

North Pond is in the Lincoln Park area and was recommended by my nephew, Clifton, who is the chef de cuisine at Max London’s in Saratoga Springs.  Clif has great taste.  North Pond ranks as one of the best eating experiences I’ve had.  There is nothing to change (other than moving it to Morgantown).  It’s a Frank Lloyd Wright inspired building and room; the service is great; the food is the best.  I had the “pork ‘n beans” which was a medley of pork tenderloin, andouille sausage, and pork belly with black and white beans.  It was all to die for.

Here’s the North Pond exterior, a free standing building by the North Pond.

And the main dining room.

And a nice touch with individual coffee servers at the finish.

And Chicago still shows its style with outdoor art.

Just remember – Rosebud on Rush, hon-ey.

I’ve done a fair amount of applied persuasion work in the area of mining safety.  While with NIOSH, I also worked with MSHA, the Mining Safety and Health Administration, on a national campaign after death rates spiked up sharply.  Yet, while the rate increased, the absolute number was still relatively small, under 50 if I recall correctly.  Within a few months of the new campaign, mortality rates dropped sharply again to approximately one or two fatalities a month nationwide.

Compare that now to what is happening in China.  In the latest of a long string of mining disasters over 40 people have been killed in an underground explosion.  China’s government and industry are operating the way we did about 50 years ago and individual workers and their families are paying the price.  Thousands of miners are killed every year in China in rates that are eerily similar to the US back in day.

Thus, in one day and one incident, more miners will die in China than will American miners in a year in the US.  And, even if you adjust for base rates (more people work in the mines of China than the US), the mortality rates are wildly different.

Why?

While it is always smart to be suspicious and wary of the government, every now and then we do get it right.  Workplace safety in the US has improved dramatically in the past 50 years, largely due to a cooperative relationship between government, industry, and labor.  There are, of course, large disagreements and Things Could Be Better.  But, let’s not lose sight of the Main Point:  we can work together to improve our common lot.

In the MSHA campaign, we designed a Standard Model intervention, aimed at specific behaviors for PPE, personal protective equipment, like hard hats, seat belts, and harnesses.  We defined the TACTs, looked at a variety of research to determine the Easy, Fun, and Popular for each TACT under TpB, then designed short, bright, and memorable Arguments which were distributed through a wide variety of interpersonal channels (lunchbox safety talks, stickers, handouts).  MSHA coordinated everything through its inspector network, and boom, within a few weeks, every mine had the campaign.  And, it worked.

Here are examples with the stickers we used.  They were created by Kim Clough who led the Message Engineering Team within the Health Communication Research Branch (HCRB).  Kim created a base sticker that contained all the main elements from the campaign messages – the specific PPE TACTs, the logo, slogan, contact information, etc.

From this base sticker, individual stickers for each PPE TACT were then added.  As here.

Like I said in the title of this post, Government Sometimes Helps.  And, it can actually use applied persuasion principles to make it work.

If you have Malwarebytes version 1.4, you may not be able to access this website and blog because according to the smart guys at Malwarebytes, this is a dangerous website that may do harm to your computer.  And the reason they know this is a dangerous website is not because they checked it out.  That would require testing the files on the site.  This is apparently a concept the smart guys at Malwarebytes have rejected.

They instead know it because a proven Bad Actor (who shall remain anonymous here) happens to share my static IP address as assigned by the hosting service, GoDaddy, I share with the Bad Actor.  And since I, and likely hundreds if not thousands of other GoDaddy customers, share an IP address with a Bad Actor it is only logical, ethical, legal, and wise to block all of us and label us as Bad Actors, too.

See, hosting services like GoDaddy assign the same static IP number to many different domain names and then assign a dynamic IP number when the website is actually accessed.  This happens so fast that no one knows what’s going on, but it saves the hosting service cost and allows them to offer a cheaper service.  The problem is that hundreds, sometimes thousands of websites with different names, will share the same IP address.  And in this mass of many websites, sometimes Bad Actors also appear.

The smart guys are Malwarebytes figured that if they block the static IP address assigned to the Bad Actor, they can make your Internet experience safer.  And that’s true.  But, they also block access to my safe website and the websites of hundreds and thousands of other Good Actors simultaneously.

Now, Malwarebytes understands this problem and in the way of smart guys everywhere, they developed a solution.  See, if your website gets blocked and labeled as a Bad Actor, all you have to do is visit the Malwarebytes website, go to a public discussion board, explain the details of your problem, and Malwarebytes will think about it.

So, Malwarebytes will label me as a Bad Actor and the owner and purveyor of a Untrustworthy Website which means no one with the Malwarebytes software will be able to visit my website.  This clearly infringes on my free speech rights, libels me, and limits my business opportunities without any proven bad actions on my part.  Just through random chance and the presence of a proven Bad Actor sharing my IP address, Malwarebytes will shut me down and call me a threat.  And, if I bring this to their attention, they will think about it.

Look, I appreciate the problem of Internet viruses and malware.  It’s a serious problem, like having muggers and pickpockets working the Mall of the Americas.  Everyone gets the problem.

But the Malwarebytes solution is at once unethical, illegal, and ultimately ineffective.  Bad Actors have many tricks to evade WannaBeGoodGuys like Malwarebytes.  It’s likely that the Bad Actor who shares my IP address has already moved on and just left up his old website to stick a thumb in everyone else’s eye.  So, this IP protection scheme has obvious holes in it, yet Malwarebytes persists with it.  Even with the damage it causes to innocent parties.

I would encourage you to always protect your computer when you’re on the Internet and to protect your own reputation and freedom of speech and action.  If you have Malwarebytes version 1.4 with IP protection, realize that you are safer, but at the expense of the credibility, freedom, and opportunity of innocent people.